Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2011 8:52:54 GMT -5
Congratulations to William and Catherine. What a beautiful couple. Kinda makes me wish we had their like over here.
W.
|
|
|
|
Post by nikonbob on Apr 29, 2011 9:21:31 GMT -5
Yea, best wishes to them both for their future happiness.
Bob
|
|
mickeyobe
Lifetime Member
Resident President
Posts: 7,280
|
Post by mickeyobe on Apr 29, 2011 17:44:01 GMT -5
Wayne,
If you Yanks (and Rebs) behave yourselves Canada would probably allow you to become an eleventh province.
Subject to royal approval, of course.
Practice saying "eh".
Mickey
|
|
daveh
Lifetime Member
Posts: 4,696
|
Post by daveh on Apr 29, 2011 23:07:44 GMT -5
Wayne, in a sense you did have their like with the Kennedys.
It certainly seems a wonderful fairy tale. I hope it lasts. I think it will. They just seem genuinely nice people.
|
|
|
|
Post by herron on Apr 30, 2011 7:59:28 GMT -5
Congratulations to William and Catherine. What a beautiful couple. Kinda makes me wish we had their like over here. W. A royal family here?  I vote no. We have enough primadonnas and carnival barkers here without adding 'royalty' to their status. Besides, what does 'royal' mean, other than we confer some kind of position to them no one on the planet deserves any more than anyone else. Interesting spectacle, but I'd just as soon see the digest version on the news, as sit through the whole thing. I'm not much for circuses, either.  |
|
|
|
Post by herron on Apr 30, 2011 8:02:00 GMT -5
Wayne, If you Yanks (and Rebs) behave yourselves Canada would probably allow you to become an eleventh province. Subject to royal approval, of course. Practice saying "eh". Mickey ;D Just when I thought Canada would make a nice 51st State!  |
|
PeterW
Lifetime Member
Member has Passed
Posts: 3,804
|
Post by PeterW on Apr 30, 2011 20:04:58 GMT -5
Ron, you wrote:
I too didn’t want to sit and watch the whole day on TV, and I respect your opinion on royalty. But I had to come back on this one because I was born into a family that, on the male side, has a long tradition going back before the days of Nelson and Trafalgar of playing a small part in building and defending England and the late British Empire with all their faults. For better or worse I have an inborn feeling for British history and traditions that I couldn’t expect anyone not born an Englishman or Englishwoman, to have.
In the UK the term "royal" isn't "some kind of position". It indicates a family blood-line going back through previous kings and queens of England (or in the case of James I Scotland) for centuries. Giving new titles to a member of the Royal Family on their wedding day is a long-standing tradition.
William becomes Duke of Cambridge, a royal dukedom created in1801 but held in abeyance since the second Duke died in 1904. Naturally, as his wife, Catherine becomes Duchess of Cambridge. She is now part of the royal family, and the Queen has decreed that she becomes “her royal highness”.
Interestingly, Catherine is the first commoner (a person neither a member of a royal family nor a member of the aristocracy) to marry an heir to the throne for more than 350 years.
The reigning King or Queen doesn’t “rule” the UK in the way that they did centuries ago but as head of state they still have certain powers even though these are nowadays used only after consultation with the elected Prime Minister. They can dissolve Parliament and force a General Election, they are Commander in Chief of the armed services and must give assent to the deployment of the armed services anywhere in the world and they are the only person who can declare war on another nation, or make peace after a war, though this would be done on the monarch’s behalf by the Prime Minister after Royal assent.
As we have been a democracy since the mid 1600s no monarch has used these powers unilaterally without consultations with the elected head of the government for quite a few hundred years, but the powers still remain.
I do hope this posting isn’t taken as being political in any way. It is not intended to be.
PeterW
|
|
photax
Lifetime Member
Posts: 1,915
|
Post by photax on May 1, 2011 12:25:44 GMT -5
There was a 8 hours live broadcast at the Austrian TV. I`ve seen a 10 min. summary at the evening news. Must have been a great day for the English people. I always thought that these Royal Highnesses are only spending the taxpayers money, but William is working as a rescue helicopter pilot. Did not know this before: my respect !
MIK
|
|
PeterW
Lifetime Member
Member has Passed
Posts: 3,804
|
Post by PeterW on May 1, 2011 18:35:42 GMT -5
MIK, Almost all the male members of the British Royal family, until they became reigning monarch or husband of a reigning Queen, going back centuries to the days when the King led his army into battle, have served in the armed services. Some saw action during Word War 1, World War 2, the Falklands war and the present confict in Afghanistan. During World War 2 our present Queen, then Princess Elizabeth, served in the ATS, the women's branch of the British Army, formed in 1939, where she trained in vehicle maintenance. In 1949 the ATS was renamed the Women's Royal Army Corps. If you're interested, brief service details of most of them, going back to William I in 1066, are on the Wikipedia website at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_service_by_the_members_of_the_British_Royal_FamilyNote that their serving military ranks were different from their honorary ranks. PeterW |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2011 20:14:58 GMT -5
England wouldn't be England without the Royal Family. It's about history and heritage IMO. There are some academics today who try their best to make us ashamed of the history of Western Civilization. To me the Royal family is a continuing reminder of the greatness of Great Britain over the centuries and the important role played by G.B. in world history. It's refreshing to see some Royals like William step forward you really seem to be worthy role models.
W
|
|
|
|
Post by nikonbob on May 2, 2011 8:29:25 GMT -5
There is no doubt that the popularity of the Monarchy has declined in recent years in Canada but I think and hope the marriage of William and Kate will do much to renew it. It is far too large a part of our history and who we are today to do without entirely
Bob
|
|
photax
Lifetime Member
Posts: 1,915
|
Post by photax on May 2, 2011 12:53:34 GMT -5
Hi Peter,
Have many thanks for this interesting link! I knew that Prince Andrew had been to the Falkland Islands and I have heard of Earl Mountbatten, but I was quite astonished to find the Queen herself at this list. Very impressive.
MIK
|
|
|
|
Post by nikkortorokkor on May 2, 2011 13:53:45 GMT -5
As a would-be academic, maybe Wayne will chuck brickbats at me but,
as one of the Queen's subjects (yes, Lizzy is Queen of NZ as well as Australia, Canada, England, etc.) I'm afraid I remain allergic to the women's magazine palaver of the royal wedding. These affairs are very much stage-managed for a purpose, as are coronations. I'm not a hard-line republican (but am, perhaps, a moderate one) I just can't buy into the hype.
OTOH, stage managed or not, I did appreciate Will's trip downunder to Christchurch in the wake of the Feb. 22 earthquake. His presence at a memorial service there made a genuine difference to his future subjects, and raised the Royals' stock in this part of the world.
On that tack, I remember an early-post-war set of British cyclopedias on our bookshelves at home with a photo of a young Lizzy & perhaps Marge too, working on a lorry in the motor pool workshop during WWII. England's Rosie the Riveter had very blue blood.
|
|
daveh
Lifetime Member
Posts: 4,696
|
Post by daveh on May 2, 2011 18:31:48 GMT -5
ntr,.......but I bet you will buy into the hype that is the Rugby World Cup.  |
|
|
|
Post by nikkortorokkor on May 3, 2011 5:41:35 GMT -5
Yes Dave, though on the night of the wedding I was watching the NZ Breakers beat the Cairns Taipans to win the Aussie NBL. The 1st time any NZ team has won a 1st division Aussie league in any sport.
|
|
