Some of them have peerages: the Duke of Edinburgh, the Duke of Cornwall (aka the Prince of Wales), the Duke of York etc. Others don’t: the Princess Royal; the Queen’s non-royal grandchildren.
The House of Lords has been reformed in recent years. Peers no longer have an automatic right to a seat. See this other current thread.
I’ve known way too many genuine queens who match this description.
I understand that the Queen isn’t the wealthiest woman in the United Kingdom. Tsk, tsk.
It’s been fun watching the changes over the years. I was about four when she married Phillip. I still have the newspaper clippings. This sounds bizarre, but I remember something about ears of corn or corn tassels on her dress or train. Their special song was “People Will Say We’re In Love” from Oklahoma.
I remember the Coronation when I was eight or nine. We saw it at night on the same day, I believe. The film had to be flown to New York before we could see it. I remember that when she put the crown on her head, other people put things on their heads too, but I may have seen that in photographs. She was a pretty young woman.
When I was about twelve or so, I read a book that was a “tell all” book written by her nanny. It was about what private life was like for Lillibet and Margaret Rose when they were growing up.
I remember how sad it was when Margaret Rose was not alowed to marry Townsend. My opinion shifted after that, I think.
She’s been a wonderful monarch as monarchs go. I’ve been a little surprised to find that she’s really bought into the nonsense parts of it.
That’s because you’re from north of the border 
All Bank of England notes have Her Maj on them.
Of course, I assumed in the context that the meaning of the word in monarchies would be understood.
Well, no. Republicans don’t favour abolishing the Monarchy per se, we simply want an Australian Head of State, elected by the Australian People. The Monarchy can dodder along for as long as it wants we just dont want anything to do with it.
How would that be different from abolishing the monarchy?
Very different. If Australia chooses to abolish the Australian crown, it makes no impact on the existence of the British one, which just happens to be embodied in the same person.
There is even a freakish (but very unlikely) potential situation where Australia could declare itself a republic, but one or more Australian states could retain the crown.
For the record, Prince Charles has told Australian politicians, “Ask us to leave, and we’ll quietly go”, so it would be a painless process.
But we’re not talking about the British monarchy. Obviously, Australians cannot abolish that.
mamboman was talking about the British one, I think. The whole point is Buckingham Palace, guys in funny red coats etc willl still all be there regardless. That’s where the misunderstanding lies. “Crown” is probably a better term to use, as it’s more easily separated. “Monarchy” to me at least, implies robes, tiaras, palaces, and the like. “Crown” implies the power. To me, there’s one monarchy, but more than one crown. The monarchy is not in questrion. The British crown is not in question. The Australian crown is.
In the context, I meant the Australian monarchy, since Australians can’t abolish the British monarchy. Australian would be left with HM as Head of the Commonwealth, but plenty of republics recognise her in that position.
And having “an Australian Head of State, elected by the Australian People” does mean abolishing the (Australian) monarchy, unless you are thinking that Australia would become some kind of elective monarchy.
The other side of the coin is to the Brits the “The President” without any qualifier is always the P.O.T.U.S
Is the problem that Australians can’t agree on how to elect an Australian president, not whether they want one at all?
There is disagreement on both issues.
What’s wrong with an elected monarch? There was a proposal in Canada that would have the members of the Order of Canada select the Governor-General as the new Head of State, once Queen Elizabeth II passes on.
(Snark: Elected monarch? Heck, that’s what the US has these days, but without the centuries-old chains of custom and tradition and law that keep the whole thing civilised…)
Well, her coronation gown was embroidered with sheaves of flowers, grain, leaves, and fruits representing the various Commonwealth realms. link
Hmm, no passport means she can’t apply for a visa. No visa means that on her recent visit, she must have been an illegal immigrant.
Looks like USCBP (Customs and Border Protection) dropped the ball big time on this one…
PS If she ever wants to be Queen of the US, she’ll need to apply for a green card…
As Monty Python said, “You don’t vote for kings”.
What would happen, practically speaking, if the queen were no longer head of state of Australia? Isn’t this merely a formality?
