Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 03, 2015, 10:52:45 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Atlas Hardware Upgrade complete October 13, 2013.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  General Politics
| |-+  International General Discussion (Moderators: Peter, afleitch)
| | |-+  Poll: Should Charles renounce rights to the throne so William becomes the heir?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Print
Poll
Question: Should Charles renounce rights to the throne so William becomes the heir?
Yes   -7 (28%)
No   -18 (72%)
Show Pie Chart
Total Voters: 25

Author Topic: Poll: Should Charles renounce rights to the throne so William becomes the heir?  (Read 3755 times)
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11477


View Profile
« on: December 03, 2010, 12:17:07 am »
Ignore

There has been much discussion over the past few years that Prince Charles should renounce his rights as next in line to the throne and that his son Prince William should become the immediate heir.

My own view is that Prince Charles has been preparing his entire life to succeed his mother as monarch, and that when Queen Elizabeth dies Prince Charles should become King.

Please vote and discuss.
Logged



J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32065
United States


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: December 03, 2010, 12:35:01 am »
Ignore

No, Charles should Reign for a few years at least.
Logged

J. J.

"Actually, .. now that you mention it...." 
- Londo Molari

"Every government are parliaments of whores.
The trouble is, in a democracy the whores are us." - P. J. O'Rourke

"Wa sala, wa lala."

(Zulu for, "You snooze, you lose.")
bgwah
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13866
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: December 03, 2010, 12:37:26 am »
Ignore

Yes, if only because it would be fun to have two very long-serving monarchs in a row. Tongue
Logged

Јas
Jas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9911
Zambia


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: December 03, 2010, 07:24:16 am »
Ignore

The great thing about monarchs is that they don't have to give a sh**t what you think of them or how they're replaced. Public opinion doesn't count for anything. What a charming system.
Logged

Funny 'cause it's true:
Very few people seriously allow facts to affect their opinions.

dead0man
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 23403
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.84, S: -4.52

View Profile
« Reply #4 on: December 03, 2010, 07:36:45 am »
Ignore

I voted no, but I don't really care.  It's up to Charles...as it should be.
Logged

accept no imitations

(unless you're dense)
afleitch
Moderator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 23054


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -8.17

View Profile
« Reply #5 on: December 03, 2010, 07:41:54 am »

No.

The Queen is old. The number of official duties she can perform will lessen over time and Charles will essentially act as Prince Regent (though that title won't be conferred on him officially). There is however a chance she could live to be 101 like her mother (by which time it will be 2027!). Charles himself would be 79...if he is still alive. Under those circumstances he would step aside and William ( himself aged 45) would surely become the King.
Logged

k-onmmunist
Winston Disraeli
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11965
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: December 03, 2010, 07:47:14 am »
Ignore

I don't care, abolish the monarchy
Logged

Αλληλεγγύη
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 34925
France


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -4.87

View Profile
« Reply #7 on: December 03, 2010, 08:40:14 am »
Ignore

Couldn't care less.
Logged

RIP Greece. RIP European Federalism.



"It's easy to confuse what is with what ought to be, especially when what is has worked out in your favor."

Tyrion Lannister, Game of Thrones, ep. 5x09
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9483
United States


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: December 03, 2010, 08:48:07 am »
Ignore

I don't care, abolish the monarchy
Logged
tpfkaw
wormyguy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8715
Liechtenstein


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: December 03, 2010, 09:06:05 am »
Ignore


I can't believe I find myself agreeing with you two.
Logged
memphis
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 16125


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: December 03, 2010, 09:06:30 am »
Ignore

Logged

I cannot do anything good under my own power. 
I don't want my women talking to people
Stranger in a strange land
strangeland
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6551
United States


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: December 03, 2010, 10:10:17 am »
Ignore


As the leaked diplomatic cables show, the monarchy is still an important source of soft power for Britain: heads of state in other countries attach great value to a visit from the Queen or Prince Charles, or a hunting trip with one of the other princes. Having girls all over the world drool over Princes William and Harry can't hurt either. Thus if I were British, I would support retaining the monarchy for this purpose. I would be a staunch republican if I lived in Canada or Australia, however.

Logged

Delicious Steak Pentagram
Ernest
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30490
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #12 on: December 03, 2010, 10:24:43 am »
Ignore

No.

