What exactly interests people?  What purpose do the Royals actually serve anyway?  WHY, WHY, WHHHYYYYYY????\n\nPlease give me your opinions...
200064
I'm the American son of a British father, so I hold dual national status and carry both US and UK passports. I am thus able to view this from both perspectives, I think, so I'll toss in my two cents/pence.\n\nThe Royals are indeed pointless in terms of actual power and general usefulness (the Queen is only the titular head of state and wields no real power that I can see -- and quite right too!) and they cost the British taxpayer an absolute fortune to house, clothe, feed and protect in the almost obscene luxury and style to which they are accustomed. \n\nThat said, they also bring in mega tourist dollars/pounds/euros and all the media attention associated with prestige, pomp and circumstance. I sometimes wonder if they are more beloved in the former British colonies than at home. Odd, that. Still, there are very clearly many Britons who remain loyal and supportive of the titular monarchy, even as there are many who would love nothing better than to see them deposed and made to work for a living. It is quite a conundrum, isn't it?\n\nAs to your query about why they interest people so much, your guess is as good as mine. I expect it's because we live in such a celebrity culture (on both sides of the pond and in most other modern, westernized nations, as well) and people just can't get enough of this sort of thing. It goes without saying that I am made nauseous by this fact, but I am hardly representative of either my fellow countrymen or those in the land of my forebears. \n\nFor what it's worth, I think the much-maligned Prince Charles is actually an intelligent and generally decent man with sound ideas regarding the environment, architecture, etc. His father is a complete jackanapes who puts his foot in his mouth on a regular basis. The Queen herself is okay with me, albeit as pompous and dowdy as a modern monarch could even dream of being. I always liked the late Princess Diana and was sorry for her tragic loss. I like Fergie, as well. Prince William seems a decent and responsible sort but Harry is trouble and will doubtless remain so, his training at Sandhurst notwithstanding.\n\nI'll not bother with the rest of the Royals and I expect you have your own well-formed views in any case. I think the best and fairest thing to do would be for the British people to hold a referendum on the desirability of the monarchy, literally a popular vote with an up or down verdict. I confess I would be very intrigued to see the end result. Please keep me posted, ok?
155146
vote. What a pointless waste of time, get rid of this Head Of State rubbish, you need one democratically elected leader and that's that.  The Yanks do it, and it seems to work for them.  I guess you can tell I'm a Brit who wants a republic, but I wouldn't replace the queen with a president, just keep the role of PM
127940
The Prince is not a Muslim and neither am I. But he, like myself, apparently wishes to learn about the Muslim faith in order to understand the people. It is through learning that misunderstanding and prejudice can be defeated and peace is possible. He wants to promote a positive attitude between Muslims and his own faith, just as I do. Not all Muslims are Godforsaken animals like Osama Bin Ladin. What is wrong with the Prince being a diplomat? He will be King one day and if I were a British citizen, I would want our King to use diplomacy and to promote peace. When our Towers collapsed, it was then that I took an interest in Islam and Muslims because I just wanted to understand the culture. I knew in my heart that Bin Ladin was not a man of God and I did not wish to condemn all Muslims nor Islam. It would be a grave injustice to do so. I remain Christian and I now have many Muslim friends and they are wonderful, caring, peace loving people. I too believe that the cartoon of Muhammed should be condemned and that it was a horrible, disprespectful thing to do. How would the English feel if someone did something like that to the Queen? While I'm sure it's happened, I'm quite sure that it offended people. Even as an American, I would be offended if someone did that to the Royal family as I am of British descent. If you wish to judge the Prince, then look at both sides of the coin. I commend Charles and the people of England for not condemning all Muslims as so many around the world do. Education and positive relations between cultures are the key to peace in my book. To remain open minded is to remain open hearted and God knows we need that now.
674178
Crown Princess Victoria is very loved by the Swedish People, but that is her public image, how she really is, only people close to her can tell.\n\nDo I smell stalker?
451101
Is it fair that Prince William gets to be king and I don't?\n\nIs it fair to everyone else in the UK that their tax dollars go to support a family of unelected morons?\n\nLife isn't fair.  From where I'm sitting, Prince William is one of the luckiest of us.
639221
thank God I don't live in monarchy,because the only place it fits is in fairy tales.\nI always look at Kings and queens and say to myself, aren't they just useless..............?
