Isn't it time that the Royals, Politicians and Cabinet Ministers. put their Sons & Daughters?
929073
It would be a great idea but it will never happen! The same as the rest of us being given the nuclear shelters the government have to save them in time of a nuclear attack!! It's as though they think themselves a superior race.... Apparantly it's 'because we need leaders in the event of a nuclear war' (So nothing to do with them being 'chicken sh*ts who'll run for cover at the first sign of attack then)!!\nCan you imagine the aftermath of such an attack......you survive and you along with a few other people and have to procreate to save mankind, but the only women available are, Cherie Blair, Margaret Beckett and Camilla? Gross!....I think I'd have to shoot myself!! Sorry mankind....there is such a thing as asking too much of someone!!
780539
Never.  It's the principle.  It's tradition and it isn't a bad one.  The only exception is for royalty (legitimate royalty, not princesses).
983709
Do you mean because of inter-racial relationships?  I would think it would take many, many generations to happen, so not soon enough.
673863
well i am not a very big supporter of monarchy no matter whatever country it is in.\nbut you guys in britain should be glad that your royal family atleast doesnt messes with the government and its running.\n\nthough i agree with you that spending so much money on the royal family serves no purpose but sometimes somethings are just part of your history and you cant do away with them.\n\nmaybe you could try abolishing the monarchy after her death.
1128304
SURE YES !\n\nBut then what do the politicians do\n- think of some job we can give them ...
584066
yah sure... but the thing is the president should not from the regular politician. he should be an youth. a fresher or 2 to 3 yrs work experience is prefersble. they knew the problems. the old ppl only drain us...
292816
ONLY IF THEY HAVE KIDS TOGETHER. Then it's kinda necessary for the kids sake.
294236
The rationale is that the raising of children is good for society - so must be supported by all, whether or not you have children.  That is the reason too why the tax system pays for schools, not just the parents.  Other people's children will be supporting you in your elderly years, right?
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No !\nIt is outdated and a waste of our public money now,\nAll they are now is a figure head of Britain without any powers they are a puppet monarchy.\nWe elect our own government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.
305429
I think there is much merit in the analogy (although I think marriage should be for life).\n\nA lot of politicians come in with high hopes of changing things and then after a few years become part of the problem and not the solution.
58718
Yes, they are. Until we learn to care for the ones already exisitng, we should hold off on creating more of our own. (Just a personal observation.) Perhaps some of these families who like to pop out kid after kid should adopt one (or several).
1010523
I like this question and I wish there was a way to make it happen! Going further,  I'm wondering 'why' Pres. Bush's daughters haven't been encouraged to enlist in one of the branches of the United States military.  Since the United States Army is now calling on civilian parents to encourage their children to do what's 'honorable' and enlist, then I think our 'Commander-in-Chief' needs to lead by example; Barbara and Jenna should be escorted to the nearest Army recruiting office and 'encouraged' to sign-up for military  service...in Iraq...today!
679696
No, they are not. The birth of Princess Aiko, daughter of the Crown Prince and Princess in 2001 sparked a succession crisis. A male had not been born into the royal family in 40 years and the Crown Prince and Princess were/are unlikely to have another child. \n\nAs a result of this, the process was started to change the laws to allow females to succeed, however this was put on the backburner in February 2006, when the Crown Prince's younger brother, Prince Fumihito and his wife Princess Kiko, announced they were expecting a child. Should this be a boy then it's highly unlikely the laws will be changed.
477996
u raised a question worth million bucks.actually i think no body is  interesed in this stuff{talking in context of our politicians}.reserving 50%of the seats for sc/st/obc...shows the poor mentality of the old political system...may be its in the roots and the only answer to it is ...ACCEPT IT!! u can do nothing.
707667
I personally don't know if they can't have their own.  They seem to think that adopting these children is going to give them a better life, in some instances this is true, but their money could be better spent giving the money to aid charities who can put it to good use for the children.  It seems to be that a baby from a different country is the new celeb accessory.
803860
No and no. I would surely hope that at this point people are warming up to the idea of having a female leader.  Other countries have and are doing just fine.
7255
because traditionally, even though the father went out to work to provide for his family, the mother was the primary carer for the children, spending much more time with them and creating a closer bond.  Obviously this system is now antiquated and needs a complete overhaul to establish what is actually in the best interests of the child.  In most cases the mother will still be the favourite of the courts but many more fathers are now being recognised as the 'better' parent.