The Queen is old. The number of official duties she can perform will lessen over time and Charles will essentially act as Prince Regent (though that title won't be conferred on him officially). There is however a chance she could live to be 101 like her mother (by which time it will be 2027!). Charles himself would be 79...if he is still alive. Under those circumstances he would step aside and William ( himself aged 45) would surely become the King.


Charles could end up as Prince Regent if his mother were to suffer a stroke or other serious condition that left her alive but unable to perform even the minimal set of duties expected of a British monarch.

However it also possible that Charles will pass on before Elizabeth.  I think that is far likelier than Charles choosing to not reign.
Logged

Quote from: Ignatius of Antioch
He that possesses the word of Jesus, is truly able to bear his very silence. Epistle to the Ephesians 3:21a
The one thing everyone can agree on is that the media is biased against them.
You kip if you want to...
change08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9018
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: December 03, 2010, 03:50:33 pm »
Ignore

Logged

Zarn
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3768


Political Matrix
E: 7.35, S: -5.91

View Profile
« Reply #14 on: December 03, 2010, 07:10:13 pm »
Ignore

I care about abolishing the monarchy. It should have been a done deal by now.
Logged
TheDeadFlagBlues
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4107
Mexico


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: December 03, 2010, 09:09:10 pm »
Ignore

Logged



Economic score: -6.26
Social score: -7.74
Delicious Steak Pentagram
Ernest
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30490
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #16 on: December 03, 2010, 09:38:01 pm »
Ignore

Or Britannia could restore the rightful monarch to her throne: King Francis II.
Logged

Quote from: Ignatius of Antioch
He that possesses the word of Jesus, is truly able to bear his very silence. Epistle to the Ephesians 3:21a
The one thing everyone can agree on is that the media is biased against them.
J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32065
United States


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: December 03, 2010, 11:31:10 pm »
Ignore

The Monarchy serves as a good national focus and person of the Monarch has sufficient emergency powers to be useful in a crisis.
Logged

J. J.

"Actually, .. now that you mention it...." 
- Londo Molari

"Every government are parliaments of whores.
The trouble is, in a democracy the whores are us." - P. J. O'Rourke

"Wa sala, wa lala."

(Zulu for, "You snooze, you lose.")
Sewer
SpaceCommunistMutant
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7519
View Profile
« Reply #18 on: December 04, 2010, 01:41:56 am »
Ignore

Logged
Frodo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14256
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.42, S: -3.30

View Profile WWW
« Reply #19 on: December 04, 2010, 01:48:02 am »
Ignore

Yes -if they want the monarchy to survive, the Windsors would be well-advised to have Charles step aside in favor of his son.  
Logged

Trump 2016
Lief
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 37523
Dominica


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: December 04, 2010, 05:08:08 pm »
Ignore

The vile attacks on the monarchy made in this thread are truly disturbing.
Logged

THE FRONTRUNNER

Stranger in a strange land
strangeland
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6551
United States


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: December 04, 2010, 06:05:39 pm »
Ignore

Yes -if they want the monarchy to survive, the Windsors would be well-advised to have Charles step aside in favor of his son.  

Why? The monarchy has survived much worse, and Charles likely wouldn't reign very long anyway.
Logged

Thomas D
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3770
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.84, S: -6.61

View Profile
« Reply #22 on: December 04, 2010, 06:19:18 pm »
Ignore

Logged
Senator Polnut
polnut
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15902
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: December 04, 2010, 07:38:30 pm »
Ignore

The constitutional monarchy is a good system of government, I wouldn't vote for a Republic in Australia... don't see the point. It wouldn't change much.

Charles will have been waiting a BLOODY long time for the throne... happy to let him have it for 10 years.
Logged


Dogma is a comfortable thing, it saves you from thought - Sir Robert Menzies
??????????
StatesRights
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31255
Political Matrix
E: 7.61, S: 0.00

View Profile
« Reply #24 on: December 04, 2010, 07:41:32 pm »
Ignore

The constitutional monarchy is a good system of government, I wouldn't vote for a Republic in Australia... don't see the point. It wouldn't change much.

Charles will have been waiting a BLOODY long time for the throne... happy to let him have it for 10 years.

Why do you all assume a short lifespan? NHS should solve all the problems, I mean, it's free healthcare!
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines