67 replies to this topic

[Still Waters]

A daughter born to the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge should be given the title Princess of Wales because the naming tradition should extend to girls, an MP will say today.

In a debate in the House of Commons on changing the rules of succession, Wayne David, the MP for Caerphilly, will call for the naming tradition to be extended to royal baby girls.

He said it would be an important gesture for the people of Wales now the Queen has confirmed a female child born to the royal couple will be a princess.

http://www.telegraph...s-of-Wales.html

[Coffey]

Or we make them a normal family and stop this medieval foolishness.

[OverSword]

Why would this matter to an MP?  Or to anyone actually?  These people (the royal family) actually believe they have thier position due to God's will, rather than because of the greed and ruthlessness of those they are descended from.  Really?  It was Gods will that a peice of human filth like Henry the VIII was the divine ruler of England?  LOL!

[ExpandMyMind]

Coffey, on 22 January 2013 - 02:35 PM, said:

Or we make them a normal family and stop this medieval foolishness.

I was about to type something similar: Royal baby should be normal British citizen.

[TheLastLazyGun]

Coffey, on 22 January 2013 - 02:35 PM, said:

Or we make them a normal family

They are the Royal Family.  How can they be a normal family?

[TheLastLazyGun]

ExpandMyMind, on 22 January 2013 - 03:36 PM, said:

Royal baby should be normal British citizen.

The royal baby's father is a future king.  The royal baby is therefore a future king or queen.  Therefore the royal baby cannot be a "normal" person.

[TheLastLazyGun]

OverSword, on 22 January 2013 - 03:29 PM, said:

These people (the royal family) actually believe they have thier position due to God's will

Do they?

Quote

It was Gods will that a peice of human filth like Henry the VIII was the divine ruler of England?

Why was Henry VIII, one of England's greatest monarchs, a "piece of human filth"?

[Hasina]

Oh John~ you just think that cause you're an American~

...actually I think that too...

Edited by Hasina, 22 January 2013 - 03:45 PM.

[OverSword]

TheLastLazyGun, on 22 January 2013 - 03:41 PM, said:

Do they?



Why was Henry VIII, one of England's greatest monarchs, a "piece of human filth"?

Because if you judged him by the same standards of behaviour that you judged any other person he would have been hanged, or like he had done to too many others, beheaded.

Lazygun I don't understand your apparent need to have a monarchy, or why you believe there are people better than you simply due to the fact that they were born into this world, but I honor your right to believe so and will not denegrate the royals further on this thread.

[Coffey]

TheLastLazyGun, on 22 January 2013 - 03:38 PM, said:

They are the Royal Family.  How can they be a normal family?

TheLastLazyGun, on 22 January 2013 - 03:39 PM, said:

The royal baby's father is a future king.  The royal baby is therefore a future king or queen.  Therefore the royal baby cannot be a "normal" person.

Please tell me why they should be in this position then? And tell me why you think they are special? Cause all i see is average people. (in fact lower than average half of them look inbred.. oh wait they are that's why)


I love the fact they made Kate out to be a commoner when in fact she went to a very expansive private school. (Also isn't she related to the royal family as well?)

Edited by Coffey, 22 January 2013 - 04:05 PM.

[ExpandMyMind]

TheLastLazyGun, on 22 January 2013 - 03:39 PM, said:

The royal baby's father is a future king.  The royal baby is therefore a future king or queen.  Therefore the royal baby cannot be a "normal" person.

*Woosh*

That was the point, flying over your head. The point being that all men should be (or in reality, are) born equal; that someone having the birthright of 'King' or 'Queen' is archaic and belongs in the distant past, nowhere near a modern democratic society.

[Coffey]

ExpandMyMind, on 22 January 2013 - 04:04 PM, said:

*Woosh*

That was the point, flying over your head. The point being that all men should be (or in reality, are) born equal; that someone having the birthright of 'King' or 'Queen' is archaic and belongs in the distant past, nowhere near a modern democratic society.

Unless they made the position open to anyone who challenges it.. lol

[TheLastLazyGun]

OverSword, on 22 January 2013 - 03:48 PM, said:

Because if you judged him by the same standards of behaviour that you judged any other person he would have been hanged

Please stop trying to impose 21st Century behaviour onto a 16th Century person.  They were completely different times.

How many monarchs of that era married for love?  There were hardly any.  A monarch in those days married a woman for political reasons and to give himself an heir to the throne.  Henry VIII was normal for those times.

Quote

Lazygun I don't understand your apparent need to have a monarchy

Why does the United States need to have a president?

Quote

or why you believe there are people better than you simply due to the fact that they were born into this world

Where have I said that there are people better than me just because they were born into a certain family?

Quote

but I honor your right to believe so and will not denegrate the royals further on this thread.

Good.  Because the monarchy is a very popular institution in Britain and it's not making you very popular amongst British people when you denigrate it.

This thread, with its abundance of republicans, is unusual.  It does not reflect Britain at large.  Republicanism is almost non-existent in Britain.

Edited by TheLastLazyGun, 22 January 2013 - 04:25 PM.

[TheLastLazyGun]

Coffey, on 22 January 2013 - 04:03 PM, said:

Please tell me why they should be in this position then?

Because Britain is a constitutional monarchy.

Quote

And tell me why you think they are special?

I'd rather have a monarch as Head of State than a second-rate politician like Cameron, Clegg, Miliband or Obama.  And I'm sure most Britons will agree with me.

Quote

half of them look inbred

Do they ACTUALLY look inbred or are you just seeing things?

I'd bet on the latter.

Quote

very expansive private school.

So just because her parents worked hard in good jobs and made a lot of money to be able to afford to give their daughters a good education makes them royals, does it?


[

Quote

Also isn't she related to the royal family as well?

Kate Middleton is the great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-granddaughter of Henry VIII.

She is also the great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-granddaughter of Edward III.

But that doesn't make her a royal and it certainly doesn't make her unique.  There are lots of people in Britain desdended from royalty although most of us don't know it.  Kate Middleton is just one of around 250,000 people in Britain descended from Edward III.

For all you know, Henry VIII, Edward III or some other royal could be an ancestor of you.

Edited by TheLastLazyGun, 22 January 2013 - 04:27 PM.

[TheLastLazyGun]

ExpandMyMind, on 22 January 2013 - 04:04 PM, said:

* that someone having the birthright of 'King' or 'Queen' is archaic and belongs in the distant past, nowhere near a modern democratic society.

It's a pity for you that hardly anyone in Britain agrees with you.

Give me a King or Queen as Head of State rather than some politician anyday of the week, thank you very much.