Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
Celtic Radio Community > Polls > Knighthood


Posted by: Macfive 13-Jul-2004, 10:13 AM
There has been a recent call to end the Knighting of certain individuals by the British throne. Many figures from the musical, acting and political arenas have been awarded the titles. Dos this award really mean anything? Is it a left over from medieval times? Can you imagine Bill Gates as a real knight? Ok, the floor is open!

Posted by: MDF3530 13-Jul-2004, 10:21 AM
I don't have a problem with honorary titles. The only way they are legally allowed to use them is if they are UK citizens.

Posted by: celtica 13-Jul-2004, 10:45 AM
I don't have a problem with the titles but with the people they are given to : singers, sportsmen and so on. It's exactly the same in France with the Légion d'Honneur, the highest decoration of the country. I wish it would be given only to persons who are really useful for the country or even the world in general, like great scientists, persons like Sister Emmanuelle who fought all her life against poverty in Egypt...

Posted by: greenldydragon 13-Jul-2004, 11:38 AM
I agree with Celtica, but I voted to get rid of the titles. True they are only honorary titles, but if they are being bestowed upon people who don't really deserve them, they shouldn't be allowed. It is like saying someone is better than others because they got this title. Getting a title doesn't change what they did to deserve it (if they did deserve it), it just makes them seem more important than people who didn't do something that way. Another view, I think, is that some people may do some things to get those titles that they wouldn't have done if they weren't bestowed. It doesn't really bother me either way, but doing something good doesn't need rewarding, it (should be) is rewarding enough to know that you did something good for the world (if you have). The title is just a nice topping to those that weren't after the title in the first place, and will continue doing good deeds, while those after the title will stop.

Posted by: greenldydragon 13-Jul-2004, 11:39 AM
If you can't tell from my above post, I have mixed feelings about the issue.

Posted by: Camchak 13-Jul-2004, 11:46 AM
I would think Knighthood would be reserved as something like "The Medal of Honor" You saved someones life, etc.

Posted by: emerald-eyedwanderer 13-Jul-2004, 12:20 PM
I agree that they should be kept and reserved for people of importance that have made a difference, not just for entertainers.

Posted by: birddog20002001 13-Jul-2004, 01:00 PM
I will clarify my comments with, I am not a British citizen so my opinion is worth what it cost, nothing. Personally I feel it is an honor that should be bestowed only on warriors. It was a title given to a soldier that fulfilled martial, social and moral requirements. By awarding it to others due to political influence and social status you prostitute the value and integrity of the award.

For example one thing that I do feel strongly about the US Army has adopted black berets for all of its soldiers (this was given by Gen. Shishenki sp?) in order to bring up the morale of the troops, I say if you want to wear the beret go to Ranger school and earn it the same with knighthood. By recieving permission to wear the beret you don't become a warrior, by becoming a warrior you get to wear the beret. I was a paratrooper and wore the maroon beret and while I was attached to 7th Special Forces Group I still wore the maroon beret not the green one because my military schooling level was only certified maroon ok I got lost on a tangent but I think every one can see how I feel confused huh.gif

Posted by: Camchak 13-Jul-2004, 04:17 PM
That is exactly the way I feel birddog! That is what I am saying when I say you save someones life! Knighthood should be honored in this way!

Posted by: Madadh 14-Jul-2004, 05:17 AM
The awarding of Knighthoods is just like our awarding honorary PH.D's. They are honorary titles. You do not have to do anything special, just meet the requirements of the issuing party. Hell, even Michael Moore could get one.

Posted by: Catriona 14-Jul-2004, 06:38 AM
The British 'Honours' system is complex... and I remember that this topic inflamed passions when it was last posted on here........... cool.gif

This site explains how the system works - http://www.knowledgerush.com/kr/jsp/db/facts.jsp?title=British+honours+system


My personal view is that many, many ordinary men and women receive some level of award from the Honours system - and that is right and proper. However, in recent years it has become a source of 'patronage' to the ruling political party - at present the Labour party, but the Tories are certainly not far behind in getting their snouts into the trough. Tony Blair has awarded so many Honours to such odd people that they are known over here as 'Tony's Cronies'.... rolleyes.gif

Posted by: behan 18-Jul-2004, 10:10 AM
ANYONE WHO VOTED THAT BRITIAN SHOUL NOT STOP HANDING OUT KNIGHTHOODS WILL PROBABLY BE FROM AMERICA AND HAS NO CLUE WHAT THEY ARE OR HOW CORRUPT THEY ARE , KNIGHTOODS AND ORDERS OF THE BRITISH EMPIRE ( LOL WHAT EMPIRE ) ARE A COMPLETE JOKE , THEY ARE CORRUPT IN HOW THE PEOPLE WHO GET THE HIGHEST AWARDS ARE PEOPLE WHO P[AY THE HIGHEST DONATIONS TO THE MONARCHY ETC, HOW CAN YOU JUSTIFY SOME COMPANY DIRECTOR GETTING A HIGHER AWARD OVER A PARAMEDIC , DR. OR SCIENTIST ONE THING THE BRITISH ARE REALLY GOOD AT IS OUTDATED PATHETIC POMPOUS CEROMONIES THAT MAKE THEM LOOK VERY SILLY , GET WITH THE TIME AND GET REAL FOR CHRIST SAKE sad.gif

Posted by: Shadows 18-Jul-2004, 03:16 PM
I voted NO with some reservations!

