Go for it Harry marry Meghan.
#63
Re: Go for it Harry marry Meghan.
I find all private charity and philanthropy to be problematic. It perversely concentrates power and it lets society/government off the for hook for caring, supporting and investing in other humans.
#64
Re: Go for it Harry marry Meghan.
Keep your pennies then, let society be to blame. The rest of us will do what we can and take pleasure in the fact that this couple both seem charitably minded.
#65
Re: Go for it Harry marry Meghan.
It's not an erroneous concern. It's a facile argument to suggest that without a monarchy there'll a dramatic reduction in the market of tea towels and snow globes. Who cares? Even one penny of public money spent on the monarchy is an affront to human dignity.
If Harry had anything about him, he'd renounce his titles, apologize for participating in such a disgusting pantomime, give all his money to the state and go and get a job.
If Harry had anything about him, he'd renounce his titles, apologize for participating in such a disgusting pantomime, give all his money to the state and go and get a job.
You could switch the Monarchy out with a President. All the palaces and castles aren't going anywhere. The revenue needles would probably increase.
Harry was a penis. After military school, combat and losing several friends from military school (who died in combat) he seems to have become a better example to people.
Best of luck to Megs and Haz.
However the monarchy has no place in the 21st century. It's more ludicrous than any religion.
Last edited by JamesM; Nov 29th 2017 at 1:57 am.
#66
Re: Go for it Harry marry Meghan.
With Oink on this one.
You could switch the Monarchy out with a President. All the palaces and castles aren't going anywhere. The revenue needles would probably increase.
Harry was a penis. After military school, combat and losing several friends from military school (who died in combat) he seems to have become a better example to people.
Best of luck to Megs and Haz.
However the monarchy has no place in the 21st century it's more ludicrous than any religion.
You could switch the Monarchy out with a President. All the palaces and castles aren't going anywhere. The revenue needles would probably increase.
Harry was a penis. After military school, combat and losing several friends from military school (who died in combat) he seems to have become a better example to people.
Best of luck to Megs and Haz.
However the monarchy has no place in the 21st century it's more ludicrous than any religion.
#67
Re: Go for it Harry marry Meghan.
I shouldn't think 'the Establishment' will give two hoots if he marries her (heirs to the throne can get away with wild behaviour and marrying those considered less suitable - see Princess Margaret's life for a similar story!).
The press might, but if it shakes the bloody Daily Mail up (it was in there that her mother was described in such an awful way I think) then that can only be a good thing IMO.
Only thing is, she's a bit ugly isn't she? I mean really, could he not have found somebody that looks a bit better than her.
The press might, but if it shakes the bloody Daily Mail up (it was in there that her mother was described in such an awful way I think) then that can only be a good thing IMO.
Only thing is, she's a bit ugly isn't she? I mean really, could he not have found somebody that looks a bit better than her.
#70
Re: Go for it Harry marry Meghan.
A part of me feels that Chelsy Davy was likely 'the one' but she did not wish to have the 24/7 365days intrusions where your life is actually not your own to live .
I believe they remain good friends.
#71
Re: Go for it Harry marry Meghan.
Financially, it's all a bit of a wash, at least to the likes of you and me, that is. A few pennies a week each up or down. But it's a lot better on their side of the equation, that's for sure.
Harry likes to play the 'ordinary chap' schtick, and I'm sure he probably believes it himself, but the truth is that the Royal Family are an anachronism which ought to be sidelined at every opportunity. Getting the country to go all gooey over a wedding is going in the wrong direction.
Harry likes to play the 'ordinary chap' schtick, and I'm sure he probably believes it himself, but the truth is that the Royal Family are an anachronism which ought to be sidelined at every opportunity. Getting the country to go all gooey over a wedding is going in the wrong direction.
#72
Re: Go for it Harry marry Meghan.
But she's also still working in her 90's, has her every move scrutinised, can't ever be free to do what she actually want to do ('I think I'd like to be a teacher/hairdresser/road sweeper'.....oh, but I get no choice in my life), has to be 'public' all the time, has to spend hours making small talk with pointless people (over 16,000 public engagements in her lifetime ), etc. Even last year she had 332 royal engagements, so a grand total of 33 days off in a year at 90 years old? No thanks.
I guess it depends on whether you value financial security or happiness more, and I know which I'd choose. As I said above, I wouldn't swap places with them for anything. I'll take my life with my pathetic one house and money worries, but the freedom to do what I want thanks.
#75
Re: Go for it Harry marry Meghan.
We'll have to agree to disagree on that one. The Queen may be a heck of a lot richer than I, have no money worries and have several homes to choose from.
But she's also still working in her 90's, has her every move scrutinised, can't ever be free to do what she actually want to do ('I think I'd like to be a teacher/hairdresser/road sweeper'.....oh, but I get no choice in my life), has to be 'public' all the time, has to spend hours making small talk with pointless people (over 16,000 public engagements in her lifetime ), etc. Even last year she had 332 royal engagements, so a grand total of 33 days off in a year at 90 years old? No thanks.
I guess it depends on whether you value financial security or happiness more, and I know which I'd choose. As I said above, I wouldn't swap places with them for anything. I'll take my life with my pathetic one house and money worries, but the freedom to do what I want thanks.
But she's also still working in her 90's, has her every move scrutinised, can't ever be free to do what she actually want to do ('I think I'd like to be a teacher/hairdresser/road sweeper'.....oh, but I get no choice in my life), has to be 'public' all the time, has to spend hours making small talk with pointless people (over 16,000 public engagements in her lifetime ), etc. Even last year she had 332 royal engagements, so a grand total of 33 days off in a year at 90 years old? No thanks.
I guess it depends on whether you value financial security or happiness more, and I know which I'd choose. As I said above, I wouldn't swap places with them for anything. I'll take my life with my pathetic one house and money worries, but the freedom to do what I want thanks.
The Queen is on the throne, we've been paying for her son for 70 years to be understudy, paying for HIS son for 30-odd years, and now paying for HIS son... how many other jobs do you hire the person doing the job and the next 4 people who will do it? Think about it, it's ridiculous.
I'm not a monarchist but I'm not strongly in favour of abolition or republicanism. I do think the monarchy should be severely trimmed down and made less ostentatious.