226992
Hell, yes! Royalty and hereditary titles. I get fed up with these titled muppets moaning because life isn't like it was in the 15th century. They receive too many tax exemptions. have too many privileges and serve little purpose. \nHaving said that, what would we do with their stately homes and a number of un-employed lords and ladies post-revolution? The houses could be re-used for the benefit of the community. The aristocracy could be encouraged to seek work like the rest of us.\nI can't see that we would lose much if we didn't have royalty or aristocracy.
252395
The continued existence of the "royal" family, is a way for he British people to hold on to an institution that has been a part of the history of their country for hundreds of years. Its figurehead status aside, it strengthens the pride of the average citizen and re-establishes patriotism
337076
I don't really consider the Queen or Royal family to be "in power" as it is a purely ceremonial role nowadays.\n\nI really don't have any time for the Royal family as I consider them an irrelevant soap opera although I am happy to just ignore them if they are around.
437930
Tomkat's not even royalty! They'll have their day or two in the presses, but no one's going to produce memorabilia-t-shirts, mugs, plates, stamps etc etc etc to their honour!\nJust wait till the British youngsters or one of the Swedes marry, that'll blow the presses!
556898
Yesterday's newspaper reported that it currently costs the British people $70 million dollars a year to maintain the Monarchy.\n\nConsidering the fact that the Monarchy plays no role in running the British Government, and makes no decisions or policy whatsoever, I think it's high time the British people dissolve the Monarchy and spend their money on ANYTHING better.\n\nPerhaps they should spend the money on paving the grass at Wimbledon with asphalt so they can finally have a more meaningful tennis tournament on hard-court that fairly decides the best player.
416345
she had 2 go.\nshe was about 2 marry a Muslim.\nthe royal family would have never stood 4 it.\nthe future king of England having Muslim half-brothers and sisters!\nthat and she was only a baby incubator 4 Charles, wasn't she?\nhe had his shacking up with Camilla in the pipe-line 4 a long long time.  he always knew Diana would cramp his style.\nmore reasons 4 her 2 go than letting her stay.\nit'll never b fully investigated, not properly.\n2 many people will lose than gain.
111984
who are these people, are they kids.. ?\n\nGEEZ why do poeple post such weak questions without the friggin details man!!!\n\nBTW\nthanks for the 2 points
262715
you know what?  F all the yankee fans who are doggin on the royals.  i seem to remember a period in the 80's where your team was at the BOTTOM of the league.  paybacks are a bitch.  oh, and by the way yankees, how many world series have you won in the past five years with all that money?  KC has horrible ownership and does not use the shared revenues well at all.  but guess what.  kauffman stadium is great, seats are cheap, and if ever the royals beat the yanks in a series, who comes out wishing smith and wesson had streetside vendors?  in answer to the question, no.  the royals are one of the worst teams in the majors.  but they still go out, they still play, and i'm proud of that.
659276
How much money do they generate in tourist dollars??? Do you remember Princess Diana's funeral and the days leading up to it???Remember the flowers??? Do you remember the recent death of HRH the Queen Mother? Do you rember all the Royal Weddings, even the most recent between Prince Charles and Camillia? Even when no Royal function is on, there are things like "The Changing of the Guard at Buckingham Palace", the many events surrounding Royal tradition...even visitations to the Bloody Tower and seeing the Crown Jewels. Yearly we are talking Millions...with or without a major Royal Function taking place...thier mere presense generates cash like no other individual action in the UK. Although the upcoming Olympics might generate more cash for a bit, it will also generate more money still because with or without the games...the Royal Family will still be there.\n\nGod Save the Queen!!!\n\nBp. David
215074
The monarchy has to end. It seems they are only here for tradition and nothing else. Sod off for all I care! Cheers!!
534468
Kings and Queens of which country??\n\nIn the olden days in some countries even brothers or cousins would seek to wrest the throne from each other.\n\nMany years ago the passage of the Monarchy became more civilised, following normal Line of Succession. Since 1700/1701 the Line of Succession follows that set down in the Act of Settlement as recently revised.\n\n>Can Royalty be evicted into the streets and some one else rule?\n\nWell, not necessarily into the streets. Just check what actually happened in Russia about 1918.\n\nAnd it might be said that "William the Conqueror" (also known by less flattering names) did take the Throne of England by conquest and crowned himself as King.\n\nUsually, though, there is an orderly succession. This is good. It provides stability for the country. Unlike countries who have a new head of state every four or eight years.\n\nThe UK's Royal Family has been in the "business" for over 1,000 years.