Please read here on how to use images on RoyalDish. - Please read the RoyalDish message on board purpose and rules.
Images containing full nudity or sexual activities are strongly forbidden on RoyalDish.


Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The BRF is being modernized A LOT  (Read 26705 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Cloaked

Muted
Humongous Member
**********

Reputation: 748

Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 5388





Ignore
« Reply #45 on: January 27, 2013, 02:42:19 AM »

'The poor will always be with you but you will not always have me' ...  I think this is a quote by Jesus Christ somewhere in the Bible - Mark, John or Matthew.?

Mankind will always have need to work out ways to help the underprivileged.  I think that we will always have people with problems.  There are those who are victims of corrupt societies, famine, persecuted by their own families, born with disabilities, and even those who cause harm to themselves etc. etc.
Unfortunately there has been no end to the huge heartache of war either.
There are eternal afflictions it seems.  Crap  
Logged
freethespoon

Most Exalted Member
*

Reputation: 3906

Offline Offline

Posts: 13923


Official TeaSpoon of Royal Dish. Aka TrollSpoon.




Ignore
« Reply #46 on: January 27, 2013, 02:45:38 AM »

Can someone remind me how trips to Mustique and France are WeeWillyWaity's way of assuaging the desperation of the poor and in need?  I must have missed the memo from SJP.
Logged


You can call me TrollSpoon.
Crawler

Medium Member
*****

Reputation: 248

Offline Offline

Posts: 975





Ignore
« Reply #47 on: January 27, 2013, 03:09:22 AM »

 Star Back at you   Smiley

'The poor will always be with you but you will not always have me' ...  I think this is a quote by Jesus Christ somewhere in the Bible - Mark, John or Matthew.?

Mankind will always have need to work out ways to help the underprivileged.  I think that we will always have people with problems.  There are those who are victims of corrupt societies, famine, persecuted by their own families, born with disabilities, and even those who cause harm to themselves etc. etc.
Unfortunately there has been no end to the huge heartache of war either.
There are eternal afflictions it seems.  Crap 

If true then the head of state is ineffectual and therefore serves no purpose for the people but for themselves.

Can you tell me how many people the royal family has personally lifted out of poverty?
Logged
SouthernBelle

Big Member
*******

Reputation: 687

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2185


With my thumbs I like to think I'm probably useful




Ignore
« Reply #48 on: January 27, 2013, 03:29:42 AM »

Star Back at you   Smiley

'The poor will always be with you but you will not always have me' ...  I think this is a quote by Jesus Christ somewhere in the Bible - Mark, John or Matthew.?

Mankind will always have need to work out ways to help the underprivileged.  I think that we will always have people with problems.  There are those who are victims of corrupt societies, famine, persecuted by their own families, born with disabilities, and even those who cause harm to themselves etc. etc.
Unfortunately there has been no end to the huge heartache of war either.
There are eternal afflictions it seems.  Crap 

If true then the head of state is ineffectual and therefore serves no purpose for the people but for themselves.

Can you tell me how many people the royal family has personally lifted out of poverty?

Liz, Phil, Anne, the Waleses, the Yorks, the Wessexes, the Kents, the Gloucesters, and the Middletons. Did I miss anyone?

I love our system because we are able to choose the person to represent us on the world stage. We are not forced to deal with some imbecile who had to use his/her title to coast through life. Many of the current heirs seem like nice people, but how many could actually be elected president/prime minister of their home countries based upon their own merits?
Logged

Crawler

Medium Member
*****

Reputation: 248

Offline Offline

Posts: 975





Ignore
« Reply #49 on: January 27, 2013, 03:34:56 AM »

Being born is not the best qualification for a leader IMV.
Logged
freethespoon

Most Exalted Member
*

Reputation: 3906

Offline Offline

Posts: 13923


Official TeaSpoon of Royal Dish. Aka TrollSpoon.




Ignore
« Reply #50 on: January 27, 2013, 04:19:57 AM »

Star Back at you   Smiley

'The poor will always be with you but you will not always have me' ...  I think this is a quote by Jesus Christ somewhere in the Bible - Mark, John or Matthew.?

Mankind will always have need to work out ways to help the underprivileged.  I think that we will always have people with problems.  There are those who are victims of corrupt societies, famine, persecuted by their own families, born with disabilities, and even those who cause harm to themselves etc. etc.
Unfortunately there has been no end to the huge heartache of war either.
There are eternal afflictions it seems.  Crap  

If true then the head of state is ineffectual and therefore serves no purpose for the people but for themselves.

Can you tell me how many people the royal family has personally lifted out of poverty?

Liz, Phil, Anne, the Waleses, the Yorks, the Wessexes, the Kents, the Gloucesters, and the Middletons. Did I miss anyone?

I love our system because we are able to choose the person to represent us on the world stage. We are not forced to deal with some imbecile who had to use his/her title to coast through life. Many of the current heirs seem like nice people, but how many could actually be elected president/prime minister of their home countries based upon their own merits?

This is a really good point SB.  Would Frodo be elected to be a Head of State were it not for luck of birth?  God, I hope not and, I suspect, the Danes would not elect a lazy, drunken buffoon to act as their country's representative.

If a head of state must be a winner of the vagina lottery, then at least require them to have some semblance of competence.  Why should the rest of us work hard when our head of state - our supposed superior - has to do nothing to earn their position.  

It's a schism that doesn't sit well with me.  I remember a sugar on another board talking about the brilliance of Westminster in that the lower house, upper house, prime minister - all had to prove their competence with the people.  

Where their argument came undone was the head of state.  Why do all the underlings have to prove their ability and make themselves accountable to the people, but the head of state can just.... exist.  It was almost like 'Well, if the king / queen is a numpty, at least democratic processes can effectively nullify their existence'.
« Last Edit: January 27, 2013, 04:28:48 AM by freethespoon » Logged


You can call me TrollSpoon.
Cloaked

Muted
Humongous Member
**********

Reputation: 748

Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 5388





Ignore
« Reply #51 on: January 27, 2013, 04:29:27 AM »

I, personally, don't require those who help others and contribute to charities to wear 'sack cloth' themselves.  If wealthy people are generous then I still call them generous.

William is a junior member of the B.R.F.  He holds down a civilian job but manages nearly 90 Royal engagements per year.  Not to mention the assistance that is donated to others through the charity that he started with Prince Harry, The Foundation of Prince William and Prince Harry, to cater for the needs of the homeless, young people, the armed forces etc.
I do not begrudge William his holidays.  Many people of his standing take similar holidays but give a fraction back to society.

I believe that many good works that effect the well being of countless people have been done by fantastic charities started or consistently supported by more senior members of the British Royal Family.  The Queen heads a large number of family members who make it their purpose in life to work for the community.
They were born into the family, yes, and I don't mind that.  It's not unlike numerous philanthropic families who breed philanthropic ideals into their children.

To help just one person is a good thing and the B.R.F have made a difference to so many that I cannot count them.  

They are not alone in that regard.   Thumb up
Many people keep working for the underprivileged even though they never eliminate all problems.
Their work can always do better/achieve more but I don't call it ineffectual.  
  
Logged
freethespoon

Most Exalted Member
*

Reputation: 3906

Offline Offline

Posts: 13923


Official TeaSpoon of Royal Dish. Aka TrollSpoon.




Ignore
« Reply #52 on: January 27, 2013, 04:52:35 AM »

I guess I have a natural preference towards those with a genuine desire to assist.  Not those who turn up for the cameras for a couple of hours to play pack boxes for starving people.  To me, the work of a Moira Kelly is far more valuable and far more life changing. 

She has adopted children, set up a working farm to assist crippled children, and she lobbies for funds constantly. She doesn't have the press coverage but her adopted children would argue that she has fundamentally changed their lives.

But the old saying 'your mileage may vary' probably applies here.  I like people who live what they say and whose preachings align with their behaviour.  I get that such congruence is not important to everyone.
Logged


You can call me TrollSpoon.
Cloaked

Muted
Humongous Member
**********

Reputation: 748

Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 5388





Ignore
« Reply #53 on: January 27, 2013, 05:17:49 AM »

Moira Kelly.  Champagne

I applaud your worship of Moira Kelly wholeheartedly, Freethespoon.  Star

I regard it as my very best fortune to have met and spoken to Moira.  Jumping
She has made huge differences to many children - especially her adopted four.
Moira and the twins met Queen Elizabeth at the Children's Hospital and I saw both women as equals.
Two great women.
She is the modern day Mother Teresa to my mind.
  
Not many people, try as they do, can become that sort of champian.
She is one in ten million!
Moira also supported her son, Ahmed, in the recent Paralympics.  Thumb up
I saw footage of her there.
One of my kids knows her other son, Emmanuel, from Monivae College.
He is a wonderful young man - a true reflection of Moira's dedication.
Moira is an inspiration ... it is totally right and logical that she draws contributions and helpers to her causes.  
Logged
Crawler

Medium Member
*****

Reputation: 248

Offline Offline

Posts: 975





Ignore
« Reply #54 on: January 27, 2013, 05:35:44 AM »

William may do some engagements but he always looks like it is torture for him so it is not really that he is out there helping people on his own it is more like he is being forced because all the royals do it.
Logged
Cloaked

Muted
Humongous Member
**********

Reputation: 748

Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 5388





Ignore
« Reply #55 on: January 27, 2013, 05:46:14 AM »

William carrying out engagements, in the flesh, in Australia seemed very warm and genuine.
He received positive press and in video footage I think that he really enjoyed the tasks.  Thumb up

I sometimes wonder whether the British Press, in their hunt for the lucrative Diana replacement, portrays William as more reluctant than he actually is when mixing with the public.
I'm thinking that the British Press is impatient with William taking so long to start working as a full time Royal.  Me, I'm happy to wait for more senior Royal positions to become vacant.  Once William joins the full time team we'll see him SO much - I like that he is working a normal job, mixing with other SAR personnel every shift.
Logged
freethespoon

Most Exalted Member
*

Reputation: 3906

Offline Offline

Posts: 13923


Official TeaSpoon of Royal Dish. Aka TrollSpoon.




