 | | | 
29.04.2011, 16:18
| Banned | | Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Graubünden
Posts: 636
Groaned at 69 Times in 38 Posts
Thanked 421 Times in 255 Posts
| | Re: Duke beats Prince? | Quote: |  | | | No, they are British citizens, as noted in British passports. They ae also, anachronistically, subjects of HRH. | | | | | Do you just love to argue, or is it the friday feeling? Source, before you ask for it. | Quote: |  | | | The Queen has the right to rule: the people of Britain are not citizens, but subjects of the monarch. Most public servants must swear an oath of loyalty, or make an affirmation of their loyalty, to the crown. | | | | | | Quote: |  | | | But royal prerogative is the subject of controversy, because it confers on governments the power to make major decisions without recourse to parliament. When Edward Heath brought Britain into the EEC in 1972, parliament was not consulted until afterwards. Similarly, Margaret Thatcher used royal prerogative to go to war in the Falklands in 1982.
The Queen has two individual powers that could cause a political crisis if they were ever exercised. She may refuse a government's request to dissolve parliament and call an election, if she believes a government can legitimately be formed. She also has the right to choose the prime minister: a formality in the case of a clear majority, but potentially controversial after an inconclusive general election. This almost happened in February 1974, when Labour failed to win an overall majority but the Conservatives considered power-sharing with the Liberals. | | | | | | 
29.04.2011, 16:21
|  | Forum Legend | | Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Fribourg
Posts: 9,295
Groaned at 237 Times in 154 Posts
Thanked 12,188 Times in 5,300 Posts
| | Re: Duke beats Prince? | Quote: | |  | | | Well sort of. She creates them anew each time. The Dukedom of York has never been passed on and has always been recreated by the monarch. The monarch can create them, modify them or invent totally new titles and lands as they see fit. | | | | | .... but, this (from at least Victoria - may be even before) was reserved and traditionally used for the second son of The Monarch -- but was not inherited, but bestowed, each time - usually at the time of their marriage.
| 
29.04.2011, 16:23
| | Re: Duke beats Prince? | Quote: | |  | | | .... but, this (from at least Victoria - may be even before) was reserved and traditionally used for the second son of The Monarch -- but was not inherited, but bestowed, each time - usually at the time of their marriage. | | | | | Not true. Holders just happened to die or become monarch. They could have passed the title on, they just didn't.
| 
29.04.2011, 16:31
|  | Moddy Wellies | | Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: North Yorkshire
Posts: 8,729
Groaned at 53 Times in 47 Posts
Thanked 9,942 Times in 3,654 Posts
| | Re: Duke beats Prince? | Quote: | |  | | | Source, before you ask for it. | Quote: |  | | | The Queen has the right to rule: the people of Britain are not citizens, but subjects of the monarch. Most public servants must swear an oath of loyalty, or make an affirmation of their loyalty, to the crown. | | | | | | | | | | That's just plain wrong. | Quote: |  | | | On 1 January 1983, upon the coming into force of the British Nationality Act 1981, every Citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies became either a British Citizen, British Dependent Territories Citizen or British Overseas Citizen.
The use of the term "British subject" was discontinued for all persons who fell into these categories, or who had a national citizenship of any other part of the Commonwealth.
....
British citizens are not British subjects under the 1981 Act. The only circumstance where a person may be both a British subject and British citizen simultaneously is a case where a British subject connected with Ireland (s. 31 of the 1981 Act) acquires British citizenship by naturalisation or registration. In this case only, British subject status is not lost upon acquiring British citizenship. | | | | | My source is better than your source | 
29.04.2011, 16:33
| | Re: Duke beats Prince? | Quote: | |  | | | I don't know what you mean by "Tampered with". The succession is sound. Obviously I'd pledge allegiance if this guy ever claimed the throne. But I'll take what I can get for now. | | | | |
The previous article was fairly clear. But here is another one, as you ask. Personally I think our Queen is a wonderful example, amazing for her 80 years. But my opinion does not matter a hoot - despite my having sworn my allegiance to her officially all those years ago.
Britain´s Real Monarch http://www.serendipity.li/more/monarch.htm
Henry Tudor VII's claim to the Throne was very dodgy indeed.
---------------------------------------------
Last edited by Odile; 29.04.2011 at 16:43.
Reason: please do not copy entire articles/website, just sample and link. Thanks
| 
29.04.2011, 16:38
| | Re: Duke beats Prince? | Quote: | |  | | | Source, before you ask for it. | | | | | Um, just a small flaw in your argument -- that link leads to The Guardian. Do you have a credible source? | Quote: | |  | | | | | | | | Indeed. Any source is better than a rabidly left-wing British newspaper.
