I am a British Citizen NOT an “English Subject”!!!

reply to post by GrandStrategy


I have already pointed out the important role she plays, by claiming otherwise you are only demonstrating ignorance.

What you are doing is the equivalent of telling a catholic to get rid of the pope as she is head of the Church of England

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by GrandStrategy

 

If you are driven to argue that the great majority, who wish to retain the monarchy, are "mentally disturbed individuals " then you've lost it.

I suppose playful comments don't reach as such on the internet, even when followed directly by a wink smiley!

Great majority to one side, 30% of Britons still support the monarchy being abolished. I was just making an observation on the fact that people believing the Queen is doing a good job is not the same as people supporting the monarchy itself. I think the Queen is doing a good job, for what her job is, and yet I don't think her job should exist. The poll you referenced is designed in such a way so as to make the monarchy appear more popular than it is. Only putting it out there so people outside of Britain are clear on this.

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by GrandStrategy

 

I have already pointed out the important role she plays, by claiming otherwise you are only demonstrating ignorance.

What you are doing is the equivalent of telling a catholic to get rid of the pope as she is head of the Church of England

What I'm demonstrating is that human beings have a diverse range of opinions, more specifically that my political beliefs aren't the same as yours.

The catholic church and the church of england can both fall over and die for all I care...

I find it hard to get too het up about the Royal family either way - and I'm a Brit. On one hand the concept of Monarchy is a bit outdated in this day and age, but on the other I don't see it does any real harm - and it is undeniably good for tourism and Britain's world standing. It never fails to amaze me how well respected the British Royal family is in some countries.

I've never seen a definitive figure on the cost per head of them, but it's generally accepted to be between 60/80p a year which I don't think is excessive. It might sound silly to pay for the lifestyles of a handful of people on the basis of nothing but birth, but it's also true to say that the Royal family and Crown Estate act as stewards for a lot of Britain's finest historical places, collections and so on. I consider those things to be genuinely important to Britain so it's perhaps better to imagine that negligible cost to be a contribution to their maintenance. I suppose it's true that we'd pay for them through taxes anyhow, Monarchy or not.

Also, as covered by better versed people that me, the Queen does hold significant power - should she ever need to use it. It does provide something of a safeguard against diabolical governments.

Edit:

Also, a bit of tradition isn't a bad thing. It's nice to see all the pomp and pageantry every once in a while. It's something we do well.

Originally posted by GrandStrategy

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by GrandStrategy

 

If you are driven to argue that the great majority, who wish to retain the monarchy, are "mentally disturbed individuals " then you've lost it.

I suppose playful comments don't reach as such on the internet, even when followed directly by a wink smiley!

Great majority to one side, 30% of Britons still support the monarchy being abolished. I was just making an observation on the fact that people believing the Queen is doing a good job is not the same as people supporting the monarchy itself. I think the Queen is doing a good job, for what her job is, and yet I don't think her job should exist. The poll you referenced is designed in such a way so as to make the monarchy appear more popular than it is. Only putting it out there so people outside of Britain are clear on this.

Without disputing your figures of a 70% to 30% split, don't you think 70% is a "great majority" ?

UK governments are routinely elected on less than 50 %.

reply to post by GrandStrategy


Your words are something that is common on ATS these day, utter disrespect for another views.

Ok your not religious that’s fine, I don’t have a problem with that

I do however take issue with you saying that the Catholic Church can fall over and die.

Its disrespectful, does not add to the debate and has no logic or reason behind it or a explanation for taking such a view.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

I understand the Scots. Brit speech is impossible to comprehend. So I'm on your side already.

We don't receive much education in the ways of other countries. When I was in school the closest we came to British history was the American Revolution.

Try to bear with us. Our classrooms are no longer classrooms. They are bully pulpits for the Socialists.

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by splitfamiliar

 

I don’t want to single out a single member but In the course of recent debates I have had many members have called me a “subject” many have also talked about the UK being a “surveillance state” that I am “English” and so on.

Hi OP,

Differentiating between the Island People:
First of all, some of us do know the difference bet. Scots, Irish, English etc - but for that to happen, I had to work closely with / among them to learn these differences, just as I got to know many 'oriental-types' in Australia & can tell the diff. bet. Japanese, Koreans, Malaysian, Indonesian etc

British Subject vs British Citizen:
I've seen some British passports in RL with "BRITISH SUBJECT" in them which amused me somewhat at the time - but googling 'british passport' just now only showed images with "BRITISH CITIZEN", leading me to excitedly think "I've jumped universes!!".

Sadly, that wasn't the case, as I Found This... en.wikipedia.org...

AND THEN!!!!!!!!!! I found this as well, explaining the 6 types of BRITISH NATIONALITY.
en.wikipedia.org...

British citizens:

British Citizens usually hold this status through a connection with the United Kingdom, Channel Islands and Isle of Man ("United Kingdom and Islands"). [...] British citizenship is the most common type of British nationality, and the only one that automatically carries a right of abode in the United Kingdom. However, other rights can vary according to how the British citizenship was acquired. In particular there are restrictions for 'British citizens by descent' transmitting British citizenship to their children born outside the UK. These restrictions do not apply to 'British citizens other than by descent'.

British subjects:

British subjects (as defined in the 1981 Act) are those British subjects who were not CUKCs or citizens of any other Commonwealth country. Most of these derived their status as British subjects from British India or the Republic of Ireland as they existed before 1949.

Now, the puzzling thing is, the text above implies that "native sorts" are British citizens & subjects of the former British Empire are "british subjects". But those whose passports I saw in RL (with British Subject written) were all "ethnically-native Island People" meaning ethnically Anglo-Saxon English, Scots, or Irish types, as opposed to Asian / other. *weird*

CC TV CAMERAS:
WELL!! London has 6 cameras per Human. How is that NOT Orwellian! I was briefly in London some years ago, and it always freaked me out a bit - not that I care if somebody knows where I am (and yeah it could come in handy if someone tries to mug me or something in a public space), but it's still spooky!!

Note: I'm "properly Indian" (as opposed to British-Asian), and don't know all that much about the UK / Britain except what I've learnt through my RL interactions. I also find it ASTOUNDING that UK law doesn't regulate the amount of bread that can be stuffed into sausages - comparing them to German sausages, I can only shake my head in sorrow

reply to post by rainychica


I suspect the passports you saw were all pre-1983, before the Act came into power defining all British citizens of either "native" or colonial status as citizens.

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by rainychica

 

I suspect the passports you saw were all pre-1983, before the Act came into power defining all British citizens of either "native" or colonial status as citizens.

it's possble, I wasn't paying that much attention - all the people were youngish though, in their 20s *shrug*

reply to post by rainychica


When did you see them though? Recently or was this some time ago?

I've had British Citizen on mine for as long as a I remember and I'm 30.

Notice how the definitions DIVIDE PEOPLE?
Who gets to make up these crazy unrealistic definitions?

Thank chirst for this thread. I'm sick of being called English or seeing Britain being referred to as England.

Height of ignorance.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


I say don't fret it. We Canadians get judged by the halfwit American all the time. Preconceptions after preconceptions. Maybe Canadians are as bad I don't know. I have Brit friends and they think the responses to this thread are absolutely ridiculous.

Have a good one.

Originally posted by twfau
reply to post by ararisq

 

Where have you got the idea that British children are raised to revere authority? I'm genuinely interested as I've not seen much of it myself.

I don't think the OP was saying more people should be like the British, just that people from outside shouldn't comment unless they've experienced the society. The whole Sharia law thing is completely ignorant as well.

Take a look at 'jihad watch' and see how many Muslim attacks in the UK go unreported in the British press, and how the Brit police downplay what is reported also read atlas see how the US media reports on the Muslims. shrugs,

Dont know how that happened, this PC is getting old! anyway, its atlas shrugs, daily reports on sharia througthout the world, but mostly the USA

I am sick of being labeled a half wit American, I mean it is not like every country doesn't have uneducated and dumb people. We get more press from ours, so we in turn have to be insulted at every turn.

I say deal with it. Not like it is some sort of stigma that hurts you in any way.

I am sure there are plenty of misconceptions about other people that citizens of the UK have. I can name a few about Americans, but honestly I don't give a rats ass.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


So for the whole thread the argument is you are not subjects because the queen as no power, and she cheaper to support than our president then we talk comparisons she s all of a sudden important in government decisions.

Time to end this ridiculous thread.

PS...our president can go to war without congress, then he has a timetable to get approval. Please don't lecture me about my constitution and laws.

Here you go.....
www.loc.gov...

reply to post by timetothink



Yes the president has to get approval for congress to declare war, America has not technically been at war since WWII as this was the last time there was a formal declaration of war. The difference between the head of state of the UK and America is that the Queen is only required to seek the advice of government, in America congress have to make the declaration as the president is not able to do this constitutionally.

The premise of this thread was never that because the Queen has no power we are not subjects the premise was that legally we are citizens and not subjects.

And there is nothing “ridiculous” about asking that I and my fellow countrymen be recognised as a citizen

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


Cool story Bro.
I once heard a saying about slaves that are more productive if they do not see the bars err or something like that and all.
Free men do what they want, good men want peace.
Difference between me and others who claim to be free men, I can show them proof.
You say you are a citizen and not a subject, I am ok with that.
As my kids were growing up, there were certain things I never called them.
Why you ask???
Because some kids believe what they are told, if I were to call them stupid, they might start to believe it.
Carry on citizen.