Is it time to end, the Monarchy?
Posted: Sun May 07, 2023 4:48 am
If only to gauge the temperature of peoples opinions on here and to ascertain if I'm out of touch as an old man of (very nearly) 60
A group for contestants and lovers of the Channel 4 game show 'Countdown'.
http://www.c4countdown.co.uk/
I didn't, until yesterday. But that whole ceremony just felt a bit culty.do you not find the whole religious aspect of it all a bit weird or even uncomfortable?
I'm not sure it was really the occasion for Charles to don his giant masturbation glove either, but there you go.Mark Deeks wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 6:29 amI didn't, until yesterday. But that whole ceremony just felt a bit culty.do you not find the whole religious aspect of it all a bit weird or even uncomfortable?
This is a good point. The UK is a majority atheist society nowadays, and swearing all manner of allegiances and oaths to a god that, in my mind and that of a large number of others, is purely fictional isn't really something that people can get behind. As Mark said, the ceremony yesterday seemed extremely culty (at least, the bits I caught from my mum having it on did).Fiona T wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 6:24 am And the other big thing - as a non-religious person, do you not find the whole religious aspect of it all a bit weird or even uncomfortable? All this is being done for a god that doesn't exist! Does Charles really believe that stuff? Most people today don't. Will William or George? Seems increasingly unlikely as the nation becomes less and less religious.
Is the UK really majority atheist? I'm not sure it is. Less than half said they were Christian in the census, but no religion was only 37.2%. It can depend on how the question is asked though. Some people identify as the religion of their parents without necessarily actually believing the actual truth of it. This site reckons 52% of British people have no religion, but even that's not the same as atheist.Elliott Mellor wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 8:26 amThis is a good point. The UK is a majority atheist society nowadays, and swearing all manner of allegiances and oaths to a god that, in my mind and that of a large number of others, is purely fictional isn't really something that people can get behind. As Mark said, the ceremony yesterday seemed extremely culty (at least, the bits I caught from my mum having it on did).Fiona T wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 6:24 am And the other big thing - as a non-religious person, do you not find the whole religious aspect of it all a bit weird or even uncomfortable? All this is being done for a god that doesn't exist! Does Charles really believe that stuff? Most people today don't. Will William or George? Seems increasingly unlikely as the nation becomes less and less religious.
I'd say so, yes. You can't take census results as being necessarily accurate because a lot of people will be coerced to put the same religion as their parents put. Out of all the people I know and associate with, I'd say people who are genuinely religious (even very liberally) make up less than 10%. Most people just won't use the term "atheist", even if for all intents and purposes they are. "Some people identify as the religion of their parents" is quite an understatement - virtually every child is indoctrinated to follow the religion/beliefs their parents do.Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 8:35 amIs the UK really majority atheist? I'm not sure it is. Less than half said they were Christian in the census, but no religion was only 37.2%. It can depend on how the question is asked though. Some people identify as the religion of their parents without necessarily actually believing the actual truth of it. This site reckons 52% of British people have no religion, but even that's not the same as atheist.Elliott Mellor wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 8:26 amThis is a good point. The UK is a majority atheist society nowadays, and swearing all manner of allegiances and oaths to a god that, in my mind and that of a large number of others, is purely fictional isn't really something that people can get behind. As Mark said, the ceremony yesterday seemed extremely culty (at least, the bits I caught from my mum having it on did).Fiona T wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 6:24 am And the other big thing - as a non-religious person, do you not find the whole religious aspect of it all a bit weird or even uncomfortable? All this is being done for a god that doesn't exist! Does Charles really believe that stuff? Most people today don't. Will William or George? Seems increasingly unlikely as the nation becomes less and less religious.
Maybe you have hit the nail on the head there.Elliott Mellor wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 8:26 amThis is a good point. The UK is a majority atheist society nowadays, and swearing all manner of allegiances and oaths to a god that, in my mind and that of a large number of others, is purely fictional isn't really something that people can get behind. As Mark said, the ceremony yesterday seemed extremely culty (at least, the bits I caught from my mum having it on did).Fiona T wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 6:24 am And the other big thing - as a non-religious person, do you not find the whole religious aspect of it all a bit weird or even uncomfortable? All this is being done for a god that doesn't exist! Does Charles really believe that stuff? Most people today don't. Will William or George? Seems increasingly unlikely as the nation becomes less and less religious.
