Queen's Jubilee

[jucyberry]

I am a woman, I don't give up..

ok, whether or not you like it or not the main thrust of most republicans complaints is
1, the so called living off of the tax payer..

2, the supposed lack of inability to share their wealth around..

followed by a seeming resentment of their inherited position and a wierd desire to rock the boat by putting a president in place of a fully functioning and perfectly capable monarchy...

For every decent president there will be more than one tin pot ruler who decides being president isn't enough..He wants to be king..Amin, Mugabe, Sadam and Gadafi to name but a few..

Then look to history, what good came after the bolshevics assasinated the Romonov's? Was, is, communisim that wonderful..?

Be careful what you wish for, a republican utopia just might be little more than a mirage..

[jucyberry]

Oh and I wouldn't go round quoting too much wikki, remember the other week it was reported that Englebert Humperdink once loved a woman named Margaret who liked it up the arse and stank of fish.... 

Sweet dreams my lovely, bed is calling..

[mjdgreg]

ok, whether or not you like it or not the main thrust of most republicans complaints is
1, the so called living off of the tax payer..

2, the supposed lack of inability to share their wealth around..

followed by a seeming resentment of their inherited position and a wierd desire to rock the boat by putting a president in place of a fully functioning and perfectly capable monarchy...

For every decent president there will be more than one tin pot ruler who decides being president isn't enough..He wants to be king..Amin, Mugabe, Sadam and Gadafi to name but a few..

Then look to history, what good came after the bolshevics assasinated the Romonov's? Was, is, communisim that wonderful..?

Be careful what you wish for, a republican utopia just might be little more than a mirage..

Point 1, there is no so called about it! They do sponge off the tax payer.

Point 2, they don't share their incredible wealth about. They don't even use it to pay their own way in life. Instead they live off state benefits! Truly ridiculous.

Of course there is a resentment of their inherited position because of all the privilege that comes with it. Look at Charlie. Despite the best schools and teachers in the land he got A Level grades that he would have struggled to get into Doncaster College with. What happens? He goes to the best university in the country to study some pointless degree.

Your idea of what powers a president would have are way off the mark. To suggest we'd end up with a dictator is absolutely ridiculous. You need to brush up on the situation in Ireland and check out how their president works . That's the sort of president we should have.

As head of the church I don't see the Queen being very Christian either. Why not let some of the homeless live at her palaces? They've got more than enough rooms to spare. But of course it won't happen because she's not a real Christian. Do you think Jesus would live like she does if he was around today? Of course not (before anyone asks I am a devout atheist).

[scriptman]

I am a woman, I don't give up..

ok, whether or not you like it or not the main thrust of most republicans complaints is
1, the so called living off of the tax payer..

2, the supposed lack of inability to share their wealth around..

followed by a seeming resentment of their inherited position and a wierd desire to rock the boat by putting a president in place of a fully functioning and perfectly capable monarchy...

For every decent president there will be more than one tin pot ruler who decides being president isn't enough..He wants to be king..Amin, Mugabe, Sadam and Gadafi to name but a few..

Then look to history, what good came after the bolshevics assasinated the Romonov's? Was, is, communisim that wonderful..?

Be careful what you wish for, a republican utopia just might be little more than a mirage..

Fortunately we live in a free society and I applaud the wealthy who have laboured tirelessly for their gains. What I do resent is the fact the gentry, or those loosely connected to the royals, receive preferential treatment. 

Explain to me why you think some in the UK expect the best health care money can buy because of their birthright, whilst old Sid, who fought for his country, and spent years after working down the pit, died prematurely because treatment would have been too costly?  Do you think it's fair that the old woman down the road has to sell her house and possessions to afford care, whist the Duke of Westminster earns millions of pounds worth of interest on his vast wealth?  What about the Hervey clan, born into vast fortunes, do absolutely nothing for this country, yet enjoy the champagne lifestyle?

The peerage system, the incredible wealth channelled to these people and the minor Royals, is fundamentally wrong.  The fact that our taxes are used to fund repairs to Buck House, and other royal estates, when we struggle to afford repairs to our own house, is wrong.

The Euro economic crisis aside, the two largest economies in Europe, France and Germany, do absolutely fine without a monarch.  The Netherlands and Norway have strong economies, both with much scaled down versions of a monarchy.  These countries have moved on and adapted to the modern day of living. 



