<p>
I am aware of the “unwritten constitution” thing. I just find that to be idiotic, and not a real constitution. There isn’t even a consensus on the state of this “constitution,” how to best change certain things, its validity, or how it fits with EU membership. They just call their laws and traditions an “unwritten constitution.” Plus, the idea of unalienable rights is entirely absent; Parliament (half of which is the House of LORDS) can do pretty much whatever it damn well pleases.</p>
<p>When I was in London last year I caught a glimpse of the Magna Carta at the British Library. Not that that particular copy is still legible.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The uses of “do” and “does” in this sentence are just brutal.</p>
<p>
I guess being ruled by a group of hereditary nobles was a step up from just one?</p>
<p>
Why did you point that out? It actually hurts.</p>
<p>The royal family have no power, their just a figure head. No royal family in Europe has full power, or some power. Now monarchs in the Middle East have complete power, just like the old days.</p>
<p>Hey, I found this thread from a [Twitter</a> link](<a href=“http://twitter.com/#!/ThisCouldBeHeav]Twitter”>http://twitter.com/#!/ThisCouldBeHeav). Seems pretty cool.</p>
<p>Ah CC, I was hoping people would understand what I meant to say and going back and editing wouldn’t be necessary.</p>
<p>My computer is down so I am posting on my phone. The mobile version of this site makes editing a pain. I was hoping everyone would that let that one go since the intention is still pretty obvious.</p>
<p>But alas, the grammar police are out today.</p>
<p>Why do people care about Paris Hilton?</p>
<p>It’s true, the British monarchy is a constitutional one. Yes, they’re figure-heads and symbolic of British ‘culture’ which has evolved over the years. And the hereditary peers thing, I believe they’re less then 90 because in 96 or 97? they abolished with the Hereditary Peers Act and only a few are left, whom will soon die out. </p>
<p>Monarchy in the Middle-East however is absolute. In Saudi Arabia, all of the politicians i.e Ministers/Ambassadors and Diplomats are all Princes or Nobility who have some kind of link with the Royal Family, the House of Saud. </p>
<p>On the note though, Monarchy may seem oh so 1700’s, but I guess it’s evolved into a sort of ‘British’ thing. Not many people care but people remain fascinated with the so called Royal family, whom, at the end of the day are people that have been granted a special mystique due to their titles and status above all. I personally don’t think the British Royal Family as an institution and firm should be granted the privilege that it has been over the years. The idea that one family is above all does seem sort of backward, and 1700’s. </p>
<p>But back to the Royal Wedding - I just woke up this morning and the first thing I see on the TV as soon as I turned it on is more about Kate’s dress. Even respected political analysts are talking about it. It just makes me think sometimes how the British media functions…</p>
<p>I care. Yup!!</p>
<p>Sent from my SPH-D700 using CC App</p>