Should monarchies still have control in there country and why?
361039
Monarchies were the civic of choice for centuries, because they are effective. That is why we have a President, if you read documents like the Federalist Papers, the framers were afraid a democracy like ours would be ineffective because of how long it would take for us to make law and come to a decesion. And, because of all the different sides having to settle for one solution, they though most laws would be bogged down by ineffectiveness. (And isn't it true? Look at the imigration issue)\n\nOf course I'm not advocated Monarchy. A country's people choose their government, and if most of the people feel oppressed by their government than their will naturually be revolution, especially in this day and age when the only remaining super power loves forming new democracys across the globe.
453891
Its the reading of world history, abuse of power & molestation of peoples' & even the human rights were the ordrer of Autocracy & Monarchism. Many examples of the recent past stand there in support of the records in history.  \nSo, democratic system is the better choice that can stop the emergence of Autocratic regime & Monarchism which has alway been seen as curse to the people. \nYes, God is always there for any system we follow or we don't.
669021
Democracy is direct rule by a population through an elected leader.  Monarchy is a system in which the king could potentially not do what the public wants.
392874
The United Kingdom is a constitutional monarchy.
1054940
BEFORE IT WAS A KING'S RULE---U KNOW TERRITORY AND STUFF--THE WORD GOVERNMENT ARISES ONLY WHEN THE PEOPLE HAVE A SAY IN SOMETHING HEARD OF DEMOCRACY THAT IS WHAT WE R HAVING NOW
619604
No !\nIt is outdated and a waste of our public money now,\nAll they are now is a figure head of Britain without any powers they are a puppet monarchy.\nWe elect our own government without a say from the monarchy\nBut still our leaders out of respect have to ask the monarchy if it can dissolve Parliament. It is a Farce\nIn today's Britain we have enough people sponging off the state without a family that is so privileged that it doesn't know what it like to live month to month.\nIt is time that all this tradition is done away with once and for all.
810247
Assuming you are referring to Jordan and not Saudi Arabia, Abdullah is the king; so, well... unless he is assassinated, he will stay in power.
251710
Thats it Control.\nThis is to fullfil need of the society. Like in the ancient kindoms in Europ when the people is to large to have sustenance he make some law to forbid s ex and the having only with the permission of the king (F ucking  U nder C onsentiment of the K ing) Remember that the catolic church is the right hand of the king and then have rules of conduct to crontol the people.\nIn modern times is much cheaper and "easy" to be moral than spend in a campaing that tell the youngs the effects of drugs,or to be carefull about AIDs or other deseases.\nThe rule saids Do not kill but not said "why".\nIn oriental ideologi because you must repect all living thing because all causes have an effect with the same intensity "but" in the inverse way.
586902
Dear Friend,\n\nPlease see:\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchies#Current_nation_monarchies\n\nThere are 44 active countries which are one or another form of monarchy.\n\nYour Friend,\nFrancesois
1181825
Goverments should do it. They are set by the people to take care of the people? Unless of course you live in America.
514420
At the moment it is a democracy/constitutional monarchy, where the queen is the head of state but does not wield any power.\n\nPreviously Britain has been ruled by an absolute monarchy within a feudal system as well as having Oliver Cromwell, who, I guess, would be described as a president at a time when representational democracy did not really happen (1641?)
323570
It will be the same,cos both are the same old politics,king gave them more than 1 years to rule.but they are failed and didint control the govt and failed to stop the voilence so thats why king overcome,but still its unwise of a king to over cos still people diidnt like him too.
779840
It's hard to do so, I do believe that there are many responsible countries out there that are really trying, but not every country is a responsible one, some counties are ruled by selfish rulers who's only concern is power that they can acquire for them selves. I think it best if counties are ruled by governments that allow their citizens to have a voice, when we can get the world on board with that I think we might have a chance.
977628
The monarchy is larglely symbolic, so what does it matter if she is there or not?  As a matter of historical pride I don't think it would be a good thing to get rid of her.  They still have a democracy so what is the problem?
851497
i do not think so huracane this has been talked about so many times and everytime it is brough up there is a group of people who just want to keep the kingdoom . i personally think they are a waste of money which could be use in making a lot of good in the world , even with all the charities they support .\n\n by the way i also heard about what the other answerer said about charles renoucing to the crown and i also know that willian is way more popular than him . people seem to like him a lot so it will be determinant in their future . so my answer is not this will not happen , at least not for now .
734435
The title "Prime Minister" refers to the days when the Prime Minister's job was to minister to the Monarch who ruled the country. It's actually quite a derogatory title in its way! Nowadays, whilst the Prime Minister may be at the head of the government, ruling the country, they're still technically the Queen's Prime Minister, which is why they have to report to her on the political situation of the country. Technically the Queen still has the right to dissolve her government if she chooses, and the Prime Minister is technically still under her rule. I'm sure the country would be happy if she were to sack Tony Blair, dissolve the government and call a general election, but that's not really going to happen. It's more of a keeping of the traditions, because the monarch wouldn't use those powers, democracy being as important a principle to them as it is to the rest of the country.
822784
The above question is neither for or against the Monarchy, it is asking your opinion!! So not jumping to conclusions on whether or not YOU personally want rid of them I shan't insult you as I answer. As a previous answer states the vast array of anti-monarchy answer show just how many people have "sour grapes" Things like: Why should people be born into wealth? and: Why should they get to spend vast sums of money on frivolous things when they have never worked a day in their lives? Easy answers to those two really- the first is just jealous people who are irked because they weren't born into wealth. The second is slightly more worrying. The people who say this don't seem to have a grasp on reality, everyday there is some TRASH written in tabloids and rags all the country over slurring the royal family or revealing some dirty secret. Everyday the Queen has to listen to inane country legislation and discussing it, some days more important than inane. In times of rememberance and worry the Queen is there-someone to look up to and listen to-indeed someone to respect- the countless charities that exsist solely because of Her? RSPCA? RSPCC?  The thousands She has raised for charities? The millions upon millions She and her family bring to THIS country. Which by the way is HERS'! We were given the right to rule the country as a democracy-we were not GIVEN the country! And why should we be? Why shouldn't somebody be born into Her Impossible position? The weight of a country on your shoulders every day the stress of constantly being within the publics focus. If all this isn't a job that is worth more than it's weight in gold I don't know what is. Besides all that there are millions of other roles that She fills that I don't even know about. Things like being able to dissolve parliment and dissmiss ministers. The powers that she has over govertment may not have been used-yet.but they are there and very real (reassuring yes?)  Her father when crowned was known for saying it was the worst thing ever to happen to his Very happy family why? Because it is hard work being the Head of State, and he knew what this meant for one of his daughters and so on forever down the line. Constant Hard Work. Better somebody be born ito this position than fighting and striving (you might say lusting ) after such a position of power- somebody with an agenda, their own ideas, not a neutral source to look to when these "somebodies" start getting unreasonable. The Queen should stay She more than works for all that is Hers and this land is indeed still hers, rightfully so!!!