Guest 1033- Registered: 23 Aug 2013
- Posts: 509
Its not Alex' fault that the way this country is run, any socialist or purveyor of outdated religion, as well as right wing clowns and various other morons, so long as they qualify can become members of the house of lords. Its not even posh politics, its jobs for the boys and girls. A 'reward' for services, like the colosall salaries and all the perks, legitimate or otherwise weren't enough. One of my favourites is Mandelson, always wondered how he got the plum jobs, even after some of the dark clouds that appeared over his career threatened to spoil it. Nice little number as an EU comissioner, and then all of a sudden and out of nowhere, a title. I've got a title for him, but it doesn't include the word 'Lord'. I have to say that I agree with Alex to some extent, I would abolish the royal family and stick them in a council flat in Southall, ditch the C of E as 'official' and let people decide what religion they wanted, rather than a bunch of strange bishop types telling them...let the people decide who god is.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Indeed it's definitely not right that our Institutions should be entwined in a private family, and that the private life-stories of this family's members are presented to us by the media in front pages.
That Mr. and Mrs. Cambridge, while being presented as the patrons of charities, and going on holiday to France, and so forth, have a child who is "our future head of Government" .... and the dresses Mrs. Cambridge wears, and how Mr. Wales goes to the Falklands on a six weeks' mission surrounded by cohorts of SAS guards, and Harry comes back from Las Vegas with a public photo album and then goes on to Afghanistan "to become a hero"...
Meanwhile the Prime Minister writes a speech and Mrs. Windsor reads it to Parliament ....
This is all going over the edge...
Brian Dixondata:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fa5a1/fa5a190541c2d9df760bc9eb844e030eddfde4a8" alt="Brian Dixon"
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
alex,they are called lemmings.
Keith Sansum1data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f6062/f60621649189e68e1f8ed712d6f19871900e5bed" alt="Keith Sansum1"
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,888
Public opinion I believe at this time is to keep the head of the church
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Actually, Keith (see thread title), there has never been a POLITICAL decision about who is head of the Church of England.
Perhaps one day there will be a public consultation among the English People on this matter.
Currently, there does not appear to be any public opinion in this matter.
In the 1970s, Labour and the Conservatives had around 3 million members each, now they have little over one hundred thousand. There has been e general fall-away from the Establishment.
While 22% of people in Britain want an end to the present monarchy system, this figure rises to 38% among young people, estimate from 2011.
Likewise, there are very few young people who join political parties.
The pope and the queen are the only two people in the world who claim to be the head of a church.
That said, the queen is also acclaimed the head of the Commonwealth.
It's an anachronistic title reminiscent of the British Empire and Disraeli.
What we need is direct Democracy, which is the Sovereignty of the People over their own affairs, and neither Democracy nor the Church should be subservient to a private family.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
better to leave things as they are alex, would cost a fortune recalling all those postage stamps and coins.
Guest 745- Registered: 27 Mar 2012
- Posts: 3,370
The queen should never have sighed of the Maastricht Treaty
The biggest act of treason by a British monarc for hundreds of years
Brian Dixondata:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fa5a1/fa5a190541c2d9df760bc9eb844e030eddfde4a8" alt="Brian Dixon"
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
jealos or upset kieth,just because you didn't sign it and tony blair/Cameron/osbourne did.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
it was john major that signed the maastricht treaty despite opposition from the reds, yellows and a breakaway group of blues.
the queen did as she was told and countersigned it.
Guest 745- Registered: 27 Mar 2012
- Posts: 3,370
Exactly Howard she countersigned it.
The removal of British independence, she could have threatened to abdicate if not given to a referendum
She could have chosen to defend Briton
Brian every village has one
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
"Brian every village has one "
What's that Keith? Vote 'Green'?
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d8205/d8205c406642759f872a2b7adcf13db8054f2a4d" alt=""
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
Ted Heath was the real traitor in my opinion. He lied to Parliament, the people and the Monarch about the Common Market just being a free trade area, while he knew all along (as he admitted in his memoirs) that the real agenda was a politically united Europe.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Brian Dixondata:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fa5a1/fa5a190541c2d9df760bc9eb844e030eddfde4a8" alt="Brian Dixon"
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
:no a pond tom.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d8205/d8205c406642759f872a2b7adcf13db8054f2a4d" alt=""
Keith Sansum1data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f6062/f60621649189e68e1f8ed712d6f19871900e5bed" alt="Keith Sansum1"
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,888
The Church of England accepts and supports the Queen as head of the church
and I see no sea change on this end of,,,
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
You keep bringing this topic up Keith. Now it is "end of".
Hmmm?
Keith Sansum1data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f6062/f60621649189e68e1f8ed712d6f19871900e5bed" alt="Keith Sansum1"
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,888
The church of England support the queen as head of the church
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
So it was not "end of", then!
Where is all this leading to?
We've all got the message, the C/E recognises the queen as its head. We know this now. OK
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/71d07/71d074c618a7d629facc8a604d3b9bafd5b6a863" alt=""
Keith Sansum1data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f6062/f60621649189e68e1f8ed712d6f19871900e5bed" alt="Keith Sansum1"
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,888
Is that an admittance that this is correct alexander???
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Keith, have you tried 33 LPs?
The older 45 version can tend to jump on the same spot when played regularly.
Keith Sansum1data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f6062/f60621649189e68e1f8ed712d6f19871900e5bed" alt="Keith Sansum1"
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,888
alexander
yes or no would do
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS