The United Nations has said that the UK must consider whether they should keep the Royal Family.

The UN's Human Rights Council said the Government should 'think' about holding a referendum on the issue, to see if people would prefer to live in a Republican state with a written constitution.

The monarchy costs each adult in Britain around 62p a year - but even groups representing taxpayers said there was no case for getting rid of it.

The council has 29 members including Saudi Arabia, Cuba and Sri Lanka.

It was the Sri Lankan envoy who raised concerns over the British monarchy.

But a Royal spokesman has said the public haven't haven't displayed any appetite for a referendum.

The UN report was also critical of the UK's treatment of immigrants from Sudan.

Syria accused the UK of discriminating against Muslims and Iran complained about the UK's record on tackling sexual discrimination.


------------------------------


Makes me angry so it does.

So the government pays for scum with no jobs and 27 kids to live in posh houses. They have no intention of finding work, and yet the government pay them so much money they don't need to.

Understandably, people are pissed off about this.

Change their last name to "Windsor", however...

Absolutely, they are no use these days. I find the layabout wankers infuriating, they're born into extreme wealth and don't have to get a proper job, and when they do they don't do it properly(it takes people years to become an RAF chopper pilot, how long did it take William). Get rid of the pricks.

Iran complained about OUR record on sexual discrimination? That has to be some sort of joke. 62p a year is a bargain if you ask me.

Personally i cringe at the thought of Prince Charles being the King of England.

Absolutely, they are no use these days. I find the layabout wankers infuriating, they're born into extreme wealth and don't have to get a proper job, and when they do they don't do it properly(it takes people years to become an RAF chopper pilot, how long did it take William). Get rid of the pricks.

They bring that much to England tho and bring England a lot of money. I mean would you like the Queens job?

They bring that much to England tho and bring England a lot of money. I mean would you like the Queens job?

I'd love prince phillip's job.

Imagine getting to shag liz every night, I'd do her doggy style, the dirty *****.
Bet she takes it up the tail pipe.

I'd love prince phillip's job.

Imagine getting to shag liz every night, I'd do her doggy style, the dirty *****.
Bet she takes it up the tail pipe.

I think your getting people mixed up.

**** the UN cunts. I wouldn't cut back an overgrown bush to appease those bell ends.

I think your getting people mixed up.

Why? :tapedshut

Why? :tapedshut

prince philip is about 60.........

prince philip is about 60.........

**** off that cunt is nearly 90

They bring that much to England tho and bring England a lot of money. I mean would you like the Queens job?

Yes i would like the Queens job. Totally financial security, not much work, i can have whatever i want. By money i assume you mean tourism, people don't choose not to go to France because there is no monarch do they? The only real use the Queen has is as the head of the church of England, but seeing as religion is becoming less and less important here i think the time is coming for her to be removed.

Yes i would like the Queens job. Totally financial security, not much work, i can have whatever i want. By money i assume you mean tourism, people don't choose not to go to France because there is no monarch do they? The only real use the Queen has is as the head of the church of England, but seeing as religion is becoming less and less important here i think the time is coming for her to be removed.

Not much work are your crazy? she averages 3 puplic appearances a day all over the Country/world

**** off that cunt is nearly 90

Post a pic of this liz girl then.

Post a pic of this liz girl then.

http://www.canadianheritage.gc.ca/progs/cpsc-ccsp/images/royal_queen.jpg

Sometimes Andy, I really worry about you.

http://www.canadianheritage.gc.ca/progs/cpsc-ccsp/images/royal_queen.jpg

Sometimes Andy, I really worry about you.

i tought you ment this posh totty :lol1:

http://img2.timeinc.net/people/i/2007/startracks/070430/kate_middleton.jpg

i tought you ment this posh totty :lol1:

http://img2.timeinc.net/people/i/2007/startracks/070430/kate_middleton.jpg

She'd get it 'un all

Not much work are your crazy? she averages 3 puplic appearances a day all over the Country/world

She goes around shaking peoples hands, she's not a paramedic.

3 public appearances a day! Andy, you crack me up, honestly.

My opinion: **** the UN and **** the Royals - let's toss them all on the bonfire.

I'm ****ing sick of being told what we should do by a council made of electees from cultures and society's that have no reflection on our own.

We are British and should be proud to be so, our country has a heritage although eccentric by nature that is admired either publicly or secretly by most of the countries of this World.

If we allow this then whats next? Driving on the right, being made to spell our language incorrectly like the Americans etc???

