zlacker

>>xd+(OP)
Time to end on a high? Shall we just abandon this whole monarchy thing and time to flip over to a republic and leave the much revered queen as the last ever monarch of the UK?

Seems like Scotland is going to go independent, and if Scotland do Wales will only be a matter of time so may as well just can it now?

>>mattlo+N7
Yes! Let's push this as hard as possible. Monarchies are an affront to all Enlightenment ideals and belong in the history books.

>>david9+Z8
Are they?

Elizabeth nor Charles are claiming devine right. They are a unfiying vestige of times past, providing as she did a human constant, an embodiment of the Commonwealth.

So long as their heredity isn't overtly providing them the ability or write or enforce law, it does not seem an affront to democracy.

>>unethi+9a
The royal prerogative includes the powers to appoint and dismiss ministers, regulate the civil service, issue passports, declare war, make peace, direct the actions of the military, and negotiate and ratify treaties, alliances, and international agreements.

While Elizabeth has CHOSEN to not use these powers much, any future monarch can. Just look at the U.S. in the last 6 years to see what happens when a country relies more on historical norms rather than law.

>>kahrl+oc
> The royal prerogative includes the powers to ...

Not really. In practice these powers belong to parliament and the monarch performs a merely ceremonial role; actions are performed in his or her name but not at her behest. In the English constitution parliament is sovereign and the monarch acts on its instructions.