It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Prince Charles or William

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 19 2005 @ 05:44 PM
link   
I am curious to know, though I am not sure if this is political, which people would rather see to be the King of England. Do you think it would be Charles or William, and why???




posted on Nov, 20 2005 @ 04:14 AM
link   
Seeings that i am openly against the monarchy and a republican, than my answer to your question would be neither.



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Infinite sums it up nicely.

It is about time we remove the unelected element of our Government; be it the Royal Family, Privy Council and the House of Lords and work towards having a democratic system in place.

Sorry guys, but I rule, I am not ruled.



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 12:01 PM
link   
I'm not sure where the laws lie in relation to this but I do think there is a possibility that Charles might just step aside for William. I know that many say Charles does believe he bears a great responsibility which he takes seriously and wants to be king to excercise that, but I don't know. What with all the fun and games he's been playing, and on the recieving end of, I wonder if he'd rather pass it on to William who many see as vastly more popular.

Such a move might kill two birds with one stone being both good PR for the Windsors (which could be used as part excuse) and maybe very agreeable for Charles personally. It will be interesting to see what happens but as with most people over here I think only as a fleeting fancy.



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 12:18 PM
link   
I support the monarchy, as they represent Britain. You're probably thinking that they aren't suitable to represent us, but then who is?



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by mashup
I support the monarchy, as they represent Britain. You're probably thinking that they aren't suitable to represent us, but then who is?


I would rather we begin to move into a system of Government where the people have control, instead of an elite few. Sorry but as I said before, I would rule over being ruled and I will do.



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 01:38 PM
link   
I'd want William to be king he is young, chraming, etc. Charles aint as bad as many make him out to be but he is an old man with a lot of scandal attached to him in regards to the death or possible murder of Diana. The Queen mum lived to about 150 though so I could see the Queen staying around for quite awhile.



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 01:52 PM
link   
I dont remember the Queen Mother living to a 150, i believe it was 102




posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 02:33 PM
link   
Chaz will be King when his mother dies. All tradition and law dictates this. Parliament could, I suppose, reject him since he is a divorcee, and possibly even an adulteror tho.



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
Chaz will be King when his mother dies. All tradition and law dictates this. Parliament could, I suppose, reject him since he is a divorcee, and possibly even an adulteror tho.


Parliament can have a say in who is next in line, i believe Parliament has to expect the monarchy before he/she is throned.



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 09:13 PM
link   
Infinite I was joking about the 150



posted on Nov, 22 2005 @ 08:17 AM
link   
Yes, parliament can reject, say, a catholic heir, for example. But these sorts of things are highly irregular no? I can't see them rejecting Chaz and accepting Billy merley because the limey ladies think he's hunky.



posted on Nov, 22 2005 @ 08:39 AM
link   
You asked for everyone's opinon, not just English folks ... so ...

I'd like to see neither! Dump the monarchy. Stop paying taxes
to support their lifestyles. The $$ could be used elsewhere for
better things.

However, since that isn't about to happen, then WILLIAM should
be king. The fact is that the only thing the monarchy is good for
is tourism, and the FACE of the monarchy has to draw tourists
and $$$. More people will be buying dishes and cups with the
face of William then the mug of Charles and his .. uh ... wife ...
Camella.



posted on Jan, 7 2006 @ 12:02 PM
link   
If the opinion of a Yank is worth anything to you, here it is: Chuck needs to pull a fast fade, his is not the face the monarchy wants later in the 21st century. Assorted scandles, the fact that he is a divorcee, etc..., whereas Billy seems to have his . on straight, reasonably intelligent, his girlfreind is a dish, etc...
Though I don't think its going to matter, because the Queen seems like she is going to live forever.



posted on Jan, 7 2006 @ 02:16 PM
link   
I am not from UK, but why are some of you against constitutional monarchy? They have no real power anyway. And while they recieve some money from goverment they are also a major source of money for example from tourism. Plus without monarchy there would be independent Scotland and maybe also Wales soon.



posted on Jan, 7 2006 @ 10:48 PM
link   
I don’t really have a problem with the Royal Family, as they do attract a lot of tourism to the UK. If they attract more money to the UK economy than they “leach” from it, as some people see it, then this can only be a good thing, wouldn’t you agree?
I don’t always agree with how they spend the money though, the majority of which comes from the taxpayers, a good example being in this article below:


news.independent.co.uk...
Camilla costs £566,000 a year as price of foreign trips soars


Fair enough her partner is the heir to the throne, but how can they justify that spending on foreign trips alone? To be honest, I’m not sure I want to know how much they spend in a year… ah who am I kidding of course I do!

When it comes to the next king, I can’t see it skipping Charles. The ladies can still dream about the hansom prince and the whole family will keep doing what the always do, consisting of… erm… anyone?

…Oh yeh, there’s the grand openings, the yearly queens speech, oh and don’t forget the foreign trips!

(But seriously does anyone envy them? As much as I’ll slag them I do kind of feel sorry for them, especially the likes of Harry who I’m guessing would do anything to live a normal life… They didn’t ask to be born into this lifestyle.)



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by mashup
I support the monarchy, as they represent Britain. You're probably thinking that they aren't suitable to represent us, but then who is?



Before you say "yank" I'm not, I have lived in London on and off for most of my life.I was born in Norwich. Through due to my Father and his work I also hold American citizenship.
I LOVE England and miss it every day I'm not there! Nothing is home to me as landing at LHR.

On that note, the Windsors represent Britain?
Really last time I checked, the every day joe or jane of Britain was NOT driving Bentleys and Rolls Royce's, acting like spoiled little drunks and living basically scott free. With privilege 95% of Britain will NEVER have.



posted on Feb, 8 2006 @ 03:16 AM
link   
Well, this might surprise ya. But as a Scot, I've no objection to the Royal Family. They are figure.s of the state and there is probebly no chance there going away anytime soon. I may not like them, but then how would you go about getting rid of the Royal Family? You can't vote them out. Unless they did something so horrific, so unforgivable, that the British public would demand a referendum or whatever. You can't think of capping them off. Not only is it wrong, there is always someone else who has "Royal Blood", whatever that is. I also doubt the support is there to get rid of them.
Here's a question. How much tourism do the Royal Family attract? Are they becoming a little expensive?



posted on Feb, 9 2006 @ 03:01 PM
link   
I don't have a problem with them, they cost hardly any money in the whole contrast of things and are part of the heritage and history of my country.

Charles will be king after his mom pops her clogs, I don't think William could deal with it so soon after his Mothers death.



posted on Feb, 9 2006 @ 06:59 PM
link   
As the next monarch will also be King of Canada, I will give my opinion...

... Charles. He has styled himself a "protector" of religions, plural, instead of singular. Which would play well with Britain - and Canada - become more and more diverse. He's very open-minded, intelligent, and being his age, he'll have a lot of political wisdom - let's not forget that the Queen and the royal family get briefings from government officials.

Besides, from the looks of things, he'll be King at age 75 and will reign maybe 10 years.




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join