Our Royal family is essentially British and it highlights over 1000 years of History (Edwardian, Victorian etc), the revenue generated by tourists coming across to view lived in Palaces and Royal abodes is in the Billions and although the Royals are in main stuck in the past they represent so much about our culture.

Also the modern Royals are beginning to come of age and enter the 21st Century with William and Harry. Also Harry has served operationally as a soldier for this country which is a whole lot more than the majority can say.

The Royals are an integral part of this nation.

They're essentially German, and they have no affect on tourism. Like i said before, people don't choose not to go to Paris because there is no monarch.

They're a bunch of pampered fools who have no idea what real life is like because they all grow up and live in a bubble.

62p per taxpayer is actually quite alot, you could probably open a school a year with that money. Or hire a ****load of doctors and nurses.

This country once relied on the monarchy, the past royals have made this country what it is today, whenever kings or queens are mentioned, Britain is the first country that comes into everyone's head, yet Spain and the Netherlands both have a monarchy yet not many people know that. Also if we were to ditch the royal family, would that not mean we would be disbanding the commenwealth, some countries we are still sort of responsible for in the way they are ran?

They're essentially German, and they have no affect on tourism. Like i said before, people don't choose not to go to Paris because there is no monarch.

They're a bunch of pampered fools who have no idea what real life is like because they all grow up and live in a bubble.

62p per taxpayer is actually quite alot, you could probably open a school a year with that money. Or hire a ****load of doctors and nurses.

We all are essentially French, Nordic etc (if you trace our family trees right back a thousand years) but the Royal family predominately were born in Britain therefore they are British.

As for the Tourism, have you ever visited Buckingham Palace or Windsor Castle??? Its like spot the Englishman, therefore the hundreds of thousands who visit just those two sites each year, are they not tourists?

The Queen is the most powerful person in the UK, even more so than the prime minister, some of the powers she has are frightning. The only reason they are there is because of the money they bring in from Tourism and Tradition. Personally I don't give a **** about the Royals, too much resources go into them. 62p to let a few elites to what they like, even more money goes into protecting them...

We all are essentially French, Nordic etc (if you trace our family trees right back a thousand years) but the Royal family predominately were born in Britain therefore they are British.

As for the Tourism, have you ever visited Buckingham Palace or Windsor Castle??? Its like spot the Englishman, therefore the hundreds of thousands who visit just those two sites each year, are they not tourists?

Those places would still be there if there was no queen. People visit for the history, that won't disappear.

Would they **** still go see those places, they wouldn't be royalty anymore. People over the world love the Queen and the royal family, she's one of the most famous people in the world. She still has a say in running the country aswell, Britain cannot go to war without her consent, the prime minister has to personally visit the Queen to ask her.
Plus when she pops her clogs don't you want a day off work? National day of mourning an all that.

I'm a Royalist. Good representatives for our nation abroad - the Queen has been a good figurehead for this nation, they're good for our tourism industry. They're also a link to our identity and history - where we came from.

In todays society, it seems our past, our culture, our heritage - everything that makes us different and better than others is slowly being dissolved.

Who the **** are the United Nations to tell us we should get rid our OUR Royals. Keep your noses out cunts. Same goes for the EU.

Would they **** still go see those places, they wouldn't be royalty anymore. People over the world love the Queen and the royal family, she's one of the most famous people in the world. She still has a say in running the country aswell, Britain cannot go to war without her consent, the prime minister has to personally visit the Queen to ask her.
Plus when she pops her clogs don't you want a day off work? National day of mourning an all that.

We have to ask the Queen for permission to go to war?, what a ****ing disgrace.

Give us someone to be proud of as a King or Queen, maybe Prince William (Not that little ****e Harry or that disgrace Prince Charles).

We have to ask the Queen for permission to go to war?, what a ****ing disgrace.

Give us someone to be proud of as a King or Queen, maybe Prince William (Not that little ****e Harry or that disgrace Prince Charles).

Why is Prince Charles a disgrace?

We have to ask the Queen for permission to go to war?, what a ****ing disgrace.

Give us someone to be proud of as a King or Queen, maybe Prince William (Not that little ****e Harry or that disgrace Prince Charles).

A person should only have that power if they've been voted in by the public if you ask me.

Viva la revolution! :boxing:

Why is Prince Charles a disgrace?

He might not be a disgraceful person as such, but it would be a disgrace to have him being King.

