ROYALTY must abdicate their archaic throne and get in line for the use of the commode.
By Joseph Chez
When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for the human race to dissolve the myth of the oldest political bandits who have assumed wealth and power over their subjects - under the phony declaration of divine providence. Neither nature nor God entitles any one person special descent or privilege.
We are at the door step of the 21st Century and it is self evident that all men are created equal. We have now mapped the genetics of many living species and we are close to mapping the entire human genome. Thus, there is irrefutable scientific evidence that all human beings are 99.9% biologically the same, with the remaining amount of variance accounting for regional and ongoing genetic mutations. Accordingly, the existence of monarchs and other royalty in today's society is simply incongruent with reality. So we must ask: why royalty and monarchs remain with the privilege of governance or hold privileged and distinguished social titles, when they should also get in line with the rest of us, for use of the latrine?
Royalty or devoted followers may argue that such social titles are determined by special lineage. In the past, royals claimed direct lineage from "a" God. However, the Universal Creator has not publicly given notice of such royal preference. There is also the argument that royals have special bloodlines. Although, 21st Century science empirically shows that there is no blue blood in human beings, despite the fact that royal bloodlines do come close to genetic degeneration. And just like the horseshoe crab which truly has blue blood, royalty and the horseshoe crab are both living fossils. Notwithstanding, others would argue that present day monarchies exist at the pleasure of its subjects. Yes, but must society continues to accept the concept of special privilege in today's egalitarian society? Must society accept such concept, when royalty was the building blocs of intolerance, colonization, social casting and slavery?
However, it is fair to say that today, few monarchs and so-called royals hold any governance in existing "kingdom" states, but they do play roles in ceremonial post. Nonetheless, the royal families in those countries continue to thrive with public funds such as in Spain and in the British Kingdom. However, even holding or being a ceremonial figure, is no longer acceptable in today's world as it constitutes a de facto recognition of privileged labels and supporting a caste system. Royals today are supremacist in semi or official public roles and they have no place in this 21st Century.
For those royal fans and apologist, if you still believe royalty deserve their self-appointed social titles or a privilege lifestyle at public expense, think again; ask yourself if royalty is biologically different or descend from divine providence. If you still do, I urge you to take a big whiff after a royal flush of the king or queen's throne, and if you still think it smells divine, you probably are insane, believe in magic or you are a royal fool. Wheeoow!
(An extended article may be found at: http://universalwrit.blogspot.com/ .)
















Yeah, but then again, some of us are obviously more equal than others.
to schedule interviews with Senators who agree, email:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
October 22, 2009 1:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
But then again, there is first among equals. Thanks for the lead. Also, our elected heads of state should not kneel before royals.
October 22, 2009 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
It has been said many times through our history that, ironically, after shirking off the Crown with a Revolution, Americans just love monarchies. Maybe people are hard-wired for it?
Don't they rather, bow?
I was pointing out how the Senate=our royalty, really. Being a bit snarky, there.
Genetics also proves that we are all descendants of the San Bushmen; that hasn't served to get people to think very differently about race, etc.
October 22, 2009 5:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Conservatives believe they were created by a divine creator in His image. Liberals believe they evolved from monkeys. Both are right.
October 22, 2009 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good one! My best friend is a gorilla, and he is my relative. I am proud to be related to him; too bad chimps are closer genetically.
October 22, 2009 6:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sounds okay with me.
October 22, 2009 5:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm wit chu.
October 22, 2009 7:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
of many living species and we are close to mapping the entire human genome. Thus, there is irrefutable scientific evidence that all human beings are 99.9% biologically the same
Considering that a point mutation or deletion can result in people's blood not functioning properly (sickle-cell) or in a person's lungs and digestive system not working (cystic fibrosis), the 0.1% that is biologically different (by which I assume you mean genetically different) is way, way, more important than you make it out to be.
October 22, 2009 6:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
The argument is right-on in its depiction of 21st century royalty as archaic and supremacist. As humankind edges closer to becoming a global community, present-day royalty simply doesn't fit in. In fact, it is a stark reminder of a darker era of prejudice, racism, and slavery.
I'm sure (Princess) Diana would agree that there is nothing special to the royal concept.
October 22, 2009 7:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Glaivester, the 99.9 % was meant to mean that all humans are relatively the same genetically. But your are right that within the 1% variance one may find differences, whether to the benefit of the individual or to its detriment. And frankly, all humans have a similar "stinky" constitution.
October 22, 2009 7:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is this going to leave us at the mercy of Paris Hilton, Donald Trump, the Simon guy who likes to tell the moderately mediocre that they aren't American Idols, and everyone else we see parading their eliteness at us on checkout counter tabloids?
I think I prefer Prince Harry and Queen Beatrice, myself.
October 22, 2009 8:28 PM | Reply | Permalink