   

[mjdgreg]

Spot on Scriptman. I'd give up now jucyberry as you are on incredibly shakey ground.

[Draytonian III]

Dregs if you dont like the Royal Family and what they stand for why dont you [a] leave these shores or crawl back under your stone.

[mjdgreg]

Dregs if you dont like the Royal Family and what they stand for why dont you [a] leave these shores or crawl back under your stone.

Why don't you try and start using your brain instead of falling for all that propaganda you sycophant. Why don't you try to argue your case like us dregs have done. Maybe you don't because you don't have a coherent argument to put that would stand up to the slightest bit of scrutiny. Cop yourself on and stop tugging your forelock and doffing your cap to a bunch of inbred retards.

[GM-MarkB]

It's amusing....you slate the Monarchy and yet treat everyone on here in the same 'I am better than you' condescending way....quite ironic really

[Filo]

Dregs if you dont like the Royal Family and what they stand for why dont you [a] leave these shores or crawl back under your stone.

Why don't you try and start using your brain instead of falling for all that propaganda you sycophant. Why don't you try to argue your case like us dregs have done. Maybe you don't because you don't have a coherent argument to put that would stand up to the slightest bit of scrutiny. Cop yourself on and stop tugging your forelock and doffing your cap to a bunch of inbred retards.

you`re one who has n`t argued his case, all you`ve done is find an article that vaguely supports your case and copy and paste it here, non of it has been your own work or words!

[jucyberry]

Sorry not to get back to you sooner Mick only I've been having a lovely time watching the ITV prog about Prince William.. Oh and call me Deb, Jucyberry is so formal don't you think?

I'm sorry I don't see how the fact that some are born into wealth is a crime against humainty..Life is after all, a lottery. At the moment nothing has ever been proven that the offspring of the wealthy choose which family they are born into, as by the same hand, who would chose to be born poor?

You will say I am being as simplistic as I can be but , think on it like this..Say tomorrow night you win the euro millions..£120 or so million. More than you will ever spend in your life time.. You leave it to your decendants, who make good use of their inheritance, adding to that wealth and so on down the generations... Now, this money wasn't earned by you, your children or theirs..the homes bought not worked for but still theirs.. Would you insist your decendants give away what is theirs just because there are people poorer? There isn't enough in that pot to help everyone. what would you do?

The houses, Balmoral and Sandringham aside go with the job, sumptious repositorys for the nations treasures. The civil list has been pared to the bone.
 You can say nothing to change my mind about the monarchy.. when I look at the baboons b*llocks that run the country in the houses of parliment, when I see what sort of fools are in power, why the hell would I want any of them to replace the royal family?

[mjdgreg]

you`re one who has n`t argued his case, all you`ve done is find an article that vaguely supports your case and copy and paste it here, non of it has been your own work or words!

I've made an extremely strong case and none of the points I have made have been refuted by anyone. I on the other hand have totally destroyed any argument that is pro monarchy. I posted some very useful information from another website without ever claiming it was my own words. I did this to try to educate the uneducated amongst you and to point out how many of you have been brainwashed and haven't even heard the argument from the other side.

I have also used many of my own words e.g 'inbred retards' etc. Secretly I know most of you agree with my point of view but can't bring yourselves to say it because you dislike my' take no prisoners' approach to debating. I can live with that.

[mjdgreg]

I'm sorry I don't see how the fact that some are born into wealth is a crime against humainty..Life is after all, a lottery. At the moment nothing has ever been proven that the offspring of the wealthy choose which family they are born into, as by the same hand, who would chose to be born poor?

You keep on focusing on inherited wealth. This is only a very small part of the debate. What about all the other many points against a monarchy. e.g. what do you think Jesus would do if he were head of the church? Do you think he would live a life of unbridled luxury at poorer people's expense? Do you think he would keep the palace doors closed to keep the great unwashed living on the streets?

Start answering some of these points and I'll take your views more seriously. By the way my children will not inherit my wealth. I've told them to stand on their own two feet as I fully intend to get it all spent before I die.

[jucyberry]

That would depend on whether you see Jesus as real, a myth or an over hyped focal point to a cult gone global I would guess.

As it is your question is hypothetical  and could only be answered by supposition as well you know.

Any focus on wealth is directly linked to the posts on this thread, most of which raise the subject, ergo one can only assume that for those commenting adversely that this is their main (or one of) objection.

Anyway, enough of this verbal tango for tonight, it's bedtime once again.. Nighty night. Sleep well..

[mjdgreg]

That would depend on whether you see Jesus as real, a myth or an over hyped focal point to a cult gone global I would guess.

It is indisputable fact that Jesus did exist. As head of the church you would think that she believes in him and his teachings. Why doesn't she put them into practice? Why does she do completely the opposite?

[Thinwhiteduke]

It is indisputable fact that Jesus did exist.

Prove it.....next you'll be telling me that its fact Noah built an Ark and put two of each and every living creature on earth upon it.

[mjdgreg]

Prove it.....next you'll be telling me that its fact Noah built an Ark and put two of each and every living creature on earth upon it.

I notice that you don't try to disprove it. Anyway here is a ton of historical evidence that should satisfy even you:

http://www.exploringgod.com/questions/did-jesus-exist?gclid=CML_2KiwvrACFTMetAodKhgqow

Hopefully now we can all agree that he did indeed exist. So I ask my questions again. Anyone can provide an answer. As the queen is head of the church do you think she lives a life in accordance with Christian beliefs? Would Jesus choose to live in such luxury? Would he be found amongst the poor or the establishment closed off from the realities of life? Would he throw open the doors to all the palaces and let the poor have a roof over their heads or would he be happy to keep the doors closed and tell them to go and live on the streets?

We all know the answers don't we and it doesn't make for comfortable reading for the queen. If there is a God she's going to find it very difficult to get into heaven. For the record I believe in God as much as I believe in the tooth fairy but she clearly does believe in him. Shame she doesn't live by the Christian principles.

[keyser_soze]

Hopefully now we can all agree that he did indeed exist.

And with that, mjdgreg's whole argument jumps the shark and becomes invalid.

[jucyberry]

By your own admission Mick you are a wealthy, sucessful business man....How many tramps have you invited to  live in your spare room? Perhaps it's time you practice what you preach.



This arguement is getting extremely childish now.. Please don't start preaching religieon to us , many of the worst atrocities are commited in the name of one god or another.

[mjdgreg]

And with that, mjdgreg's whole argument jumps the shark and becomes invalid.

You can take a horse to water but you can't make it drink. Even though you refute overwhelming evidence my argument still stands if you believe Jesus didn't ever exist. The queen does believe in Jesus but doesn't live according to his principles. So I'm afraid it is your argument that is invalid. I notice you don't offer a shred of evidence for your view that he didn't exist. Typical of all you monarchists, you just blindly follow the pro monarchy line without engaging your brain. I'm sure if many of you had a lobotomy no-one would notice the difference. 

[jucyberry]

Oh and to answer a point you made last night about my so called focus on the inherited wealth , this is a quote from the op's second post on his thread....

'It amazes me that the plebs are quite happy for these inbred Royals to have a life of luxury at our expense.'










YOU raised that particular subject Mick..   

Now, if I don't reply to you for  a few hours it's not because you have me on the ropes and i'm stuck for a reply..I have to go out.. so have a nice afternoon..

[mjdgreg]

By your own admission mjdgreg you are a wealthy, sucessful business man....How many tramps have you invited to  live in your spare room? Perhaps it's time you practice what you preach.

This arguement is getting extremely childish now.. Please don't start preaching religieon to us , many of the worst atrocities are commited in the name of one god or another.

There's no way I would have a tramp living in my spare room. He should harden up and get a job. Then again I'm not head of a church that believes in Christianity. The queen is, and should live by her faith. She clearly doesn't. She does the exact opposite.

I'm not preaching religion. I'm merely pointing out one of the many contradictions of the monarchy. At least we can agree on religion causing many of the worst atrocities the world has ever seen even to this day.

Accepting I've totally won this part of the debate, where do you all stand on thicko Charlie going to Cambridge university with his piss poor A Level grades? Another fine example of privilege being granted through a quirk of birth and not based on ability whatsoever. That place he took should have been given to someone who actually deserved it. That person's life chances have been totally compromised by this flagrant example of nepotism and sycophancy.

[mjdgreg]

Oh and to answer a point you made last night about my so called focus on the inherited wealth , this is a quote from the op's second post on his thread....

'It amazes me that the plebs are quite happy for these inbred Royals to have a life of luxury at our expense.'

YOU raised that particular subject mjdgreg.    