My source is page 3 of my British passport.
| 
29.04.2011, 16:39
| Banned | | Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Graubünden
Posts: 636
Groaned at 69 Times in 38 Posts
Thanked 421 Times in 255 Posts
| | Re: Duke beats Prince? | Quote: | |  | | | | | | | | Not claiming to be an expert or have thorough knowledge on this subject apart from what I read and heard.
It seems like a case of Guardian Vs Wikipedia | 
29.04.2011, 16:42
|  | Forum Veteran | | Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Die Südkürve
Posts: 1,790
Groaned at 11 Times in 10 Posts
Thanked 1,030 Times in 552 Posts
| | Re: Duke beats Prince? | Quote: | |  | | | Do you just love to argue, or is it the friday feeling? Source, before you ask for it. | | | | | If the Queen has this legal right, and a lawyer friend told you about it, surely they could also provide the name of the Act / Directive / legislation where this power is given.
I'd rather trust my own passport than an article out of The Naugriad.
| 
29.04.2011, 16:56
| Banned | | Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Graubünden
Posts: 636
Groaned at 69 Times in 38 Posts
Thanked 421 Times in 255 Posts
| | Re: Duke beats Prince? | Quote: | |  | | | If the Queen has this legal right, and a lawyer friend told you about it, surely they could also provide the name of the Act / Directive / legislation where this power is given.
I'd rather trust my own passport than an article out of The Naugriad. | | | | | Hmmm... I am not sure if a Legal Act / Directive / Legislation would be applicable on a Monarch, is Monarch not above the Law?
Is Yahoo trustworthy source?
Citizenship bit could be a porkie by the Guardian, but not forgetting Passports are a recent development, which are more like a legal contract/agreement between the person and the State/issuing authority.
Hence the illegal immigrants dispose off their passports, making it difficult (even impossible) to deport them.
| 
29.04.2011, 17:35
| | Re: Duke beats Prince?
Let's settle the original question once and for all. This is a tough one. Duke - "Duke" was a nickname, not his real name
- Composed more than 1,000 pieces
- 8 US/US R&B number 1 hit singles
- 12 Grammy Awards
- Made the cover of Time Magazine
- Had hits across 5 decades
- Performed across 6 decades
- Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize
- Had a coin issued in his honour
- Never heard of Prince
- Cool. Really, really cool.
Prince - That's his real name. Had a silly symbol/nickname for a while
- Composed at least 500 and maybe more than 1,000 songs
- 9 US/US R&B number 1 hit singles
- 7 Grammy Awards
- Plenty of artists took time to cover his songs
- Had hits across 4 decades (so far)
- Performed across 5 decades (so far)
- Sold more than 100 million records -- who needs a Pulitzer Prize?
- Probably owns more coins than Duke ever did
- Lists Duke as one of his influences
- A bit effeminate, really, isn't he?
Hmmmm. Given the different eras in which they amassed these achievements, I'm going to award this to ... Duke. So, maybe Duke beats Prince after all.
| 
29.04.2011, 17:40
| Banned | | Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Graubünden
Posts: 636
Groaned at 69 Times in 38 Posts
Thanked 421 Times in 255 Posts
| | Re: Duke beats Prince? | Quote: |  | | | Let's settle the original question once and for all. This is a tough one. Duke - "Duke" was a nickname, not his real name
- Composed more than 1,000 pieces
- 8 US/US R&B number 1 hit singles
- 12 Grammy Awards
- Made the cover of Time Magazine
- Had hits across 5 decades
- Performed across 6 decades
- Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize
- Had a coin issued in his honour
- Never heard of Prince
- Cool. Really, really cool.
Prince - That's his real name. Had a silly symbol/nickname for a while
- Composed at least 500 and maybe more than 1,000 songs
- 9 US/US R&B number 1 hit singles
- 7 Grammy Awards
- Plenty of artists took time to cover his songs
- Had hits across 4 decades (so far)
- Performed across 5 decades (so far)
- Sold more than 100 million records -- who needs a Pulitzer Prize?
- Probably owns more coins than Duke ever did
- Lists Duke as one of his influences
- A bit effeminate, really, isn't he?
Hmmmm. Given the different eras in which they amassed these achievements, I'm going to award this to ... Duke. So, maybe Duke beats Prince after all. | | | | | Stop trolling mate, you'll get banned if some Mod sees it.
| 
29.04.2011, 17:41
| | Re: Duke beats Prince?
Honest question gets an honest answer.
| 
29.04.2011, 17:57
|  | Forum Legend | | Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: romandie
Posts: 9,971
Groaned at 101 Times in 92 Posts
Thanked 9,106 Times in 4,522 Posts
| | Re: Duke beats Prince? | Quote: |  | | | Honest question gets an honest answer. | | | | | That would have worked had you not already answered the REAL duke vs prince question......
| 
29.04.2011, 20:49
| | Re: Duke beats Prince? | Quote: |  | | | Um, just a small flaw in your argument -- that link leads to The Guardian. Do you have a credible source?