Apart from being a 60 year old, ugly snob, that has never worked a day in his life, cheated on Diana and enjoys fox hunting?, nothing.

Just not the image we need at all to be fronting our country in my opinion.

Why is Prince Charles a disgrace?

Would you cheat on Diana with a women who looks more like a horse than the 1000's of horse you own? (but, incidentally, didn't pay a penny of your own money for)

The Royal Family are no better than the teenage mums who have a council flat and benfits.

They all sit on their ass doing **** all, and get paid to do so.

Yet we accept one lot doing it, and not the other.

Hypocrisy of it's highest and most unintelligent form.

Dont particularly like them but the monarchy is a part of British history.

He might not be a disgraceful person as such, but it would be a disgrace to have him being King.

Apart from being a 60 year old, ugly snob, that has never worked a day in his life, cheated on Diana and enjoys fox hunting?, nothing.

Just not the image we need at all to be fronting our country in my opinion.


ugly? is that a good reason to get rid? :nonono: jesus christ, you make no sense. As for cheating on Diana... i'm pretty sure she cheated on him ALOT more.

Would you cheat on Diana with a women who looks more like a horse than the 1000's of horse you own? (but, incidentally, didn't pay a penny of your own money for)

The Royal Family are no better than the teenage mums who have a council flat and benfits.

They all sit on their ass doing **** all, and get paid to do so.

Yet we accept one lot doing it, and not the other.

Hypocrisy of it's highest and most unintelligent form.

The Royals are extremely busy people, work every day of the year - meetings, opening buildings, state-ly duties and in the military.

To much Diana worship here.

Alot of you get your views and opinions given to you from the red top newspapers i think

Gucci don't get a gremlin to model their best clothes, do we want Prince Charles as the face of England? :dunno:.

Gucci don't get a gremlin to model their best clothes, do we want Prince Charles as the face of England? :dunno:.

It's not a beauty contest, that's not how it works- thank god.

It's not a beauty contest, that's not how it works- thank god.

Okay then, just exactly what qualities does Charles posess to make a good King, because i am at a loss to try and think of one.

Okay then, just exactly what qualities does Charles posess to make a good King, because i am at a loss to try and think of one.

It's a difficult question - because we don't really know the mans qualities - because the Royals are reserved. He's been groomed since birth for the job, in every aspect he has been taught - he is reserved, polite and can be very charming.

Just because he didn't get along with Diana "princess of hearts boo hoo" who was ****ing every English rugby player, British Army officers and the Royal Polo team - doesn't make him a bad man.

Give the guy a chance.

We can't get rid of the Royals - who the **** would we put on our coins?

He's just too old to be taking on the job now. I don't see any reason at all why he would make a better King than William. I just think we need a different outlook for the 21st Century. William at least seems a bit more modernised, and less of a toff.

He's just too old to be taking on the job now. I don't see any reason at all why he would make a better King than William. I just think we need a different outlook for the 21st Century. William at least seems a bit more modernised, and less of a toff.

William hasn't the experience Charles has. You can't just skip a generation either. This is history and tradition. It cannot be changed and made up as we go along because William is better looking.

he's old, sure. But he's experienced and wise with it.

We can't get rid of the Royals - who the **** would we put on our coins?

This would be another plus. We could put people on our money who actually deserve to be there, like Nelson, Wellington, Collingwood, Churchill etc.

Collingwood :rofl:.

Collingwood :rofl:.

:confused:

:confused:

Wait a minute...

I thought you meant Paul Collingwood, have i just :owned: myself?.

Wait a minute...

I thought you meant Paul Collingwood, have i just :owned: myself?.

Paul? I was talking about Cuthbert. :la:

Why are the Royal family who they are?

Apart from being "related" to someone they never met who took the country by force.

They are no better than the rest of us, why should they be treated like kings? (excuse the pun)

And Mickey, to assume that my views are influenced by tabloid newspapers is actually quite insulting, something I never came to expect from you.
(I appreciate that's not how it was meant, but still)

Wait a minute...

I thought you meant Paul Collingwood, have i just :owned: myself?.

Paul Collingwood would be a good call i think.

**** the UN cunts. I wouldn't cut back an overgrown bush to appease those bell ends.

*applauds*

I'm all for the royal family, it's heritage at the end of the day, and a vital part of british tourism.

Lose the royal family, you lose britain and gain another state of america

Why are the Royal family who they are?

