[...]But the campaign group Republic - which wants an elected head of state in Britain - said "nothing of substance" had been changed.
"The monarchy discriminates against every man, woman and child who isn't born into the Windsor family. To suggest that this has anything to do with equality is utterly absurd," spokesman Graham Smith said.
It's about as pertinent an issue as whether women are allowed to become bishops; it's all archaic bullshit - who gives a good god damn?
"Today the law has decided that dogs can now be a member of the Gestapo." Well that's fabulous; we can mark this down as another great leap forward for civilisation today.
Unfortunately whenever I show my anti-royalist tendencies I'm told that we can tolerate the gross hypocrisy of claiming to be being a progressive, equal-opportunities society when we carry these aristocratic ticks on our flank because they bring in more money than they take. Which is all fine and dandy - but if they're bringing in so much money, why do they need to skim taxes?
Of course if they weren't funded by the citizens they could say "Well screw you then", lock down the palace we currently pay to maintain and move all their money out of the country to dodge taxes like the other aristocrat parasites.
I've not checked the Jobscentre site, but I don't think you're entitled to benefits if you're getting [url=http://www.discoveryfinance.com/how-much-do-british-royal-family-make-annually.html]over $450,000 a year[/url] in inheritance.