Indeed. Any source is better than a rabidly left-wing British newspaper.
My source is page 3 of my British passport. | | | | | On page 4 of my recent British citizen's passport, it states in note 2: No right of abode in the United Kingdom derives from the status as British protected persons and British subjects
I am a citizen of the UK, but it looks as though if I was just a subject I would have no right to live in UK. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_citizenship "
British subjects (other than British subjects by virtue of a connection with the Republic of Ireland) and British protected persons lose British nationality upon acquiring any other form of nationality, whether British, Commonwealth or foreign. - These provisions do not apply to British citizens.
On 1 January 1983, upon the coming into force of the British Nationality Act 1981, every Citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies became either a British Citizen, British Dependent Territories Citizen or British Overseas Citizen.
The use of the term "British subject" was discontinued for all persons who fell into these categories, or who had a national citizenship of any other part of the Commonwealth. The category of "British subjects" now includes only those people formerly known as "British subjects without citizenship", and no other. In statutes passed before 1 January 1983, however, references to "British subjects" continue to be read as if they referred to "Commonwealth citizens".
| 
29.04.2011, 21:01
| | Re: Duke beats Prince? | Quote: | |  | | | On page 4 of my recent British citizen's passport, it states in note 2: No right of abode in the United Kingdom derives from the status as British protected persons and British subjects
I am a citizen of the UK, but it looks as though if I was just a subject I would have no right to live in UK. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_citizenship | | | | | Correct. For the right to live in the UK, one must be a British citizen or have the right to abode granted for some other reason (such as being born to a mother who was a British citizen)*.
Anyway, Duke beats Prince.
*Until relatively recently, a baby born to a father with British citizenship was entitled automatically to British citizenship, regardless of place of birth, but the same did not apply if it was the mother (only) who had British citizenship. In such cases, the permanent right of abode in the UK (but without other citizens' rights) was granted to the baby. This clearly sexist principle was amended in 1983, and now citizenship can be gained if either parent is a British citizen.
EDIT: It looks like the law has changed on this issue ...
Last edited by Guest; 29.04.2011 at 21:12.
| 
29.04.2011, 21:13
|  | Forum Legend | | Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somewhere special far away
Posts: 4,322
Groaned at 69 Times in 51 Posts
Thanked 7,190 Times in 2,662 Posts
| | Re: Duke beats Prince? | Quote: | |  | | | I have looked this up (not on EF though), but I don't quite get it... Can some one explain to this not very bright common person:
Is a Duke higher than a Prince? Why did Prince William become a Duke but then he will be a Prince again when his father becomes king.... 
Oh, and just so you know, if the right 60 people die then the UK (et al) will become part of Norway! Wouldn't that be fun? | | | | | and I suppose that there's still a claim to Spain and Holland too eh ? | 
29.04.2011, 22:51
|  | Forum Legend | | Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: romandie
Posts: 9,971
Groaned at 101 Times in 92 Posts
Thanked 9,106 Times in 4,522 Posts
| | Re: Duke beats Prince? | Quote: | |  | | | and I suppose that there's still a claim to Spain and Holland too eh ?  | | | | | Surprisingly, the Spanish claim only comes up when you've killed off 469 people ahead in the line of succession. However, the Spanish royals are pretty much excluded from taking over in the UK as they are Catholic. Catholics can't succeed to the British throne.
And for the Dutch royals to take over the UK they will need to kill off 867 people in line!
Basically I was really surprised how far up the succession list the King of Norway was. Who would've thunk it!?
It's useless but sort of fun information. A bit odd that "they"'ve gone through and created a line of succession that's more than 2000 people long! (And I'm not even on it!  ) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_of...British_throne | 
29.04.2011, 23:27
|  | Forum Legend | | Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Lugano
Posts: 32,617
Groaned at 2,593 Times in 1,850 Posts
Thanked 39,709 Times in 18,721 Posts
| | Re: Duke beats Prince? | Quote: | |  | | | Prince Albert?
Hurts like hell to begin with. | | | | | No, the first German King of England was George the 1st, and the rest are his descendants.
Tom
| 
29.04.2011, 23:34
|  | Senior Member | | Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Kanton Schwyz
Posts: 395
Groaned at 8 Times in 6 Posts
Thanked 335 Times in 178 Posts
| | Re: Duke beats Prince?
The Germans are well-represented:
England
Netherlands
Belgium
to name but a few
...
and we thought the Germans were not taking over Europe | 
29.04.2011, 23:54
|  | Forum Legend | | Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somewhere special far away
Posts: 4,322
Groaned at 69 Times in 51 Posts
Thanked 7,190 Times in 2,662 Posts
| | Re: Duke beats Prince?
Mia 
I was thinking the other way around.... since both Spain and Holland have had British queens right ?
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | | Thread Tools | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | All times are GMT +2. The time now is 17:45. | |