Apart from being "related" to someone they never met who took the country by force.

They are no better than the rest of us, why should they be treated like kings? (excuse the pun)

And Mickey, to assume that my views are influenced by tabloid newspapers is actually quite insulting, something I never came to expect from you.
(I appreciate that's not how it was meant, but still)

I never wished to insult anyone, apologies if i did.

What i meant is, everyone hates Prince Charles for some reason... and that reason is because the newspapers have told us too. Why is Charles so disliked? What has he actually done?

I never wished to insult anyone, apologies if i did.

What i meant is, everyone hates Prince Charles for some reason... and that reason is because the newspapers have told us too. Why is Charles so disliked? What has he actually done?

Well it's all over Di really, he was ****in that ugly moose camilla behind her back. He is also a bit of a tit really isn't he, but you gotta love him though really. He could be a lot worse, he could be like his dad.

Camillia is hot.

If we got rid though, we could put Ricky Hatton on the quid coin.

Camillia is hot.

If we got rid though, we could put Ricky Hatton on the quid coin.

I'd rather have Camilla than that ugly cunt.

*applauds*

I'm all for the royal family, it's heritage at the end of the day, and a vital part of british tourism.

Lose the royal family, you lose britain and gain another state of america

Theres more than an once of truth in that statement.

prince charles was shagging camilla, however people seem to forget that Diana wasn't whiter than white herself. She was continually having affairs behind Charles back and frankly i wouldn't be suprised if Prince Harry wasn't even his child

as for the whole royal family thing, i'm happy for them to stay. They are a crucial link to our heritage, and regardless what people think they contribute massively to our tourism and income.

Was'nt there rumours she was having it off with that James Hewitt or whatever he's called, would explain the ginger hair.

Naw, the royals rule.

Was'nt there rumours she was having it off with that James Hewitt or whatever he's called, would explain the ginger hair.
my point exactly, and harry is the spitting image of the ginger cunt

Theres more than an once of truth in that statement.

No there's not, the Queen doesn't make Britain what it is. And i don't see how we could get any closer to America than we are now, we've already joined in with their bull**** worldwide witch hunt.

This is never going to be resolved.

The royalists have what they belive to be a cast iron arguement, as does anyone who disagrees.

But surely someone in favour of the royals can tell me why they are so special?

I'm not talking what do they do for the country, I'm talking them. Why should they be so high and ****ing mighty, what have they done to deserve it?

This is never going to be resolved.

The royalists have what they belive to be a cast iron arguement, as does anyone who disagrees.

But surely someone in favour of the royals can tell me why they are so special?

I'm not talking what do they do for the country, I'm talking them. Why should they be so high and ****ing mighty, what have they done to deserve it?

Historically, they're God's representatives on earth. They're also the head of the Anglican church. Essentially, you could argue that they are just as worthy as the Pope is to the Catholics. - And you don't hear the UN calling for the Pope to pack it all in.

Historically, they're God's representatives on earth. They're also the head of the Anglican church. Essentially, you could argue that they are just as worthy as the Pope is to the Catholics. - And you don't hear the UN calling for the Pope to pack it all in.

But the Anglican church only exists so a fat man could get divorced...

You missed the point anyway.

What makes them, as people, better than me or you?

Why do they get this treatment?

Have they themselves done anything to deserve it?

They were born into a royal family, I think your point is flawed it's like saying a kid that's born into a rich family should be stripped of their assests because they've done nothing to deserve wealth. Way way way way way way down the line the royal family's ancestors worked hard to be on top of everyone else, that's the reason why they're where they are today.

They were born into a royal family, I think your point is flawed it's like saying a kid that's born into a rich family should be stripped of their assests because they've done nothing to deserve wealth. Way way way way way way down the line the royal family's ancestors worked hard to be on top of everyone else, that's the reason why they're where they are today.

It's not the same, the Royal family feed off the state. I'm sure someone did work so that they could be where they are, but that doesn't mean they should stay there.

It's not the same, the Royal family feed off the state. I'm sure someone did work so that they could be where they are, but that doesn't mean they should stay there.

That's exactly my point, what makes them, personally, better than us?

Nothing, nothing at all.

I have no problem with a kid who is born into a rich family, but when that family is rich off my back, from my hard earned taxes, I have some kind of right to be pissed off about that.

The Royal's do nothing more than scrounge from the taxpayer.

Single parents get stick for doing exactly the same thing.

All I ask is where is the difference?

