Warhippy Posted September 23, 2016 Share Posted September 23, 2016 12 hours ago, JV77 said: All the talk of the royal visit and so called "proper etiquette" brought up this question again for me. Don't get me wrong, Will and Kate seem like really nice and humble people but... It's 2016 and people bow to them and basically put them above the rest of society. Where is the equality if we live in supposed modern societies? Why are they still even prominent? Ask yourselves, how did their family became "Royal" and rulers? They stole, murdered, raped their way there, way back when. How were they different than what ISIS is today? How is that different than America, France, the UK, China, Japan or any of the other G8 and G 20 nations. Let alone any of the uber rich and elite on the planet who commit egregious crimes of excess daily resulting in the monetary and economic downfall of thousands to the hundreds of thousands. There is literally 0 difference except the land they hold and the public spotlight on them. As for comparing them to ISIS today, really? I am no loyalist but seriously man? They are a balding white boy his semi pretty wife and two chubby kids who happened to be born in to a particular family. And you're comparing them to a group that beats rapes and creatively murders every woman they see and engages in some of the most horrific torture practices seen since Ghengis Khan depending on the day and location they're in. Come on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted September 23, 2016 Share Posted September 23, 2016 9 hours ago, JV77 said: I don't even dislike them, just bringing up the question. I just find interesting in 2016 people are willing to bow to them and accept they are above them. I'm all about equality. And another question why is the Queen on our 20 dollar? People talk about our Canadian culture and identity, yet it is all based off the British... Dude I am a first nations/scottish individual. I have EVERY reason to hate the british. But really? The UK, the monarchy and the legacy of this ENTIRE COUNTRY is based on the fact that up until less than 34 years ago; during the Canada Act signed under Trudeau... We were British We lived in a country called Canada but we were British citizens under the commonwealth like Australia, Hong Kong, India and so many other countries. Without Britain we'd be French Canada became its own independent nation in 1982. I was technically born a citizen of the British Empire and so were a LOT of the members on this board. Is...is school just failing that many people or are some of you really not just paying attention? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted September 23, 2016 Share Posted September 23, 2016 12 hours ago, SabreFan1 said: Don't talk about your Supreme Ruler like that! OFF WITH YOUR HEAD!!! In other news, America came to that realization 240 years ago, kicked King George's butt, and freed itself from the monarchy. And now worships Jebus instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted September 23, 2016 Share Posted September 23, 2016 The royal family is a farce. There is really no reason for them to exist other than to perpetuate some tired idea of manifest destiny. The idea/mentality that someone has a birthright to rule or preside over others is an archaic mentality. Canada would be wise to move towards being a republic versus remaining a commonwealth nation. It's insulting to me to see that old biddy Elizabeth on our currency. There are far more deserving Canadian people whose visages should be there in place of her. But this is Canada, where the national identity is a question mark. Or maybe maple syrup, moose, and beavers wearing touques...and hockey. This country is far too great to still be deferring anything to a tired, declining, has been empirical nation. And I love Britain. I love how they have always been at the vanguard of modern music from Led Zeppelin to Radiohead, and how their comedy is peerless in it's ability to take the piss out of oneself. I think they would also be far better off kicking the mooching Windsors to the curb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted September 23, 2016 Share Posted September 23, 2016 9 hours ago, JV77 said: I don't even dislike them, just bringing up the question. I just find interesting in 2016 people are willing to bow to them and accept they are above them. I'm all about equality. And another question why is the Queen on our 20 dollar? People talk about our Canadian culture and identity, yet it is all based off the British... Canada didn't actually become a fully independent country until 1982. Until then you were part of a British commonwealth. People bow to her and she's on your money because she is your head of state. In title she outranks your PM. In practice, just like in the UK, she is a figurehead with no actual power. Don't forget that Canada is a very young country. It didn't even start to have an independent "culture and identity" until 1867 when Canada became an autonomous dominion. Then Canada went through various steps to wean itself from the UK that finally culminated with the Canada/Constitution Act in 1982. That's when you finally completely cut your