Now, if I don't reply to you for  a few hours it's not because you have me on the ropes and i'm stuck for a reply..I have to go out.. so have a nice afternoon..

Never said I didn't raise that particular subject. All I've said is that it's just a very small part of the brilliant case I've made against having a monarchy.

[Dimples-D]

JESUS CHRIST ???

http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/

Just thought I would put over the case for the other side...

Read 'The God Delusion' by Richard Hawkins..  or even 'Tricks of the Mind' by Derren Brown. 

[mjdgreg]

JESUS CHRIST ???

http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/

Just thought I would put over the case for the other side...

Read 'The God Delusion' by Richard Hawkins..  or even 'Tricks of the Mind' by Derren Brown. 

You can even find people who will tell you that the holocaust never happened. I have read and own a copy of 'The God Delusion'. I am a devout atheist. That doesn't mean I don't think there is overwhelming evidence that Jesus existed. That doesn't mean I believe any of the fairy stories associated with him.

The queen obviously does, as do many foolish people in the world. My point is that if she believes in a ludicrous religion like Christianity then why doesn't she live her life accordingly?

[Dimples-D]

JESUS CHRIST ???

http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/

Just thought I would put over the case for the other side...

Read 'The God Delusion' by Richard Hawkins..  or even 'Tricks of the Mind' by Derren Brown. 

You can even find people who will tell you that the holocaust never happened. I have read and own a copy of 'The God Delusion'. I am a devout atheist. That doesn't mean I don't think there is overwhelming evidence that Jesus existed. That doesn't mean I believe any of the fairy stories associated with him.

The queen obviously does, as do many foolish people in the world. My point is that if she believes in a ludicrous religion like Christianity then why doesn't she live her life accordingly?

You know something mate, I don't think I have ever met a christian that does. Bloody sinners the lot of 'em..

Just a note to anyone reading this topic.. You should check out the 2 books I mentioned above. They are both awesome.  Maybe go for the Derren Brown one first, then you will want to read the Richard Dawkins one anyway.

PS. I don't think you can campare the web site I gave you the link for to Holocaust deniers.

[mjdgreg]

Just a note to anyone reading this topic.. You should check out the 2 books I mentioned above. They are both awesome.  Maybe go for the Derren Brown one first, then you will want to read the Richard Dawkins one anyway.

Agree with that. The Dawkins book is not an easy read but is well worth the effort. He is extremely intelligent and writes that way so unless you yourself are intelligent you will struggle with this book.

[rtid88]

Mick you are probably the most arrogant and condescending man that has ever posted on this forum, you simply cannot ever accept other people opinions as possibly being right and that your opinion and beliefs are above and better then everyone else's!

This is actually a football forum and yet from what I have seen of your football related posts you seem to know very little and your general comment is to get Saunders Out!

Kindly just do one!!

[mjdgreg]

mjdgreg you are probably the most intelligent and charismatic man that has ever posted on this forum, you simply cannot ever accept other people opinions as possibly being right and that your opinion and beliefs are above and better then everyone else's!

If you read the post prior to yours you will see that I agree with the poster. I have also agreed with scriptman as well. As far as everyone else's opinions are concerned I am not going to agree with them when they are talking a load of rubbish. I always consider other people's arguments before deciding I was right all along.

I always make a very convincing argument backed up with facts and evidence. Unfortunately other posters don't do the same and make themselves look foolish when they try to say I am wrong. They very rarely even try to back their arguments up because they can't. I rest my case.

Saunders out!!!!

[rtid88]

It is not because they can't it is more that they have much better things to do with their time then to search for quotes and articles on the internet to increase their arrogance and to make their own heads bigger! Unlike yourself!
There are facts and theories on the internet that will always support both sides of any argument! It is just other people would prefer to spend their time doing things away from their computer!

[mjdgreg]

It is not because they can't it is more that they have much better things to do with their time then to search for quotes and articles on the internet to increase their arrogance and to make their own heads bigger! Unlike yourself!
There are facts and theories on the internet that will always support both sides of any argument! It is just other people would prefer to spend their time doing things away from their computer!

It is because they can't. Even I couldn't defend some of the rubbish that gets posted on here. I'm content in the knowledge that the silent majority are being educated by my posts. I reckon I've turned a few monarchists into republicans with my well thought out posts.

For those that are time challenged, could one of you please just disprove what I say about thicko Charlie. That will do me.