It's not the same, the Royal family feed off the state. I'm sure someone did work so that they could be where they are, but that doesn't mean they should stay there.

There are thousands of families feeding of the state, lets worry about ****ing them off before we get rid of the royals.

There are thousands of families feeding of the state, lets worry about ****ing them off before we get rid of the royals.

Lets just be thankful they don't take as much money as the Royals. Again, big difference between getting the dole and child welfare money, and getting millions to fly around the world on a private jet.

There are thousands of families feeding of the state, lets worry about ****ing them off before we get rid of the royals.

Some people need money to feed their family, others need money to fly a military helicopter to their girlfriends house...

I have no problem with a single parent, who cannot afford childcare, hence cannot work, receiving enough money to feed him/herself and their children.

What i do have a problem with, is an already wealthy family taking money out of this country.

They do a damn sight more than sponging families in this country though, everyday of the year they're in the public eye. Harry has just come back from a tour of Afghanistan, that's more than what some people can say they've done in their life. The queen is making public appearances all over the world for the sake of keeping Britain in the limelight, I'm more than happy for 64p a year of my taxes to go to the royal family, what does the Royal family provide us with? Public gardens, charities, schools, not every single penny of it goes to them so they can have dinner on their plate.
The queen and the royal family is the only good stead we have going at the moment to the majority of the globe, cos it sure ain't Gordon ****in Brown.

i don't know.. i think the Royal family create alot more employment and bring alot more money through tourism to this country than what they're "given".

I guess they're just normal mortals like us, they're just lucky to be born Royal (or unlucky some might argue).

i don't know.. i think the Royal family create alot more employment and bring alot more money through tourism to this country than what they're "given".

I guess they're just normal mortals like us, they're just lucky to be born Royal (or unlucky some might argue).

I know plenty of people who have been to see Buckingham Palace, or Windsor Palace, or even Balmoral, but I don't know anyone who has actually gone to see the Royals.

The tourism would still be there if the Royals weren't, it's the history and significance surrounding the buildings that draws tourists, not the Royals themselves.

I know plenty of people who have been to see Buckingham Palace, or Windsor Palace, or even Balmoral, but I don't know anyone who has actually gone to see the Royals.

The tourism would still be there if the Royals weren't, it's the history and significance surrounding the buildings that draws tourists, not the Royals themselves.

...............the significance that surrounds the buildings IS the Royals themselves. Otherwise...everyone would just visit a stately home near there own place. You know plenty of people that travelled all the way from Wales to see Buckingham Palace...but they weren't fussed that it had anything to do with the Royal Family - they just wanted to see a big building - regardless of who lived there?

You're contradicting yourself. Would London lose foreign tourists if there was no monarch? Yes. Full stop. People come from abroad to see these attractions... the Royal palace, the Royal Guards and her tower surrounded by her Beefeaters. It's just the way it is Luke. I know you don't like the United Kingdom and love to bash the English and there silly Queen. But this is the way it is.

...............the significance that surrounds the buildings IS the Royals themselves. Otherwise...everyone would just visit a stately home near there own place. You know plenty of people that travelled all the way from Wales to see Buckingham Palace...but they weren't fussed that it had anything to do with the Royal Family - they just wanted to see a big building - regardless of who lived there?

You're contradicting yourself. Would London lose foreign tourists if there was no monarch? Yes. Full stop. People come from abroad to see these attractions... the Royal palace, the Royal Guards and her tower surrounded by her Beefeaters. It's just the way it is Luke. I know you don't like the United Kingdom and love to bash the English and there silly Queen. But this is the way it is.

LOL I love this bit, shows how much you honestly don't know about me.

I'm actually British over Welsh, if asked, and I have no real problem with the royals, I'm not bothered either way, but a lot of the arguements made by royalists piss me off because they are based only loosely on old facts.

I couldn't give a damn if England want to keep their "silly queen" or not.

I'm much more partial to a round of "bash the yank", 99% of them deserve it too.

:kiss:

LOL I love this bit, shows how much you honestly don't know about me.

I'm actually British over Welsh, if asked, and I have no real problem with the royals, I'm not bothered either way, but a lot of the arguements made by royalists piss me off because they are based only loosely on old facts.

I couldn't give a damn if England want to keep their "silly queen" or not.

:kiss:

If you don't care, why have you posted more than anyone else in this thread, largely arguing against the royals.
Is it because your country is so crap that the queen gave it to her son lolz.