Ignore
« Reply #56 on: January 27, 2013, 06:46:16 AM »

Moira is awesome.

And, if the purpose of a monarchy is to ensure the country has apolitical individuals who are committed to the wellbeing of their people, including those in poverty, isn't it better to distribute funds to those who actually make a difference, rather than channeling a whole lot of cash for people who are - at best - part time and only work for the purposes of keeping the peasants off their backs.
Logged


You can call me TrollSpoon.
Cloaked

Muted
Humongous Member
**********

Reputation: 748

Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 5388





Ignore
« Reply #57 on: January 27, 2013, 10:13:19 AM »

Yes, funds should be channeled to those who make a difference.  Star
Though my opinion differs from yours in what I regard as useful.  I think that the British Royal Family does make a difference and I think that they are good value for money.
They work long enough hours including quite flexible hours and always on standby. They are scrutinised when they are not working too.  They also bring attention to others who make huge differences and encourage donations of time and money to many deserving causes.  There is room for Royalty and the Moira Kellys of this world.

I like the way forward thinking previous monarchs set up the Duchies to fund the living expenses of the Queen and the Prince of Wales.  They have funds quite independent of politics.
They are fortunate to have had forebears with great wealth but also forebears who thought ahead and helped create and support a very stable system of government.
I think that the preservation of the Monarchy will add to stability of the nation for years to come.
Logged
freethespoon

Most Exalted Member
*

Reputation: 3906

Offline Offline

Posts: 13923


Official TeaSpoon of Royal Dish. Aka TrollSpoon.




Ignore
« Reply #58 on: January 27, 2013, 10:17:12 AM »

We shall have to agree to disagree.

I don't think the calibre of a Moira Kelly can be compared and/or equated with a Waity Middleton.  If I had my way, the finite pot of funding would be weighted to Moira and less to Waity's hair bill.

I also don't see what 'stability' the royals bring to Australia, other than symbolic appreciation by monarchists.  I certainly don't feel stable because of them, but I'm the child of immigrants, taught to stand on my own feet and to create my own history (not celebrate someone elses).  Thumb up 

The royals represent a pecking order where I don't feature, for no other reason than I wasn't born into the right family.  Not the egalitarian society I aspire to live in, but recognise and respect that others feel differently
« Last Edit: January 27, 2013, 10:23:21 AM by freethespoon » Logged


You can call me TrollSpoon.
luvcharles

Gigantic Member
*********

Reputation: 1332

Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 3547





Ignore
« Reply #59 on: January 27, 2013, 11:55:24 AM »

For people in NSW in particular and Australia generally I thought you might be interested in the new National History Curriculum and the Republican debate.

In 1998, when the last major rewrite of the History syllabus was written in NSW it was compulsory to teach the Republican debate - no doubt the assumption was that the upcoming 1999 referendum was going to be a Yes vote and so the course would be up to date.  When it was sligthly modified in 2006 the republican debate was made an optional topic (I continued to teach it).

The new curriculum, and certainly the NSW syllabus based on that national curriculum doesn't even have the republic as an optional topic.

The current Year 9/10 Australian history course is:  Australia 1900 - 1914 with an emphasis on the reasons for federation and what it was like to live at that time, Australia in WWI with an emphasis on Gallipoli and life at home, some optional topics from between the wars such as the Opening of the Harbour Bridge and Donald Bradman and finally Australia in WWII with one campaign studied and what happened here at home.  Then in Year 10 it is Australia in the Vietnam War Ere - again emphasis is what was happening here not the war itself, Rights and Freedoms - aborigines and either migrants or women, Post-War Politics - with the option of studying the Dismissal or the Republic or any of about 6 or 7 other options and a study of social changes since 1945.

Now the new course removes a lot of that stuff and replaces it with world options - it is perfectly possible to only study Australian history in relation to the two World Wars and rights and freedoms for Aborigines.  Anything else that was Australian history is now optional - making a nation (federation etc) can be ditched in favour of a study of Asia and in year 10 the options are popular culture or the experienes of migrants plus rights and freedoms for Aborigines and then a choice of a school developed topic that doesn't include either The Dismissal of the Whitlam government or the republic debate with the options being more world history based.

I find it interesting that a pro-republic Labor government have approved a curriculum that doesn't mandate the teaching of events such as the Dismissal and the republican debate. What does that say about where the Labor government is in regard to ditching the monarchy at the moment?
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to: