The assertion was: They contribute nothing to society, are born into wealth and luxury, and demand respect.
And at least one of his elections is debatable. (Though not in this thread…Please.) I should have never brought up Bush. I apologize and withdraw my stupid comment.
As I said, you may not respect Bush the man, but you can still address him as Mr. President or follow protocol because you respect the office that he holds, even if you think he personally is a pile of crap.
The “office” of the king/queen of England means absolutely nothing to me as an American because it is a purely hereditary title from thousands of years ago. The office of Prime Minister I do respect…
I’m sure the Queen will be crushed when she finds out how you feel.
What showing a little respect to Great Britain? Although she isn’t elected to it, her office does still represent the nation and its people with their collective consent, more or less.
I’d go so far as to say that a very strong majority of Britons want her to be their head of state. That sentiment – along with the above point that she does indeed represent a nation with a very strong alliance with the US – I think is worthy of respect.
Quite a lot of that respect, though, is for her particularly as Queen. Charles is less popular, though he’ll probably get a bit of a boost from the diehard royalists when and if he ascends.
If he ascends is more like it
Genuflection, a phrase I didn’t hear until years after seeing everyone at mass doing so, I’ve no idea why its done either. During the reading of some book of some sort in the bible the priest and everyone else touch their forehead, lips and heart (IIRC) and I’ve no idea why they do that, I’m not even sure if that’s what they touch exactly so I never tried it myself.
Your distinction seems pretty arbitrary - although of course you’re welcome to it - but I think you’re actually wrong on the second bit. The office of the Monarch of England isn’t purely hereditary - it also implies the consent of the people to be ruled - certainly not in so explicit a way as an elected official, but if we all decided we didn’t want a monarch, I think we could have removed them.
We’ve done so before, of course - twice, in the 1600s, for more than 20 minutes.
Hmmm, so maybe “third time lucky”, eh? 
I don’t recall them asking for my consent.
<goes to sharpen axe> Rats, no axe: wonder whether my trusty Swiss army knife would do.
Canada’s Federal Government says (colour/bolding added byMuffin): http://www.pch.gc.ca/progs/cpsc-ccsp/fr-rf/guide_e.cfm
Given that a Canadian does not have to nod his head if he doesn’t want to, one would expect that an American should get down on one knee, pin his chin to his chest, and make grovelling sounds toward the Queen’s shoes, although formalists would recommend the full prone position with both face and palms of hands flat on the floor.
Dude, read the thread, it was not my assertion.
It’s making the sign of the cross.
Thus:
Spectacles
Testicles
Wallet
Watch 
No, genuflection is something different. The bow was whenever any of the speakers crossed the front of the altar, they bowed to the tabernacle. It’s still in use by older members of the parishes around here.
Did I say it was?
Well, you quoted me restating someone else’s assertion but if you were not attributing the remark to me then disregard.
Reagan made a gaff when visiting the Queen with his missus by falling in alongside the D.of.E and chatting to him while he left his wife to chat to Liz.
As Liz is Head of State protocol decreed that he should have walked alongside her,but no feathers were ruffled.
The tradition amongst the British upper classes is to always try to spare guests embarassment.
There is a story(probably an urban legend)that once at a very grand banquet a guest in blissful ignorance drank the water in his finger bowl.
As one (so the story goes)the cream of British nobility raised their own finger bowls and drained them without batting an eyelid.
As to bowing to Liz its more politeness to her position then anything else,not an endorsement of our political system.
Personally I dont point my feet at a Buddha(which is V.offensive in some countries) out of good manners,not because I’m a Buddhist cos I’m not.
The Queen DOES shake hands and she does it a lot,so much so that it is requested that if you shake her hand that you give a very gentle grasp of her fingers as by the time she’s shaken several dozen at each visit in the day the fingers are paying the price.
Ordinary members of the public are not recommended to touch her,not because of etiquette but because her bodyguards(many of whom you wont even recognise as such until it is too late)may very well jump you.
Apart from assasins and looneys there are always the drunks and wannabe anarchists who want to brag to their mates that they hugged,kissed,spat on the Queen etc.
As a proud citizen of a great republic, I would nevertheless nod my head and make a very slight bow of respect towards Her Majesty the Queen, if I ever had the pleasure of meeting her. She’s the chief of state of a noteworthy kingdom which has long been a friend to our country, after all.
Plus I’m a raging Anglophile. 
I spent the day genuflecting on the ski hill, as I am wont to do most winter weekends.
I’ll be ready for when the Queen or the Pope take up telemarking.