Her views, outside of her formal duties, are hers alone and of no relevance in the political sphere. So her influence is nondescript and of no sway in any political sense.
Poll: The EU Referendum: How Will You Vote? (March Poll)
- Thread starter Burnsy2023
- Start date
- Status
Her views, outside of her formal duties, are hers alone and of no relevance in the political sphere. So her influence is nondescript and of no sway in any political sense.
The Palace denied too. The truth is known, the story was made up, there's no proof no evidence. I had a phone conversation with the Queen and she told me she was a huge EU fan. I guess we'll never find out the truth on this one.
They would deny it wouldn't they? The monarch has to be politically neutral in public, in private who knows what she said. Like I mentioned earlier, we'll probably never get to know the truth behind this story.
But the fact Remains.
If she did announce which side she actually supports then it'd be a Slam Dunk for that side !
She is the head of a theocracy (you didn't even know the UK is one last week)
Since when has the UK been a theocracy? To my knowledge only The Vatican and North Korea qualify. Next.
Remember, being racist is OK as long as it is a joke...
I do find it interesting that otherwise left wing posters will fall back on the same sorts of arguments used by the likes of BNP on how British someone is or isn't.
Actually that's a very good point.
And yes, I think 'isms' (racism, sexism etc) are ok within the context of a joke (by a comedian) rather than the same point being put forward as a belief (By a BNP member). Because one is meant as a humourous comment without belief or serious intention and the other is believed and intended.
Now, how that joke is perceived and received by the audience will differ based on the receivers initial prejudices.
A study on the effects of racist humour has been done and it found
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/humor-sapiens/201107/does-racist-humor-promote-racism
So effectively, the acceptablity of discrimination within a joke is extremely contextualised, dependant upon whether the discrimination of the group is a socially accepted norm (Racists, Criminals) or not (Gays, Women) and then it's also dependant on the audience. If you are telling a racist or homophobic joke to a group of BNP supporters, you are more likely to reinforce their views and actions than telling the same joke to say a group of Guardian readers who will not have their beliefs changed and will see it just as humour.
Since when has the UK been a theocracy? To my knowledge only The Vatican and North Korea qualify. Next.
All the talk of leave voters being not educated in this thread, oh the irony
After all, the Queen is head of the Church of England and head-of-state, and head of the armed forces, and delegates royal prerogative to parliament and the executive. Our national anthem is dedicated to a mix of "God" and "Queen" Mix in with this the fact that our upper chamber have 'Lords Spiritual' from our ecclesiastical hierarchy, to what extent might it be said that Britain isn't theocracy?
Rubbish, she has massive influence especially with the older population, if she was to be allowed to go with one side or the other that side would win.
When people start to explain what makes a joke a joke, I think we've lost the punch line and the humour. Jokes by definition are flippant and glib and should a person decide to take offense then that is on them and them alone.
Ifs and buts again. Her views on such matters are private and so arguing the toss my friend is futile. Lets move on.
Ifs and buts again. Her views on such matters are private and so arguing the toss my friend is futile. Lets move on.
Did you vote in or out?
Why do you care what I voted for? You don't know me personally so my views to you are irrelevant. I'm just another faceless poster on these forums.
Why do you care what I voted for? You don't know me personally so my views to you are irrelevant. I'm just another faceless poster on these forums.
Your an IN voter them. We used to able to see who voted for who. A clamp down on that now!
"Says police responded 93,000 times to violence in refugee centres last year"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...cks-violence-radicalisation-rise-further.html
It's only going to get worse. Glad they are in Germany, and I hope they stay there for good.
Associate
- Joined
- 12 May 2012
- Posts
- 515
So the islamification of europe is true
COVER UP: These European leaders oppose Islamification -- but media won't report it
http://www.therebel.media/why_do_we...eaders_who_do_not_support_islamic_immigration
This is why we britons must have full control of our borders... Britons must summon the courage to leave the European Union
COVER UP: These European leaders oppose Islamification -- but media won't report it
http://www.therebel.media/why_do_we...eaders_who_do_not_support_islamic_immigration
This is why we britons must have full control of our borders... Britons must summon the courage to leave the European Union
I don't get it. The Czechs and Hungarians are the good guys or the bad guys? Their leaders are against Islam but their people come to the UK to steal jobs.
I don't get it. The Czechs and Hungarians are the good guys or the bad guys? Their leaders are against Islam but their people come to the UK to steal jobs.
No one has ever suggested that Czech or Hungarian nationals are bad people, if we vote to Leave and get rid of free movement I expect that there will still be many, many immigrants to the UK from these countries - we have massive skills shortages in some areas and training up UK workers isn't going to address it initially. The difference would be however that we would be deciding who will be coming to the UK, not the EU.
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
Why do you keep completely missing the point that 'refugees' (I use this term lightly as exactly how many of them are genuine refugees is debatable and I'm certainly not on the 'let everyone come here!' side) are by their very nature NON EU CITIZENS and therefore they are hardly going to cease to be an issue if we leave the EU? Canada has refugees and is not in the EU for example.
And don't roll out the rubbish 'They'll all get passports and come here' line again after it was categorically demonstrated to be rubbish last time you used it.
We managed to opt out of receiving an EU migrant quota despite being a member of the EU, remember. These are two rather different issues that should not be merged - the refugee crisis is not relevant to the In/Out EU decision. It's not going away irrespective of what we vote to do.
Associate
- Joined
- 12 May 2012
- Posts
- 515
+ 1 Exactly... 100% correct this is why we must take this once in a lifetime opportunity to break from the EU. Britain will still need skilled foreign workers but we will have better tighter & tougher control.
We will have better more lucrative trade deals with whoever we want... without being restricted by Europe.
Do we really want to be a part of a federal united states of Europe... make no mistake... this is where Europe is heading!
My only concern is what would happen to Britain's financial services if it leaves the eu. This is the only part that this is the only part that doesn't sit well with me?
Last edited:
- Status