Equal treatment, rather than a settled finding of guilt, was the logic behind the Yes side’s decisive win, by nearly three to one. The margin is substantial, but the wording left a smudge on the verdict: one highly respected voter warned, “Question badly worded and I suspect voters are confused!!”
The floor’s strongest Yes case acknowledged that he had not been convicted, then widened the argument to alleged failures to hold others accountable, invoking Jimmy Savile and Celtic FC before concluding that “all paedophiles their employers etc need to be brought down”. Another Yes voice dispensed with institutional language altogether, calling him a man who had done “nothing worthy of note except an accident of birth”.
The No side was not a defence of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor so much as an attack on the entire system around him. Its most-respected argument demanded that “No one deserves extra privalage just because they happened to pop out of the right womb!”, while other No voters cited alleged cover-ups, Parliament, borders and Gibraltar; the darkest intervention was the sarcastic claim that he should receive “the respect all other peados of his calibre have been shown”.
That leaves a vote about more than one funeral plan, but not necessarily a settled view on the underlying allegations. The chamber’s arguments fused public money, hereditary privilege and institutional accountability, while both sides complained that the question itself could make a straightforward answer hard to interpret; even the Yes side’s supporting case reached beyond the individual to “take back the stolen lands & wealth”.
The result is clear enough on the ceremonial question, but the debate was angrier and broader than the ballot paper: a rejection of special treatment, with a warning attached about how easily blunt wording distorts a public verdict.
8 Opinions
This question is really badly worded
Question badly worded and I suspect voters are confused!! I voted YES, Handy Andy should NOT have a funeral (Royal or otherwise!). Reading some comments, I think some No voters missed the double negative - and simply voted to not have a funeral…
He should get the respect all other peados of his calibre have been shown. Fanfare and lights, medals that sort of thing
Half the Royals covered up and paid off his "indescretions ", why hasn't big hugs dissolved parliament for not getting on top of the border invasion, giving away British lands ceeding border of Gibraltar to Spain! On and on. Get them out!!
A state funeral would be ridiculous for a man who has done nothing worthy of note except an accident of birth. At least the other siblings have tried to be relevant. AMW was always out for himself; obnoxious, vain, grasping, lazy and lecherous. I would not be surprised if people pelted his coffin with eggs or worse if this happened. We should not spend any public money on him, dead or alive.
NO As far as I'm concerned a plague everyone in the royal household, the Lords & Ladies, Dukes etc & all the other hangers on too. No one deserves extra privalage just because they happened to pop out of the right womb! Britain should remove the whole heriditary system, take back the stolen lands & wealth becoming a republic where every citizen has equal rights. #VivaLaRepublique #BringBackMadameGuillotine
Celtic FC need to be brought down similarly to AMB as vicarious liability can be proven
I qualify my vote with the fact he has not been found guilty of any criminality but many have and have not been stripped of titles. Jimmy Saville has not posthumously stripped of his titles. The 9 paedophiles at Celtic FC have not seen their employer brought to justice. They are protected by the so called Scottish Government. All paedophiles their employers etc need to be brought down. The problem at Celtic is they knew about the evil they decided to sweep it under the carpet