country off from the UK with the exception of the Monarchy. As to why you still have a queen? I dunno. Canada will always enjoy a favoured nation status with the UK. It pretty much makes it compulsory that the UK defends Canada during any kind of aggression. Now don't forget to be a good subject and tell your overlords how much you love them when they go walking past you! The US on the other hand was in 1776 and still is too proud of a nation to accept the idea of a hereditary king or queen. Canada on the other hand has no qualms with being a beta country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted September 23, 2016 Share Posted September 23, 2016 17 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said: And now worships Jebus instead. Secularism is quickly on the rise in the US. Also, if I remember correctly Canada mentions God in its constituion whereas the US does not. Does this sound familiar? Quote Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted September 23, 2016 Share Posted September 23, 2016 1 minute ago, SabreFan1 said: Secularism is quickly on the rise in the US. Also, if I remember correctly Canada mentions God in its constituion whereas the US does not. Does this sound familiar? Certainly. Not denying that at all. Say all your want about secularism in the States, but the US and A is still considered by both the majority of it's inhabitants and the majority of the free world to be a Christian nation. The Washington Monument has the following: Holiness to the Lord (Exodus 28:26, 30:30, Isaiah 23:18, Zechariah 14:20) Search the Scriptures (John 5:39) The memory of the just is blessed (Proverbs 10:7) May Heaven to this Union continue its beneficence In God We Trust “Praise be to God” (engraved on the monument’s capstone in Latin as “Laus Deo”) And the fact that the faith based economy in the US is worth $1.2 trillion dollars a year is indicative of the same. Don't get me wrong, I love the US. Hell, I'm half American. While secularism is on the rise in the US, it's passive secularism, in which the state remains uninvolved in religious affairs, while countries like France and Turkey practice assertive secularism, in which they actively regulate religions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted September 23, 2016 Share Posted September 23, 2016 29 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said: I think they would also be far better off kicking the mooching Windsors to the curb. What's funny is that the Windsors as a whole family rakes in Billions per year through their family trust. http://fortune.com/2016/04/21/tqueen-elizabeth-birthday-net-worth/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted September 23, 2016 Share Posted September 23, 2016 2 minutes ago, SabreFan1 said: What's funny is that the Windsors as a whole family rakes in Billions per year through their family trust. http://fortune.com/2016/04/21/tqueen-elizabeth-birthday-net-worth/ All on the backs of the British population. And what do they offer the masses in return? A wave? A photo op? The feeling of belonging to something special? Commemorative china sets? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted September 23, 2016 Share Posted September 23, 2016 2 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said: Certainly. Not denying that at all. Say all your want about secularism in the States, but the US and A is still considered by both the majority of it's inhabitants and the majority of the free world to be a Christian nation. The Washington Monument has the following: Holiness to the Lord (Exodus 28:26, 30:30, Isaiah 23:18, Zechariah 14:20) Search the Scriptures (John 5:39) The memory of the just is blessed (Proverbs 10:7) May Heaven to this Union continue its beneficence In God We Trust “Praise be to God” (engraved on the monument’s capstone in Latin as “Laus Deo”) And the fact that the faith based economy in the US is worth $1.2 trillion dollars a year is indicative of the same. Don't get me wrong, I love the US. Hell, I'm half American. While secularism is on the rise in the US, it's passive secularism, in which the state remains uninvolved in religious affairs, while countries like France and Turkey practice assertive secularism, in which they actively regulate religions. I'm a Christian, but I'm not one who tries to shove my values and beliefs down other people's throats. I talk about religion in real life if somebody brings it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted September 23, 2016 Share Posted September 23, 2016 Just now, PhillipBlunt said: All on the backs of the British population. And what do they offer the masses in return? A wave? A photo op? The feeling of belonging to something special? Commemorative china sets? Actually it's an income percentage on property that is already theirs. It's not owned by the country or the citizens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
etsen3 Posted September 23, 2016 Share Posted September 23, 2016 It's v difficult to argue that the concept of a "royal family" isn't completely archaic. They seem like lovely people and tradition/ceremony can be nice, but plenty of other countries get on just fine without a king or queen. The only tangible benefit they seem to have to me is to bring tourist money into the British economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted September 23, 2016 Share Posted September 23, 2016 1 minute ago, etsen3 said: It's v difficult to argue that the concept of a "royal family" isn't completely archaic. They seem like lovely people and tradition/ceremony can be nice, but plenty of other countries get on just fine without a king or queen. The only tangible benefit they seem to have to me is to bring tourist money into the British economy. They are a living reminder of what the UK once was. They are a part of their national identity. As figureheads, they have no actual real power. I'm sure some day the monarchy will end up being dissolved. I think that's the reason why Queen Elizabeth hasn't abdicated the crown in favour of Charles. She's probably worried that between him and Camilla they'll hasten that outcome along. Those 2 aren't very likable. If I had to guess, William and Kate will be the last king and queen of the UK. I could easily see him dissolving the monarchy if public opinion favoured it during his reign. By then his grandmother will be gone as will his father. Those are the last 2 of the old guard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted September 23, 2016 Share Posted September 23, 2016 Just now, SabreFan1 said: I'm a Christian, but I'm not one who tries to shove my values and beliefs down other people's throats. I talk about religion in real life if somebody brings it up. Same with my parents. I was raised Catholic. I left the church in my late teens, but I respect the right of a person to follow their beliefs 100%. I do find the majority of Christians that I've interacted with to be ones who are motivated by a very deep and personal connection. One that they hold dear. I remember my mother telling me that the priest at her church wanted the parishioners to consider canvassing the surrounding neighborhoods to "recruit". The idea was promptly struck down as the majority of people felt that it had to be a decision that one came to on their own versus being coerced into. The priest was replaced as well. I found that to be impressive and at the heart of how my parents view their religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted September 23, 2016 Share Posted September 23, 2016 28 minutes ago, SabreFan1 said: Actually it's an income percentage on property that is already theirs. It's not owned by the country or the citizens. Understood. But how did they get that property originally? How did they generate the income to purchase that land? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted September 23, 2016 Share Posted September 23, 2016 12 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said: Understood. But how did they get that property originally? How did they generate the income to purchase that land? It was just part of their personal lands that they originally owned for centuries. William the Conqueror owned all of Britain starting in 1066 and subsequent rulers ceded land over time to other royal family members (Barons, Lords, Dukes, etc.) who help support the monarchies and paid taxes and tribute in order to keep the country operating. The beginning of the very slow reduction of the UK monarchy to the figureheads that they are today began with the Magna Carta in the early 13th century. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted September 23, 2016 Share Posted September 23, 2016 15 minutes ago, SabreFan1 said: It was just part of their personal lands that they originally owned for centuries. William the Conqueror owned all of Britain starting in 1066 and subsequent rulers ceded land over time to other royal family members (Barons, Lords, Dukes, etc.) who help support the monarchies and paid taxes and tribute in order to keep the country operating. The beginning of the very slow reduction of the UK monarchy to the figureheads that they are today began with the Magna Carta in the early 13th century. Hell, most of Canada was given to Prince Rupert at one time. Then the best parts were given to the Railway company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted September 23, 2016 Share Posted September 23, 2016 Just now, Alflives said: Hell, most of Canada was given to Prince Rupert at one time. Then the best parts were given to the Railway company. Yep. Although once Canada became a semi-autonomous territory it gained those lands in relatively short order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tre Mac Posted September 23, 2016 Share Posted September 23, 2016 I'd let Kate rule with my scepter if ya know what I mean. By that I mean I'd let her govern a region and instill a tight economic reform while maintaining strict environmental policies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted September 23, 2016 Share Posted September 23, 2016 19 minutes ago, Tre Mac said: I'd let Kate rule with my scepter if ya know what I mean. By that I mean I'd let her govern a region and instill a tight economic reform while maintaining strict environmental policies. The crotchal region? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.