I assume that he won't be having servants or enjoying all the privileges afforded to the royals that others couldn't ever expect then? Totally meaningless and false statement otherwise.Marc Meakin wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 9:29 amMaybe you have hit the nail on the head there.Elliott Mellor wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 8:26 amThis is a good point. The UK is a majority atheist society nowadays, and swearing all manner of allegiances and oaths to a god that, in my mind and that of a large number of others, is purely fictional isn't really something that people can get behind. As Mark said, the ceremony yesterday seemed extremely culty (at least, the bits I caught from my mum having it on did).Fiona T wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 6:24 am And the other big thing - as a non-religious person, do you not find the whole religious aspect of it all a bit weird or even uncomfortable? All this is being done for a god that doesn't exist! Does Charles really believe that stuff? Most people today don't. Will William or George? Seems increasingly unlikely as the nation becomes less and less religious.
There is a correlation between religious fervour and monarchism.
I am an atheist, yet I feel that like Brexit, (I was a leaver Btw) it may be a case of be careful what you wish for.
There are many nations that have denounced their Monarchy that may have regretted it.
My argument in favour of the Monarchy is purely on tradition and the revenue that it generates.
Yes it needs reform and ironically Charles is the one to do this.
I liked that he wants to serve and not be served.
Lets see him put his money where his mouth is
You probably want to reconsider your position if this is where you're at.Marc Meakin wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 9:34 am It looks like I am the lone voice in support of the Monarchy on here.
Paging Rhys.....
You're just deliberately dragging things to the extremes because you haven't actually got a decent counterargument for what has been raised.Marc Meakin wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 12:20 pm So how do you think the Monarchy should go?
Slowly, starting with Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
A dissolving of the commonwealth maybe az its a reminder of our imperialistic path.
Do away with the arrogance of ' Great' Britain as a name.
Have a public vote on name change maybe a new flag.
Or a good old revolution.
Maybe Kier might have something for the King's speech next year
Harry has proven how easy it is to get masses of cash from the press by whining to them about how harshly he had it in one of, if not the most, privileged upbringings in the world. He hardly "earns his keep" - he doesn't, as far as I know, actually work a job. He doesn't contribute to society in any meaningful way.Marc Meakin wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 1:57 pm My counter argument is based on fear of the unknown as England at least has had a Monarchy for over a thousand years.
At least with Brexit I knew what society was like before we joined the EU.
I know I keep going on about Russia but I'm trying to come up with a country that has genuinely prospered since giving up the Monarchy.
Even Australia, a much more modern and progressive nation currently wants to retain the Monarchy.
Yes the Monarchy is not relevant in a modernistic way, the King doesn't go into battle like they used to.
So in effect my argument is to keep the status quo based on nothing more than a reluctance to change when there really is no need.
I definitely think it needs reforming, scaling down to just the first family getting a duchy.
Andrew should be put on trial and every one outside the King's Son and his children should earn their keep and Harry has proven how easy that is.
But i concede, at least on this forum I am the only sane, pro royal. (though its a shitty straw poll with only a handful of contributers to this debate)
Though my sanity is or has been for another forum to debate
The Monarchy going is a huge probability but not in my lifetime and unlikely to happen in yours.Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 4:42 pm You equate getting rid of the monarchy with revolution and communism and like it would be the end of life as we know it. Almost like you're scared of it. But you're against most other entitlement establishment things. You just need to let go and embrace the inevitable (one day).
So basically you're in favour of anything that annoys groups you dislike, even if that costs hundreds of millions a year in a Britain wracked with a cost of living crisis. Glad we cleared that up.Marc Meakin wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 7:25 pm I think its because I'm getting older and more reflective.
Also anything that pissss off Liverpool supporters I'm all for.
Also the yanks are jealous of our monarchy
I think you are targeting the wrong establishment forget Buck House how about the residents of Downing Street.Elliott Mellor wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 7:43 pmSo basically you're in favour of anything that annoys groups you dislike, even if that costs hundreds of millions a year in a Britain wracked with a cost of living crisis. Glad we cleared that up.Marc Meakin wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 7:25 pm I think its because I'm getting older and more reflective.
Also anything that pissss off Liverpool supporters I'm all for.
Also the yanks are jealous of our monarchy
I don't see why it has to be one or the other. Why not both?Marc Meakin wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 7:54 pmI think you are targeting the wrong establishment forget Buck House how about the residents of Downing Street.Elliott Mellor wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 7:43 pmSo basically you're in favour of anything that annoys groups you dislike, even if that costs hundreds of millions a year in a Britain wracked with a cost of living crisis. Glad we cleared that up.Marc Meakin wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 7:25 pm I think its because I'm getting older and more reflective.
Also anything that pissss off Liverpool supporters I'm all for.
Also the yanks are jealous of our monarchy
The Royal family are deluded but the Tories know exactly what they are doing to the poor and don't care
Yeah I did some googling on cost/benefit too. Generally it seems to be accepted that it is positive but also that it costs over twice what the next dearest monarchy costs. As someone who's not that bothered, it'll be interesting to see how it all pans out, assuming I'm around to see the next change of monarch!Jon O'Neill wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 8:50 pm I think it's pretty obvious all along here that Marc is playing a bit of the devil's advocate and many of his comments are tongue-in-cheek or deliberately slightly provocative so to get triggered or call him defensive is a bit weird. He's not one of the many royalist nutters in this country.
Anyway, obviously the monarchy is totally mental. It goes without saying. The only interesting question is whether or not it is a net generator of revenue. I suspect it's pretty hugely in the positive (£1.8bn by this 2017 report - I can't find much else from a quick Google) and if we were to liquidate all the assets, give back the stolen diamonds, cut off all the allowances and security and travel etc. that it would be a very short-sighted decision economically. Would be interested to see further research on this though.
I've not read that whole report (and I'm not going to) but it doesn't read like it's neutral. Plus how can you tell how much difference the monarchy makes to tourism? The error bars would be enormous.Jon O'Neill wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 8:50 pmAnyway, obviously the monarchy is totally mental. It goes without saying. The only interesting question is whether or not it is a net generator of revenue. I suspect it's pretty hugely in the positive (£1.8bn by this 2017 report - I can't find much else from a quick Google) and if we were to liquidate all the assets, give back the stolen diamonds, cut off all the allowances and security and travel etc. that it would be a very short-sighted decision economically. Would be interested to see further research on this though.
No, but in a time of economic crisis (or any time), to make a decision that would take money out of the public purse for no benefit other than to appease anti-royal dogmatists would be absurd.Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 9:18 pmI've not read that whole report (and I'm not going to) but it doesn't read like it's neutral. Plus how can you tell how much difference the monarchy makes to tourism? The error bars would be enormous.Jon O'Neill wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 8:50 pmAnyway, obviously the monarchy is totally mental. It goes without saying. The only interesting question is whether or not it is a net generator of revenue. I suspect it's pretty hugely in the positive (£1.8bn by this 2017 report - I can't find much else from a quick Google) and if we were to liquidate all the assets, give back the stolen diamonds, cut off all the allowances and security and travel etc. that it would be a very short-sighted decision economically. Would be interested to see further research on this though.
In any case, I think we agree that it's not just about money, or evenly primarily about money. The monarchy is indeed totally mental.
I don't buy this. One person's anecdotal opinion based on the people they know has no validity compared to a nationwide census. People tend to know and associate with people who are in a social group they can identify with, be that race, religion, etc. If we're going with personal social groups over a census, then I could similarly assert that over 90% of people are "genuinely religious (even very liberally)" and that the census is a load of tripe.Elliott Mellor wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 9:00 amI'd say so, yes. You can't take census results as being necessarily accurate because a lot of people will be coerced to put the same religion as their parents put. Out of all the people I know and associate with, I'd say people who are genuinely religious (even very liberally) make up less than 10%. Most people just won't use the term "atheist", even if for all intents and purposes they are. "Some people identify as the religion of their parents" is quite an understatement - virtually every child is indoctrinated to follow the religion/beliefs their parents do.Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 8:35 amIs the UK really majority atheist? I'm not sure it is. Less than half said they were Christian in the census, but no religion was only 37.2%. It can depend on how the question is asked though. Some people identify as the religion of their parents without necessarily actually believing the actual truth of it. This site reckons 52% of British people have no religion, but even that's not the same as atheist.Elliott Mellor wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 8:26 am
This is a good point. The UK is a majority atheist society nowadays, and swearing all manner of allegiances and oaths to a god that, in my mind and that of a large number of others, is purely fictional isn't really something that people can get behind. As Mark said, the ceremony yesterday seemed extremely culty (at least, the bits I caught from my mum having it on did).
Even if you aren't going to accept the UK as majority atheist presently, it certainly will be in 10 or 20 years time - attitudes change, and the most religious group in society are those who are elderly, and who are dying off at a much faster rate than the younger generations.
Adam Gillard wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 10:29 pmI don't buy this. One person's anecdotal opinion based on the people they know has no validity compared to a nationwide census. People tend to know and associate with people who are in a social group they can identify with, be that race, religion, etc. If we're going with personal social groups over a census, then I could similarly assert that over 90% of people are "genuinely religious (even very liberally)" and that the census is a load of tripe.Elliott Mellor wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 9:00 amI'd say so, yes. You can't take census results as being necessarily accurate because a lot of people will be coerced to put the same religion as their parents put. Out of all the people I know and associate with, I'd say people who are genuinely religious (even very liberally) make up less than 10%. Most people just won't use the term "atheist", even if for all intents and purposes they are. "Some people identify as the religion of their parents" is quite an understatement - virtually every child is indoctrinated to follow the religion/beliefs their parents do.Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 8:35 am
Is the UK really majority atheist? I'm not sure it is. Less than half said they were Christian in the census, but no religion was only 37.2%. It can depend on how the question is asked though. Some people identify as the religion of their parents without necessarily actually believing the actual truth of it. This site reckons 52% of British people have no religion, but even that's not the same as atheist.
Even if you aren't going to accept the UK as majority atheist presently, it certainly will be in 10 or 20 years time - attitudes change, and the most religious group in society are those who are elderly, and who are dying off at a much faster rate than the younger generations.
Moreover, I reckon a child of committed atheists is as likely if not more likely to be "coerced" into atheism as a child of religious parents is to be "coerced" into religiosity.
It is a fantastic song and we all love belting it out, but if we're going to change the National Anthem, let's go for a non-religious oneMarc Meakin wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 6:56 am I'm all for reforms like a new national anthem maybe Jerusalem if only as an English one for sporting occasions.
Marc Meakin wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 7:03 am Having had time to digest being triggered by the 'Not my King' brigade I think it's because Charles has always been an environmentalist, promotes healthy eating and my daughter benefitted from The Princes Trust and his declaration to serve and not be served is a nice touch.
The late Queen didn't get the same hatred from, UK Republic
The question in the census was recognised to be leading ("What is your religion?") - this has been recognised by the ONS.Adam Gillard wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 10:29 pmI don't buy this. One person's anecdotal opinion based on the people they know has no validity compared to a nationwide census. People tend to know and associate with people who are in a social group they can identify with, be that race, religion, etc. If we're going with personal social groups over a census, then I could similarly assert that over 90% of people are "genuinely religious (even very liberally)" and that the census is a load of tripe.Elliott Mellor wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 9:00 amI'd say so, yes. You can't take census results as being necessarily accurate because a lot of people will be coerced to put the same religion as their parents put. Out of all the people I know and associate with, I'd say people who are genuinely religious (even very liberally) make up less than 10%. Most people just won't use the term "atheist", even if for all intents and purposes they are. "Some people identify as the religion of their parents" is quite an understatement - virtually every child is indoctrinated to follow the religion/beliefs their parents do.Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 8:35 am
Is the UK really majority atheist? I'm not sure it is. Less than half said they were Christian in the census, but no religion was only 37.2%. It can depend on how the question is asked though. Some people identify as the religion of their parents without necessarily actually believing the actual truth of it. This site reckons 52% of British people have no religion, but even that's not the same as atheist.
Even if you aren't going to accept the UK as majority atheist presently, it certainly will be in 10 or 20 years time - attitudes change, and the most religious group in society are those who are elderly, and who are dying off at a much faster rate than the younger generations.
Moreover, I reckon a child of committed atheists is as likely if not more likely to be "coerced" into atheism as a child of religious parents is to be "coerced" into religiosity.
America had the UK's monarchy before independence. They did OK afterwards. (By some measures anyway.)Marc Meakin wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 6:18 am Genuine question.
Which nations that formerly had a Monarchy is doing the best economically.
I guess China is one but that can't be attributed to getting rid of the monarchy.
Eh, the USA.Marc Meakin wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 6:18 am Genuine question.
Which nations that formerly had a Monarchy is doing the best economically.
I guess China is one but that can't be attributed to getting rid of the monarchy.
Yeah sure you've got a point that there probably is a bias in there but it's no coincidence that in the past few years, two churches in the local area have closed due to lack of members, and the others seem to also be struggling for numbers. My parents both go to church (and occasionally I'll venture there because it does run some pretty good events - I also was made to attend for the best part of 16 years of my life), and it's quite noticeable how it's gone from "brimming with members" when I was young, to "has a few dozen members who are largely over the retirement age". The Sunday school used to have 20-30 kids each Sunday, and now it's lucky if it gets five. Religion is a majority amongst the elderly and a minority amongst the youth, and you don't have to be a genius to figure out which of those groups is going to survive the longest.Adam Gillard wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 10:29 pmI don't buy this. One person's anecdotal opinion based on the people they know has no validity compared to a nationwide census. People tend to know and associate with people who are in a social group they can identify with, be that race, religion, etc. If we're going with personal social groups over a census, then I could similarly assert that over 90% of people are "genuinely religious (even very liberally)" and that the census is a load of tripe.Elliott Mellor wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 9:00 amI'd say so, yes. You can't take census results as being necessarily accurate because a lot of people will be coerced to put the same religion as their parents put. Out of all the people I know and associate with, I'd say people who are genuinely religious (even very liberally) make up less than 10%. Most people just won't use the term "atheist", even if for all intents and purposes they are. "Some people identify as the religion of their parents" is quite an understatement - virtually every child is indoctrinated to follow the religion/beliefs their parents do.Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 8:35 am
Is the UK really majority atheist? I'm not sure it is. Less than half said they were Christian in the census, but no religion was only 37.2%. It can depend on how the question is asked though. Some people identify as the religion of their parents without necessarily actually believing the actual truth of it. This site reckons 52% of British people have no religion, but even that's not the same as atheist.
Even if you aren't going to accept the UK as majority atheist presently, it certainly will be in 10 or 20 years time - attitudes change, and the most religious group in society are those who are elderly, and who are dying off at a much faster rate than the younger generations.
Moreover, I reckon a child of committed atheists is as likely if not more likely to be "coerced" into atheism as a child of religious parents is to be "coerced" into religiosity.
You've convinced me. The Monarchy has to go.
I mean plenty of people believe in things with little or no evidence....
That statement got old after Obama second termGavin Chipper wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 8:14 amAmerica had the UK's monarchy before independence. They did OK afterwards. (By some measures anyway.)Marc Meakin wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 6:18 am Genuine question.
Which nations that formerly had a Monarchy is doing the best economically.
I guess China is one but that can't be attributed to getting rid of the monarchy.
I don't think the Irish people chose to have a Monarchy and then got rid of it.Mark James wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 8:25 amEh, the USA.Marc Meakin wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 6:18 am Genuine question.
Which nations that formerly had a Monarchy is doing the best economically.
I guess China is one but that can't be attributed to getting rid of the monarchy.
Also, apparently Ireland had the fastest growing ecomony in Europe last year, (although admittedly the forecast for continued growth is only cautiously optimistic.)
But anyway, what has the monarchy got to do with the ecomony?
Apart from the bit at the topMark James wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 7:16 pm Before the Anglo-Norman invasion, Ireland had its own collection of high Kings and kingdoms that the people "chose". Henry II assumed contoll of Ireland around the 12th century. For 800 years or so we "chose" to have the British Monarchy. Then, in the early part of the 20th century we decided not to have the British Monarchy any more and instead chose to the kick the shit out of yis until ye left, with moderate success.
While I think it's cute you think that, what are you talking about? Everyone thinks they're an over privileged, badly dressed, sex crazed laughing stock.Marc Meakin wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 8:51 pm
2)A fair bit of respect from around the world is commanded because of the Royal family
I think the amount of dignitaries from other countries that came to the coronation implies a level of respect from the heads of state anyway.Mark James wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 9:23 pmWhile I think it's cute you think that, what are you talking about? Everyone thinks they're an over privileged, badly dressed, sex crazed laughing stock.Marc Meakin wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 8:51 pm
2)A fair bit of respect from around the world is commanded because of the Royal family
https://youtu.be/RhR4eeVek2Q