Time to ditch the monarchy?

Is it time to ditch the monarchy?

  • Yes

    Votes: 282 50.8%
  • No

    Votes: 273 49.2%

  • Total voters
    555

Patdfb

Ex Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2021
Messages
384
Reaction score
581
Points
174
Location
London
Do you think that when the Queen dies we should ditch the monarchy and become a Republic with an elected head of state?
 
I have long thought that when the Queen passes a part of that institution will go with her. Her reign is a special one and has been unprecedented.

It feels fitting that it should in some way be the end. Saved the best till last sort of thing (for want of a better phrase)

And I'm not sure society will be as enthusiastic with Charles and eventually William at the helm. Doesn't feel like we're evolving that way.
 
I think the Queen still commands great respect and there is sympathy from many people how the last few years have panned out.

However when the Queen passes, I think serious discussions need to happen around abolishing the monarchy. Charles and Williams do nothing to advance its cause and I think at that stage more people will be open to the idea of abolishment.
 
Do you think that when the Queen dies we should ditch the monarchy and become a Republic with an elected head of state?

I don't see how it's going to save you much, a UK President is going to be like the German President fulfilling a largely ceremonial role by greeting other Heads of States, opening schools ...etc. pretty much all the Queen does and the President will still need somewhere to live

Presidents still have problematic families and still have lives before becoming President so you're going to find your President having to resign because they were accused of corruption. At least Charles and William aren't likely to be forced to resign because they accepted a low interest loans, and free holidays from people whom they then gave a lot of State Contracts to.

 
Yes they should be abolished but they absolutely won’t even after The Queen passes. The media obsession with “Queen Kate” is an early start at conditioning the masses as an example.
 
Keep them. Not sure why we need to waste money on having another election every few years to chose who we want to cut ribbons and shake hands with other world leaders.
 
I don't really understand the point of them personally. But if we had an elected President, it should be a role that matters instead of just a figurehead. I think people tend to be against it because they think presidents never have any real power, but surely that's just a case of designing the role in a way that makes sense for this country.
 
Charles’s plans to drastically slim down the monarchy and the hangers on is excellent. They still have a role to play for this country.
 
I voted to keep them. Their role in promoting this country around the world is still valid. I think it's worth £69 million a year. Besides the Govt wastes so much more of our money on other things, not least a £100+ billion rail project.
 
On balance I think a stream lined monarchy is a positive thing for Britain. I don’t see how becoming a republic would change things for ordinary people given that the monarch has few real powers any longer. I’d prefer to see the abolition or major reform of the House of Lords first.
 
I find it strange that sone people in favour of the monarchy want to skip Charles - that's not how hereditary monarchy works I'm afraid, you've no say in the matter, no matter how awful they might be.
I don't see the point of a royal family, don't see them as being hard working. They do come across as being not particularly bright.

It would be amusing if we had some sort of freak "king Ralph" esque accident and Andrew ended up being king
 
I find it strange that sone people in favour of the monarchy want to skip Charles - that's not how hereditary monarchy works I'm afraid, you've no say in the matter, no matter how awful they might be.
I don't see the point of a royal family, don't see them as being hard working. They do come across as being not particularly bright.

It would be amusing if we had some sort of freak "king Ralph" esque accident and Andrew ended up being king
Now that would end the monarchy!
 
He’s not committed any crimes. Unless you count divorce as a crime.
I am going to sound like Jacob Rees mogg here. I don't think it's acceptable for the future head of the church of England to be divorced and remarried. I'm not religious at all, but it goes against the teachings of the Bible.
It's also ridiculous that the head of the church is an inherited title.
 
On balance I think a stream lined monarchy is a positive thing for Britain. I don’t see how becoming a republic would change things for ordinary people given that the monarch has few real powers any longer. I’d prefer to see the abolition or major reform of the House of Lords first.

Reform, yes. Abolition, definitely not.
 
I am going to sound like Jacob Rees mogg here. I don't think it's acceptable for the future head of the church of England to be divorced and remarried. I'm not religious at all, but it goes against the teachings of the Bible.
It's also ridiculous that the head of the church is an inherited title.
When was the Bible written? Weren’t people lucky to get beyond 40 years of age back then?
 
I am going to sound like Jacob Rees mogg here. I don't think it's acceptable for the future head of the church of England to be divorced and remarried. I'm not religious at all, but it goes against the teachings of the Bible.
It's also ridiculous that the head of the church is an inherited title.
Wasn't the CoE founded especially to enable divorce?
 
I am going to sound like Jacob Rees mogg here. I don't think it's acceptable for the future head of the church of England to be divorced and remarried. I'm not religious at all, but it goes against the teachings of the Bible.
It's also ridiculous that the head of the church is an inherited title.
The Church of England was founded on divorce, only Cromwell made divorce within the monarchy an anathema again. Blame Mountbatten for Charles being forced into a marriage he did not really want, causing many people to be unhappy.

Would rather keep the monarchy as the alternative idea of President could be far worse.
 
Depends who you listen to. I’ve asked her, she said it’s fine.
“Live long and prosper.”:thumbsup:
Committing adultery is fairly high up in her no no lists too. I'm not religious at all, just find Charles being head of the church hypocritical.
I'd say he will be a very short lived monarch
 
Committing adultery is fairly high up in her no no lists too. I'm not religious at all, just find Charles being head of the church hypocritical.
I'd say he will be a very short lived monarch
Well I agree with her but most people, the ones who do it, don’t.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom