People who „don’t want LGBTQ+ teachings“ taught to their kids are coming from a place of homophobia. This is an expression of their homophobia. If they were no homophobic they would not be saying this. Every place where you have a law that’s in like with this is extremely homophobic and outright dangerous for LGBTQ folks, eg Hungary, Russia and Florida. It explicitly IS homophobia. It’s not fear for kids or whatever because that’s just a bullshit repackaging of gay panic homophobic messaging. There is no hypocrisy at all, it’s a woeful example to give

And that's fine that you can't get behind the Monarchy, I fully respect that. I'm not a Royalist, but you've not put together any form of argument other than it's unfair. I could list you loads of parts about life that are unfair. If there was appetite for it, I'd be saying go-ahead, but the public don't want it in this country and nor do I suspect they will for a couple of generations. I've never asked you to get behind the Monarchy, but you've not once acknowledged any benefits of the Monarchy which benefit our society, values, culture and economy - I don't consider you stupid at all for the record.

 

But who is benefitting from it? I’d have more respect for you if you were a royalist to be honest, because at least the lengths you’re going to defend them would make more sense. But it’s your usual stance in these discussions ‘I don’t agree with this but’ and it always ends with you siding with the wealthy and/or powerful over those that need the most help. I’m sorry but I consider things being unfair to be a strong argument when you look at the way the country is.

 

"Being homophobic is a hate crime, but if someone does not want LGBTQ+ teachings to be taught their children, that is not a hate crime."

 

I kinda disagree with this. What is the one if not the other?

LGBTQ teachings are generally "hey, these people exist. Here's a description. Please respect them", no? Toby would have a more direct perspective than me on that, of course.

 

Apols for the 'pile on' but I am kinda directly affected & I do think there is a bit of a difference between a governance choice and an issue regarding how to generally treat other 'categories' of humans.

 

I believe Rooney does have us on a technicality because the law of hate crimes and LGBT+ are not as tight as they are for racism. But that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be or that people aren’t campaigning for them to be. You can technically state you don’t agree with it being taught and it’s technically not a hate crime but it absolutely should be because it is homophobia no matter how you dress it up. It’s a really shitty argument to bring into this but I’m glad others are speaking up too.

 

I honestly don’t care if you look down your nose at me and consider me stupid and continue to talk down to me.

 

 

I mean the hypocrisy:

 

And we already have an expensive vanity project in the UK. It’s called your mates, the Monarchy.

 

 

I guess I’m happy for you that your privileged enough for these things not to affect you at all.

 

 

I’d have more respect for you if you were a royalist to be honest, because at least the lengths you’re going to defend them would make more sense.

 

 

I haven't noticed them attack you personally once throughout this thread, in fact they go as far as to establish they do not think you are stupid. But keep gaslighting.

 

But who is benefitting from it? I’d have more respect for you if you were a royalist to be honest, because at least the lengths you’re going to defend them would make more sense. But it’s your usual stance in these discussions ‘I don’t agree with this but’ and it always ends with you siding with the wealthy and/or powerful over those that need the most help. I’m sorry but I consider things being unfair to be a strong argument when you look at the way the country is.

 

I believe Rooney does have us on a technicality because the law of hate crimes and LGBT+ are not as tight as they are for racism. But that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be or that people aren’t campaigning for them to be. You can technically state you don’t agree with it being taught and it’s technically not a hate crime but it absolutely should be because it is homophobia no matter how you dress it up. It’s a really shitty argument to bring into this but I’m glad others are speaking up too.

 

The whole country benefits from it economically and it’s part of our identity, culture and stature throughout the world. Look The Monarchy is not perfect, but I also believe over the last generation and especially since Diana passed they’ve realised this and have become adaptable. A Monarchy system is not perfect but neither is a Republic. You replace one shit system with another shit system. My issue is here is you fundamentally believe abolishing the Monarchy will make everyone’s lives better and a fairer society, I’m challenging this thought, as my opinion is it will not make the slightest bit of difference to our daily lives and wider society, and there is no appetite for it, so what is the point? For everything we may gain in having a slight democratic structure we lose by impacting our culture & identity as a nation.

 

And on your second point, I’m not trying to be a clever arse I’m merely just trying to show you the hypocrisy in some of the arguments and show why I think it’s slightly disrespectful and a mis-judged moment to be utilising free speech. I’m not getting in to an argument about hate crimes, I was just trying to show a different argument. I’ll use a different example- is it right that people protest and shout shame at women outside abortion clinics? As that’s free speech.

It feels like this is on the edge of getting unnecessarily personal, can we all try not to do that as it will ruin what has been a good debate so far.

I mean the hypocrisy:

I haven't noticed them attack you personally once throughout this thread, in fact they go as far as to establish they do not think you are stupid. But keep gaslighting.

 

You should probably contribute to the discussion if you’re going to post in the thread. You’ve only posted here to have a go at me which is something you accused me of doing to you in another thread last week. Please refrain from personally attacking me or I will report you.

 

The whole country benefits from it economically and it’s part of our identity, culture and stature throughout the world. Look The Monarchy is not perfect, but I also believe over the last generation and especially since Diana passed they’ve realised this and have become adaptable. A Monarchy system is not perfect but neither is a Republic. You replace one shit system with another shit system. My issue is here is you fundamentally believe abolishing the Monarchy will make everyone’s lives better and a fairer society, I’m challenging this thought, as my opinion is it will not make the slightest bit of difference to our daily lives and wider society, and there is no appetite for it, so what is the point? For everything we may gain in having a slight democratic structure we lose by impacting our culture & identity as a nation.

 

And on your second point, I’m not trying to be a clever arse I’m merely just trying to show you the hypocrisy in some of the arguments and show why I think it’s slightly disrespectful and a mis-judged moment to be utilising free speech. I’m not getting in to an argument about hate crimes, I was just trying to show a different argument. I’ll use a different example- is it right that people protest and shout shame at women outside abortion clinics? As that’s free speech.

 

I get that the benefits exist but I’m asking if we see them? I don’t feel like we do. And I’ve only spoken out in the thread because you criticised protests about the monarchy. Whether I think we need a Monarchy is neither here nor there, I’m fighting for the discussion to be had.

 

I also disagree that it’s hypocrisy. I respect that you think it may be but I’ve outlined why and clearly other posters have agreed. So I guess this is something we’ll just have to disagree on.

 

To be honest, I’m gonna bow out now. I didn’t mind debating this with Rooney at all but I don’t want posters coming here just to insult me and not contribute to the topic. I get very passionate when discussing things but I recognise that this may lead to posters taking issue with me and derail the thread. I hope a decent conversation can continue but I no longer feel I can contribute.

 

 

 

I think it’s far worse for the Queen in terms of constant coverage - I means it’s been constant everyday on bbc 1 since last Thursday now!

The constant coverage for The Queen might be worse but it's a lot easier to avoid than how it was for Diana when she died. There were far less channels on TV in 1997 and technology wasn't as advanced as it is now. Even the kids/cartoon channels got affected in 1997! :lol:

 

 

Personally I've avoided all of it so far this week. Times like this are when the value of on demand services such as Netflix or YouTube really show, or in my own case doing some activities away from home during evening time.

 

 

Next Monday will be the most intense day so far though for the coverage of The Queen's death but unlike in 1997 for Diana's funeral it will be a lot easier to avoid if you don't watch linear TV.

Yeh true but as I say my sky box has her picture and all.

 

It’ll all be over by next Tuesday though I guess as plans for the Coronation start.

I get that the benefits exist but I’m asking if we see them? I don’t feel like we do. And I’ve only spoken out in the thread because you criticised protests about the monarchy. Whether I think we need a Monarchy is neither here nor there, I’m fighting for the discussion to be had.

 

I also disagree that it’s hypocrisy. I respect that you think it may be but I’ve outlined why and clearly other posters have agreed. So I guess this is something we’ll just have to disagree on.

 

To be honest, I’m gonna bow out now. I didn’t mind debating this with Rooney at all but I don’t want posters coming here just to insult me and not contribute to the topic. I get very passionate when discussing things but I recognise that this may lead to posters taking issue with me and derail the thread. I hope a decent conversation can continue but I no longer feel I can contribute.

 

The changes are we don’t see the benefits, but we wouldn’t of a Republic either I don’t suspect. Both systems have advantages and disadvantages, we were dealt with the Monarchy hand (and it’s not like we are the only Western democracy to have a Monarchy) and it serves our identity and culture. Having a President would be expensive too, would they have better decisions? Who knows, our Monarchy have soft power only and I’d suggest they are pretty glued up to world issues that we need to be addressing. Fighting for the discussion is fine, but you have to convince people of the benefits. If someone could put forward a convincing, efficient and cost effective argument I’m fully open to changing my mind, but throughout all my knowledge, fundamentally we are changing one flawed system, with another flawed system and commiting to changing our culture and identify at the same time with no real plan or strategy.

 

Free speech is important, I’ve never once said I disagree. I also fully agree with the right to protest and these people should not be oppressed. I just found the timings disrespectful and an abuse of free speech. I was making similar examples of people utilising free speech around issues that I know as a collective BuzzJack feels passionate about (E.g. abortions). I think we can all agree protesting outside a clinic is the absolute wrong thing to do morally.

This thread got very spicy.

 

Anyway, I'm really intrigued to know the general feeling amongst the public (and those who never really cared about the monarchy in either direction) after this relentless coverage. Any recent polls?

Edited September 15, 20222 yr by blacksquare

This thread got very spicy.

 

Anyway, I'm really intrigued to know the general feeling amongst the public (and those who never really cared about the monarchy in either direction) after this relentless coverage. Any recent polls?

Yes, there was a YouGov survey on how Britain reacted to the Queen's death which also included statistics on support for the monarchy. They found that 64% of Brits support the country having a monarchy (with 21% opposing it and 15% saying they don't know), which is down from 75% ten years ago. There is also a clear age divide on this - 84% of 65+ year olds are in favour compared to 10% who oppose it, but for 18-24 year olds only 40% support it compared to 29% who oppose it.

Still very popular then! It remains to be seen how people will respons to Charles. It is too early for polls on the matter. For many years now the Queen has been the be and end all of the Momarchy, with William and Kate the sideshow.

This was great:

 

Didn't Charles get heckled when he was in Wales??

 

 

This was great:

 

 

Absolutely spot on.

 

Didn't Charles get heckled when he was in Wales??

 

He did indeed and rightly so. I heard described as the most hostility he’s received from the devolved nations this week but not really surprising given his actions and attitude towards the Welsh over the past ten days.

There's A LOT to go through in this thread but for what it's worth I'm in agreement with anyone who doesn't support the monarchy. I don't think they serve a valid purpose in this day and age and all they really represent is how much our societal system is based on classism, making the rich richer etc. I definitely think now the queen has passed that whole debate will have a whole lot more light shed on it.

 

I can't stand Charles so I'm not looking forward to this next chapter one bit. I think the only royal I wouldn't have minded seeing take the throne is Anne but yea I don't think not having a royal family would be a huge loss to us.

 

It's quite a shame to see people arguing that they represent British culture because we have a lot more going for us than them. Plus, the monarchy is always going to be a huge part of our history, people visiting the UK will still be able to visit Buckingham palace etc but I do think it's time we drew a line between it being something of our past and not our present.

What do people think would change if we were to abolish the monarchy? The royal family would still own the residences they do now, either directly or in trust. They would potentially and presumably then take all of the income from said visitors for themselves and very easily maintain their status in the media if they wanted to. The only part that would change is that they wouldn’t undertake any public duties.

 

I get that people don’t like the concept of a royal family. I wouldn’t choose to have one if we were starting from scratch either, but we’re not - we’re starting from a place where that family already owns everything. I don’t have any particular desire to have a monarchy in place but it is only sensible to take a balanced view of the positives and negatives of their existence. I’m not sure anyone in here has particularly taken a monarchist stance, more challenged the concept that things would automatically be better without them. We’d be essentially stripping them of any obligation to do good and turning them into another private family of rich land owners in the UK. And that’s the exact category of selfish families who have such a monopoly over everything that I’m not sure I’d want another, potentially more powerful one, added to it.

With our media, our presidents would have been Thatcher, Blojo, and William Hague...

 

I don't like Charles either, and hate our classist system, but I think the monsrchy is thr least important of the changes we need to make, for now - voting system, media, rejoin the EU, etc.

^^

Exactly this for me as well. The royals are nowhere near the top of my list of issues.

I think to what I'd say towards meaningful republican action is... the path to abolishing the monarchy is possible within our lifetimes, change often happens quicker than is expected. The Queen ended up being a special case, long term surely there won't be as much adoration towards her successors.

 

But also some institutions seem so encroached on our society that you could use this argument for anything and then nothing changes. Sure, it's far from a priority, but it's a component of the state that should be dismantled at some way along the road because while it's there it will forever be a huge symbol of inequality.

 

Give Charles time to mess up, some momentum from other monarchies being dismantled. At least, the number of Commonwealth realms will surely shrink over the next decades and it's quite possible that another European monarchy decides to completely dispense with their royal family too - I'd call Spain. But then, as the UK has the monarchy with surely the most scrutiny, it could even be sooner than that.

 

also in the event of dismantlement at least a good portion of what they own should return to the people, considering they've been getting away with not paying inheritance tax and any number of legal loopholes specifically for the Crown over the years