I hate being British!!
27 January 2003, 03:04 PM
#31
Scooby Regular
Oi, don't call me a muppet; not unless you fancy a good slap 
I mentioned nothing about religion. I ain't muslim, christian or anything else,s o what should I care if you fornicate outside marriage. That hasn't got anything to do with being British or not. In fact, I don't even care if someone decides to have seven wifes and have everyone of them cover their faces.
As long as they accept our laws and are prepared to defend our country, I'm happy.
Stefan
I mentioned nothing about religion. I ain't muslim, christian or anything else,s o what should I care if you fornicate outside marriage. That hasn't got anything to do with being British or not. In fact, I don't even care if someone decides to have seven wifes and have everyone of them cover their faces.
As long as they accept our laws and are prepared to defend our country, I'm happy.
Stefan
27 January 2003, 03:07 PM
#33
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 680
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lol who do the Civil servants work for, Who is in charge of Parliament. Who do you pay your taxes too ? The Pope ?
You really are spouting nonsence and you know it and making yourself sound very very very silly.
Do you think that what you care to think has any relevance.
You really are spouting nonsence and you know it and making yourself sound very very very silly.
Do you think that what you care to think has any relevance.
27 January 2003, 03:07 PM
#34
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: £1.785m reasons not to be here :)
Posts: 6,095
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FFs will you stop editing the post - its getting hard to keep up 
I'm not arguing the Queen's position as head of state.
Her religion, however, and her role within the Church of England is of absolutely no relevance outside that Church.
There have been Catholic monarchs too you know
I'm not arguing the Queen's position as head of state.
Her religion, however, and her role within the Church of England is of absolutely no relevance outside that Church.
There have been Catholic monarchs too you know
27 January 2003, 03:10 PM
#35
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Carnetix, Adams and Nitosport
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Diablo - lol CO55IE would be supporting an English team at a sporting event and waving the Union flag!
Same misconceptions, arguments only the thread is new...
Same misconceptions, arguments only the thread is new...
27 January 2003, 03:13 PM
#36
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: £1.785m reasons not to be here :)
Posts: 6,095
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are you really that naive?
The Queen is a figurehead, not much more, not much less. She doesn't make the decisions, she doesn't pay the bills. Sure, in theory she's in control, reality is somewhat different.
Name me one occasion when the Queen has actually brought about some change in the past X years off her own back? When has she hired or fired one of her "employees"
Clearly reasoned argument doesn't work. You are obviously incapable of even considering anothers perspective.
D
The Queen is a figurehead, not much more, not much less. She doesn't make the decisions, she doesn't pay the bills. Sure, in theory she's in control, reality is somewhat different.
Name me one occasion when the Queen has actually brought about some change in the past X years off her own back? When has she hired or fired one of her "employees"
Clearly reasoned argument doesn't work. You are obviously incapable of even considering anothers perspective.
D
27 January 2003, 03:18 PM
#38
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Croydon - returned to democracy! Yay!!
Posts: 3,682
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Diablo, I really hate to side with co55ie on this, but...
"Protector of the realm, defender of the faith" is indeed the role of the monarch.
There have been Catholic monarchs, but not since Henry VIII - that's when the monarch officially also became head of the Church of England. We have mechanisms in place that officially and legally keep the church and state as discrete entities, but nonetheless in this case he's right.
The rest of his argument is complete twaddle, of course
SB
"Protector of the realm, defender of the faith" is indeed the role of the monarch.
There have been Catholic monarchs, but not since Henry VIII - that's when the monarch officially also became head of the Church of England. We have mechanisms in place that officially and legally keep the church and state as discrete entities, but nonetheless in this case he's right.
The rest of his argument is complete twaddle, of course
SB
27 January 2003, 03:23 PM
#39
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: £1.785m reasons not to be here :)
Posts: 6,095
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SB - If you read my posts you'll see I'm not saying she's not the head of state and head of the C of E. I agree with Co55ie on this.
Its the mechanisms in place that officially and legally keep the church and state as discrete entities that Co55ie seems to be ignoring.
I may legally be her subject, but there is NOTHING that ties me to the C of E as a result, in law or otherwise.
D
Its the mechanisms in place that officially and legally keep the church and state as discrete entities that Co55ie seems to be ignoring.
I may legally be her subject, but there is NOTHING that ties me to the C of E as a result, in law or otherwise.
D
27 January 2003, 03:28 PM
#40
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 680
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Except next time you break one of those laws and go in front of a reprentative of the Queen and are then detained in one of her hotels at her pleasure using all our tax money that we have had to pay her.
Sbradley you think its twaddle that Britain should be for Britain
You think Council Money should be spent on illegal immigrants and mosques etc instead of Education and Hospitals? Why should I have to go and see a GP that cant communicate in this countrys language ? DO Japenese Gp's all talk to their patients in German ?
[Edited by co55ie - 1/27/2003 3:34:11 PM]
Sbradley you think its twaddle that Britain should be for Britain
You think Council Money should be spent on illegal immigrants and mosques etc instead of Education and Hospitals? Why should I have to go and see a GP that cant communicate in this countrys language ? DO Japenese Gp's all talk to their patients in German ?
[Edited by co55ie - 1/27/2003 3:34:11 PM]
27 January 2003, 03:41 PM
#41
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: £1.785m reasons not to be here :)
Posts: 6,095
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Co55ie, you are indeed devoid of any intellect. WTF has prison or law got to do with the C of E?
I agree that she is head of state, head of C of E.
She is also required by the 1707 Treaty of Union to preserve the Church of Scotland (Scotland's established Church). The monarch takes an oath to preserve the Church of Scotland at the meeting of the Privy Council immediately following his or her accession.
The Queen is not the Supreme Governor of the Church of Scotland, but an ordinary member. In Scotland, there is a division of powers by which Church and State are each supreme in their own sphere; the Church is self-governing in all that concerns its own activities. Its supreme authority is the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, presided over by a Moderator chosen each year by the Assembly itself. The Crown is represented at the Assembly, sometimes by the monarch in person, but more often by a Lord High Commissioner appointed each year by The Queen. Provided that it acts within the law of the land, the Assembly has the power to pass resolutions which can have effect without Royal Assent.
Incidentally, it is the C of E that names the Monarch as "Defender of the Faith". The Preface to the 39 Articles of the Church of England describes the monarch as 'being by God's Ordinance, according to Our just Title, Defender of the Faith and ... Supreme Governor of the Church of England'. The monarch must be in communion with the Church of England (i.e. a full, confirmed member) and, in his or her coronation oath, the monarch promises to maintain the Church.
Note "Defender of the Faith AND Supreme Governor of the Church of England"
Two distinct roles.
D
[Edited by Diablo - 1/27/2003 3:44:35 PM]
I agree that she is head of state, head of C of E.
She is also required by the 1707 Treaty of Union to preserve the Church of Scotland (Scotland's established Church). The monarch takes an oath to preserve the Church of Scotland at the meeting of the Privy Council immediately following his or her accession.
The Queen is not the Supreme Governor of the Church of Scotland, but an ordinary member. In Scotland, there is a division of powers by which Church and State are each supreme in their own sphere; the Church is self-governing in all that concerns its own activities. Its supreme authority is the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, presided over by a Moderator chosen each year by the Assembly itself. The Crown is represented at the Assembly, sometimes by the monarch in person, but more often by a Lord High Commissioner appointed each year by The Queen. Provided that it acts within the law of the land, the Assembly has the power to pass resolutions which can have effect without Royal Assent.
Incidentally, it is the C of E that names the Monarch as "Defender of the Faith". The Preface to the 39 Articles of the Church of England describes the monarch as 'being by God's Ordinance, according to Our just Title, Defender of the Faith and ... Supreme Governor of the Church of England'. The monarch must be in communion with the Church of England (i.e. a full, confirmed member) and, in his or her coronation oath, the monarch promises to maintain the Church.
Note "Defender of the Faith AND Supreme Governor of the Church of England"
Two distinct roles.
D
[Edited by Diablo - 1/27/2003 3:44:35 PM]
27 January 2003, 03:49 PM
#44
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Croydon - returned to democracy! Yay!!
Posts: 3,682
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Diablo, I misunderstood. Sorry.
Co55ie, the "Britain for the British" argument is flawed because, as I see it, you don't take a realistic account of who is British and who isn't. As has been said elsewhere, there are plenty of people in this country who can quite legitimately claim to be British but who many (and I'm not specifically accusing you here) "Britain for Brits" types would have on the next boat "home."
The fact that home is London or Manchester or Oxford or wherever seems to escape them.
No, I wouldn't rather see my tax money spent on mosques and illegal immigrants. But last time I looked, mosques and churches were funded by their devotees, not by the government anyway. I'm willing to be proven wrong on this, by the way.
I also don't want to see my tax money spent on self aggrandising codpieces like The Dome, on John Prescott (another self aggrandising codpiece) or on going to war to bolster Dubya's election chances. But I don't seem to have a choice right now.
SB
Co55ie, the "Britain for the British" argument is flawed because, as I see it, you don't take a realistic account of who is British and who isn't. As has been said elsewhere, there are plenty of people in this country who can quite legitimately claim to be British but who many (and I'm not specifically accusing you here) "Britain for Brits" types would have on the next boat "home."
The fact that home is London or Manchester or Oxford or wherever seems to escape them.
No, I wouldn't rather see my tax money spent on mosques and illegal immigrants. But last time I looked, mosques and churches were funded by their devotees, not by the government anyway. I'm willing to be proven wrong on this, by the way.
I also don't want to see my tax money spent on self aggrandising codpieces like The Dome, on John Prescott (another self aggrandising codpiece) or on going to war to bolster Dubya's election chances. But I don't seem to have a choice right now.
SB
27 January 2003, 03:54 PM
#45
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 680
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You have said it yourself Diablo the Law of the Land which is governed by the Monarchy of the Church of England or is Scotland now exempt from these various Laws . As I was under the impression that it still was then what is the point of your arguement ? I know you lot want your independance etc etc but until you get it if you get it then its hard cheese. I dont particularly like the current set-up any more than you but have to put up with it the same as yourself. I am an aetheist etc etc so why should I have to put up with the system anymore than any other faith, belief thats just the way the cookie crumbles.
Sbradley your sentimnets are exactly the same as my own, to define what makes a British citizen is a rather sesitive and grey area.
[Edited by co55ie - 1/27/2003 4:01:20 PM]
Sbradley your sentimnets are exactly the same as my own, to define what makes a British citizen is a rather sesitive and grey area.
[Edited by co55ie - 1/27/2003 4:01:20 PM]
27 January 2003, 04:00 PM
#46
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: £1.785m reasons not to be here :)
Posts: 6,095
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hits...head...against...wall.......
the fact she is the head of the Church of England (or Monarchy as you so elloquently put it) has no bearing on the laws we abide by.
I agree she is head of state
I agree she is head of C of E
I agree we abide by the Laws of our Land (whatever they are - I was simply regurgitating official text)
I am not, however, bound by the "rules" of the Church of England
She heads up both, but the Church and the State are not one and the same. Can you honestly not see that ??????
D
the fact she is the head of the Church of England (or Monarchy as you so elloquently put it) has no bearing on the laws we abide by.
I agree she is head of state
I agree she is head of C of E
I agree we abide by the Laws of our Land (whatever they are - I was simply regurgitating official text)
I am not, however, bound by the "rules" of the Church of England
She heads up both, but the Church and the State are not one and the same. Can you honestly not see that ??????
D
27 January 2003, 04:12 PM
#52
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: £1.785m reasons not to be here :)
Posts: 6,095
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ROLMAO @ MATTel
No, mate, that would only confuse the issue further.
So, technically, I don't abide by the same laws as Co55ie
Oh - and for the record, personally I don't want independance.
No, mate, that would only confuse the issue further.
So, technically, I don't abide by the same laws as Co55ie
Oh - and for the record, personally I don't want independance.
27 January 2003, 04:23 PM
#54
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Telboy..i hear what your saying.....but just cos these people dont like something it doesnt make it inherently wrong....besides which I would nt say Bradford has much of a skyline.......far too hilly 4 that...
27 January 2003, 04:25 PM
#55
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Telboy..i hear what your saying.....but just cos these people dont like something it doesnt make it inherently wrong....besides which I would nt say Bradford has much of a skyline.......far too hilly 4 that...
27 January 2003, 04:29 PM
#56
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Carnetix, Adams and Nitosport
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Diablo - What about the different way house buying is carried out? Is that okay to mention?
How about the Union flag? Should we try to explain why it isn't appropriate at an England only sporting event and is just plain silly when waved at an England vs Scotland football/rugby match?
[Edited by MATTeL - 1/27/2003 4:31:00 PM]
How about the Union flag? Should we try to explain why it isn't appropriate at an England only sporting event and is just plain silly when waved at an England vs Scotland football/rugby match?
[Edited by MATTeL - 1/27/2003 4:31:00 PM]
