SandyCromarty Posted August 10, 2019 Share Posted August 10, 2019 An Independent Scotland seems to be more and more possible, I've read that the Queen has a claim to be Scotlands Head of State when Independance is gained. Personally if this is the case I would be absolutely strongly against this, but I am aware that there are Scots who would welcome the Windsors and their financial greed. Thoughts please. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EH75 Posted August 10, 2019 Share Posted August 10, 2019 Off with their heads. Seriously though. Independence first, Republic later. This seems seem as easier sell to folk for some reason so fine. Baby steps. 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ira Gaines Posted August 10, 2019 Share Posted August 10, 2019 Just now, EH75 said: Off with their heads. Seriously though. Independence first, Republic later. This seems seem as easier sell to folk for some reason so fine. Baby steps. This is how I see it as well. Personally I want no part of the monarchy but I'd want any Yes campaign to stay WELL clear of the subject. In the list of important matters, it's waaaaayyyyy down the list. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dee_62 Posted August 10, 2019 Share Posted August 10, 2019 Yep. Separate issues. Get one out of the way and decide on the other at a later date. Personally, and won’t be a popular comment on these forums, I’ve no problem with the royals as “head of state” in an independent Scotland. If the alternative is to elect a politician for an extended period - no thanks. Anyone seeking that kind of office would annoy me intensely. Maybe best to go with no one. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirty dingus Posted August 10, 2019 Share Posted August 10, 2019 Keep Lizzy on till she pops her clogs then gently move away from a hereditary monarchy system by shooting Lizzie's left overs and putting their heads on spikes on a walk of shame along Edminston drive. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doulikefish Posted August 10, 2019 Share Posted August 10, 2019 Yip Off with their heads. Seriously though. Independence first, Republic later. This seems seem as easier sell to folk for some reason so fine. Baby steps. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D Angelo Barksdale Posted August 10, 2019 Share Posted August 10, 2019 Personally, I'd be up for seizing the Crown Estates the day after a Yes vote. It'll probably take a few years after independence is required to eventually get rid of them though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeTillEhDeh Posted August 10, 2019 Share Posted August 10, 2019 An Independent Scotland seems to be more and more possible, I've read that the Queen has a claim to be Scotlands Head of State when Independance is gained. Personally if this is the case I would be absolutely strongly against this, but I am aware that there are Scots who would welcome the Windsors and their financial greed. Thoughts please.Republic please. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victor von Doom Posted August 10, 2019 Share Posted August 10, 2019 28 minutes ago, Henderson to deliver ..... said: Personally, I'd be up for seizing the Crown Estates the day after a Yes vote. I see you've moderated your iconoclastic and treasonous tone since taking the name of Stanton in vain last night. I mind seeing an interview with whoever was first-in-line for a claim to being head of the House of Stuart thirty-odd years ago. If you'd stuck a black wig on the man and put him next to a portrait of Charles II, you'd've sworn it was the same person. I'm sure there are folk in France, Italy or Spain who have a claim and would be interested in the vacancy. I mean, at least one of LeGuen, Sauzee, Landi, Bonetti, Calderon didnae do toooo badly when put in charge of important things in Scotland and Joe Dolce may yet win things at Killie. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suspect Device Posted August 10, 2019 Share Posted August 10, 2019 1 hour ago, This time Perthshirebell said: Learn to spell independence first. I agree with the two prior replies. Independence first, then we can elect President Alexander Salmond as the leader of the Independent republic of Scotland. Unless he's in jail. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SandyCromarty Posted August 10, 2019 Author Share Posted August 10, 2019 1 hour ago, This time Perthshirebell said: Learn to spell independence first. I agree with the two prior replies. Independence first, then we can elect President Alexander Salmond as the leader of the Independent republic of Scotland. How did the Hair Splitters Convention turn out for you this year. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suspect Device Posted August 10, 2019 Share Posted August 10, 2019 2 minutes ago, SandyCromarty said: How did the Hair Splitters Convention turn out for you this year. More spelling Nazi than hair splitter. I'm splitting hairs though. And if we bring back execution for the royals after independence, we would be splitting heirs. I'll get my coat. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SandyCromarty Posted August 10, 2019 Author Share Posted August 10, 2019 48 minutes ago, Henderson to deliver ..... said: Personally, I'd be up for seizing the Crown Estates the day after a Yes vote. It'll probably take a few years after independence is required to eventually get rid of them though. And therein lies one of the problems in that the Reigning Monarch owns the Crown Estates. The Monarch owns the Crown Estates and the stipulation was that when George the Third gave them up for a type of Civil List a future Monarch could not gain financially from the Estates, since then every one of the wankers has fought to get the monies from the Government which they were denied, until that is this one last year finally after much badgering of the Government finally received £15 million with an inbuilt condition that the monies she will receive year on year will not be less than the payment the previous year, greedy b*****ds they are. The question is that on Independence will the English Monarch become just another Landowner in Scotland or do they qualify as Head of State by other means, including the Crown Estates. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurkst Posted August 10, 2019 Share Posted August 10, 2019 2 hours ago, SandyCromarty said: An Independent Scotland seems to be more and more possible, I've read that the Queen has a claim to be Scotlands Head of State when Independance is gained. Personally if this is the case I would be absolutely strongly against this, but I am aware that there are Scots who would welcome the Windsors and their financial greed. Thoughts please. Well she's still head of state of the long since independent Canada, Australia and New Zealand so I can't see why we'd initially be any different. And given that one of the kingdoms in the United Kingdom is Scotland with a royal bloodline stretching back to the 9th century it could be seen to be historically significant for Scotland to remain a monarchy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BawWatchin Posted August 10, 2019 Share Posted August 10, 2019 There are two acts to consider. The 1707 Act of Union and the 1603 Union of the Crowns. Independence abolishes the 1707 act, but not the 1603 act. Although it's hard to see the 1603 act remaining in place for too long after. Once auld Lizzy pops her clogs the games a boggy. Don't think Willy or Harry are interested in taking over the throne. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donathan Posted August 10, 2019 Share Posted August 10, 2019 Independent Scotland should move towards an elected President but the first president should absolutely not be rapey Eck. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BawWatchin Posted August 10, 2019 Share Posted August 10, 2019 2 minutes ago, Donathan said: Independent Scotland should move towards an elected President but the first president should absolutely not be rapey Eck. Or we could just establish our own monarchy under the queen of Scots. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted August 10, 2019 Share Posted August 10, 2019 Independent Scotland should move towards an elected President but the first president should absolutely not be rapey Eck.I'd say we should make the president an entirely ceremonial role and avoid giving it to politicians. President Peter mullan. Or Chris Hoy. Let them represent us for a few years at a time - with some influence but no direct political power. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richey Edwards Posted August 10, 2019 Share Posted August 10, 2019 6 minutes ago, Donathan said: Independent Scotland should move towards an elected President but the first president should absolutely not be rapey Eck. It should be Steve Clarke. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Connolly Posted August 10, 2019 Share Posted August 10, 2019 26 minutes ago, pandarilla said: I'd say we should make the president an entirely ceremonial role and avoid giving it to politicians. President Peter mullan. Or Chris Hoy. Let them represent us for a few years at a time - with some influence but no direct political power. I like this idea. Not Peter Mullan though, he's a fucking w**k. Keep the monarchy until Lizzie pops off, then tax the f**k out of Charles 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.