You are here: Home > Message Board > General Talk > Time for a republic
November 20 2018 7.15pm

Time for a republic

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 3 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5 >

 

View steeleye20's Profile steeleye20 Flag Croydon 11 Oct 18 7.18pm Send a Private Message to steeleye20 Add steeleye20 as a friend

I think a federal republic rather along the lines of West Germany, would be beneficial.

I would advocate removal of the House of Lords and the monarchy really has no powers but is so representative of the nation.

Caution there if we get an absolute duffer when HRH passes on.!!!!!!!

Real involvement of the rest of England outside Westminster, together with the other members of the Union, are essential IMO.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View steeleye20's Profile steeleye20 Flag Croydon 11 Oct 18 7.26pm Send a Private Message to steeleye20 Add steeleye20 as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

But a referendum is first past the post as well and you have just argued that people have to accept those results.

Live your own arguments.

The government that was elected decided to have a referendum.....it was governing.....you can't pick and choose.

Quite so S....

So why elect them in the first place, thank you, the voters.

Edited by Stirlingsays (11 Oct 2018 7.13pm)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View YT's Profile YT Flag Oxford 11 Oct 18 9.22pm Send a Private Message to YT Add YT as a friend

Originally posted by Badger11

I would prefer a republic but the majority of the country still love the Royal family. Personally I am very fond of our queen who has done a brilliant job, the rest of her family not so much.

The problem we republicans have is what do you replace the monarchy with, there is no consensus as the Australians discovered. Do you want a President like the USA / France or a figure head like Ireland. If you go for a figure head you may end up with the human equivalent of boaty mcboat face e.g. President Lilly Allen.

For now I say leave things as they are. There are constitutional changes that should be made after our queen departs this mortal coil. Before Charles III is enthroned we should disestablish the Church of England the only other countries that have a state religion you would probably not want to live in. Currently the monarch cannot be catholic that needs to be changed. Personally I don't care what they are it is a matter of conscience but the head of the Church of England should not be the monarch but the Archbishop of Canterbury and that role should be selected by the church and not the Prime Minister. There are probably other technical changes as well including for instance a term limit. In Scandinavia the monarchs abdicate when they feel no longer up to the job and this is no big deal. Our queen in her coronation oath took this as a job for life her successors should not be lumbered with that.

What a lovely, balanced post, Badger; if I may say,

Incidentally I recall (from somewhere back in the mist) that Chas is intending to be King George VII when his time comes.

 


Palace since 19 August 1972. Palace 1 (Tony Taylor) Liverpool 1 (Emlyn Hughes)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View the.universal's Profile the.universal 11 Oct 18 9.40pm Send a Private Message to the.universal Add the.universal as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays


One of the benefits has just been stated.
I very much doubt that you'd see eye to eye with our perspectives .....despite the fact that they are pretty close to how the state saw them not so long ago.

Maybe not, but it is a discussion board after all. Or should I leave you all to agree how great “(y)our perspectives” are.

 


Vive le Roy!

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View JL85's Profile JL85 Flag London,SE9 11 Oct 18 9.53pm Send a Private Message to JL85 Add JL85 as a friend

Electable head of state?

Yes please.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View the.universal's Profile the.universal 11 Oct 18 10.06pm Send a Private Message to the.universal Add the.universal as a friend

L

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Explain.

I think Britain has a better track record on freedom of speech than does America:

1950s anticommunism purge impacted the civil rights of all Americans. Free speech was not so important then, apparently (despite a written consitiution).
The concept of being “Unamerican” being used to stifle debate that criticises the actions of American leaders. We have a long history of political satire that criticises in a more subtle way.
The prevalence of political lobbying in America I don’t believe helps free speech either. Big business wins out over democratic process.

 


Vive le Roy!

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Badger11's Profile Badger11 Flag Beckenham 12 Oct 18 7.49am Send a Private Message to Badger11 Add Badger11 as a friend

I see Windsor council is threatening to move on the useless lazy scroungers because of today's wedding.

I think that's a bit harsh after all they are the brides parents.

 


One more point

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Cannonball's Profile Cannonball Flag Oxley, Arkansas 12 Oct 18 10.15am Send a Private Message to Cannonball Add Cannonball as a friend

Originally posted by Badger11

I see Windsor council is threatening to move on the useless lazy scroungers because of today's wedding.

I think that's a bit harsh after all they are the brides parents.

Best post of the week !

 


God said "Let there be light" and Ruby Wax invented the candle.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag Wisbech, England 12 Oct 18 10.36am Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by the.universal

L

I think Britain has a better track record on freedom of speech than does America:

1950s anticommunism purge impacted the civil rights of all Americans. Free speech was not so important then, apparently (despite a written consitiution).
The concept of being “Unamerican” being used to stifle debate that criticises the actions of American leaders. We have a long history of political satire that criticises in a more subtle way.
The prevalence of political lobbying in America I don’t believe helps free speech either. Big business wins out over democratic process.

The 50s??? Really?

How you can point to the McCarthy era as an attack on civil rights when major conservative voices are being silenced all over the Internet by 'progressive' left wing companies in Silicon Valley....that simply astounds me.....Indeed it's only that 'written constitution' that stops them from deleting all of them.

It's only that 'written constitution' that enables them to face prosecution.

Perhaps you don't realise but the black list and then McCarthy era came not long after WW2 where communists were most definitely within Hollywood and using it for propaganda.....for example, making 'Mission to Moscow' (1943) an obvious pro-Stalin propaganda made directly by Hollywood.

[Link]

While I think....as always seems to happen...things went too far.....Watch that clip and tell me that nothing should have been done.

In the UK we have eroded and damaged free speech laws massively.....we have sent Police to the door of thousands of people for expressing non PC thoughts on the Internet....We have sent people to jail over expressing opinions....How on earth can you seriously talk about us as being better on free speech when we prosecute people for poor taste jokes and rap lyrics.

So no, you are wrong.

Edited by Stirlingsays (12 Oct 2018 10.39am)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View steeleye20's Profile steeleye20 Flag Croydon 12 Oct 18 11.49am Send a Private Message to steeleye20 Add steeleye20 as a friend

Originally posted by Cannonball

Best post of the week !

I enjoyed that too.

And how accurate !


 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View the.universal's Profile the.universal 12 Oct 18 11.51am Send a Private Message to the.universal Add the.universal as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

The 50s??? Really?

How you can point to the McCarthy era as an attack on civil rights when major conservative voices are being silenced all over the Internet by 'progressive' left wing companies in Silicon Valley....that simply astounds me.....Indeed it's only that 'written constitution' that stops them from deleting all of them.

It's only that 'written constitution' that enables them to face prosecution.

Perhaps you don't realise but the black list and then McCarthy era came not long after WW2 where communists were most definitely within Hollywood and using it for propaganda.....for example, making 'Mission to Moscow' (1943) an obvious pro-Stalin propaganda made directly by Hollywood.

[Link]

While I think....as always seems to happen...things went too far.....Watch that clip and tell me that nothing should have been done.

In the UK we have eroded and damaged free speech laws massively.....we have sent Police to the door of thousands of people for expressing non PC thoughts on the Internet....We have sent people to jail over expressing opinions....How on earth can you seriously talk about us as being better on free speech when we prosecute people for poor taste jokes and rap lyrics.

So no, you are wrong.

Edited by Stirlingsays (12 Oct 2018 10.39am)

I feel like you’ve made some incorrect assumptions about my politics. I wouldn’t disagree with your first paragraph but two wrongs don’t make a right.

 


Vive le Roy!

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag Wisbech, England 12 Oct 18 12.40pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by the.universal

I feel like you’ve made some incorrect assumptions about my politics. I wouldn’t disagree with your first paragraph but two wrongs don’t make a right.


Well, to be fair, I'm arguing a specific point here. From what I've seen of your politics I'd say you're a centralist who leans left but feel free to put me right on that.....not quite my political position but certainly a political position I respect.

So this isn't personal.. Just arguing the toss over that point.

Free speech is under attack both here and in the US and the authoritarians are looking to implement their own form of 'heresy laws'...by usage of the 'hate' justification. If the religious right were doing their 'heresy laws'...like they tried to do with their 80s attempted takeover of the Republican party then these 'progressives' would be up in arms....but because it's them doing it with their politics it's alright and they refuse to see the contradiction.

Edited by Stirlingsays (12 Oct 2018 12.46pm)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 3 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > General Talk > Time for a republic