Knighthood is an age old and honored tradition and should be continued as long as it is in congress with it's original intent.

Just because someone becomes "of money" does not mean they should be knighted, there needs to be some evidence of chivalry, charity, and concern for others well being. To give out knighthoods like candy is not good, it would be like the US giving out "Medals Of Honor" to our rich sports figures ( something that makes me shudder because I see it coming) !

Posted by: faolin 18-Jul-2004, 10:07 PM
I voted NO, but I feel that some substantial changes should occur in regards to how knighthoods are awarded ( or rather how the recipients are chosen). I feel that there should be more public involvement in the nomination process, and that more emphasis be placed on the need for the recipient to have made a great personal ( and not monetary) contribution to society. I mean, Conrad Black's knighthood was a bit of a joke, at least for most people here in Canada. I think that the whole honors system is integral to Britain, and that they should focus more attention on revitalizing it. Well, those are my two cents at least biggrin.gif

Posted by: drexcia 19-Jul-2004, 09:11 AM
i am wondering if your aware of how many knighthoods / obe's / mbe's etc, are handed back or turned down , a lot thats how many this aged system of hounouring people who dont really deserve it has to be stopped what do we need knights for or commanders of the british empire its a complete farce and most british agree with this , why else do you think its being scrapped

Posted by: Aragorn 19-Jul-2004, 10:25 AM
I feel the whole process has been abused. Giving knighthood and Damehood to people who are undeserving or are celebrities is wrong. The whole reason for this I think was to honor people who have shown valor under adverse conditions. Just my thoughts.

Posted by: BluegrassLady 19-Jul-2004, 08:50 PM
QUOTE (Aragorn @ 19-Jul-2004, 12:25 PM)
I feel the whole process has been abused. Giving knighthood and Damehood to people who are undeserving or are celebrities is wrong. The whole reason for this I think was to honor people who have shown valor under adverse conditions. Just my thoughts.





I agree with Aragorn's comment. I would be the first to admit, however, that I am a bit idealistic, and the "real" world often differs from what I would like it to be.

Posted by: Blue_Rogue 20-Jul-2004, 11:59 AM
My feelings seem to be in the majority rule.
Knighthood/Damehood should be honorary titled, but not just handed out. One should have something really extraordinary, or brave, or honorable before they should even be considered.

Sean Connery = YES
Bill Gates (?) = NO

Posted by: stevenpd 20-Jul-2004, 01:10 PM
IMHO, the qualifications to receive one should be tightened up a bit.

Posted by: wicwisworhun 29-Oct-2005, 06:51 AM
well i like the title Knighthood it shaws us that some normal people can acheve things

to all keep it tribal

Posted by: Eiric 10-Dec-2005, 12:28 AM
I most agree with Kamchak - I don't think you should give it to sportsmen or Elton John-types, but to those who really has shown what agood person they are by fighting for human rights or saving lives.

Posted by: Dogshirt 01-Jan-2006, 11:54 AM
Now THAT would keep me awake at night!


beer_mug.gif

Posted by: Senara 04-Jan-2006, 10:34 AM
I would like to see the Brits keep the Knighthoods, I would also like to see as much notariety given to the medical/scientific/philanthropist as there is given to the celebrities. You have to remember that many of these celebs, Elton for example, were knighted not only for the contributions to society in entertainment but for the fundraising/advertising they do to fight diseases that threaten us all. I don't see Elton's knighthood as a waste of an honor. I do believe though that the media has skewed every one's thoughts on who does get awarded Knighthood and I'm sure the criteria for being awarded such is as stringent as it would be recieving a Presidential Award here in the US.

I think anyone that cites that only celebrities are awarded knighthoods really doesn't know what they're talking about.

Posted by: j Padraig moore 04-Jan-2006, 11:24 AM
Wasn't Michael Jackson angling for a knighthood a few years back?

Posted by: Shamalama 04-Jan-2006, 02:48 PM
I had to look it up to make sure I knew what a Knight really was supposed to be.

knight:
- a mounted man-at-arms serving a feudal superior
- a man ceremonially inducted into special military rank usually after completing service as page and squire
- a man honored by a sovereign for merit
- a man devoted to the service of a lady as her attendant or champion

knighthood:
- the rank, dignity, or profession of a knight
- the qualities befitting a knight

I see the words "service", "special rank", "honored for merit", "devoted to service", "dignity", and "qualities".

I also see, in the real world, knighthood being applied more with political correctness than honor or service. That said, I see some countries watering-down their knighthood to mere ceremony lacking in true merit.

There was a time, down here in the south, that the titles of Sir and Lady/Ma'am were earned and not given out freely.

Posted by: AyaLove 20-Jan-2006, 02:02 AM
Naé

Posted by: teashoci 01-May-2006, 11:10 AM
knighthoods are a sad relic of englands imperial past along with other commendations such as mbe obe etc.

and scot or welshman who excepts one is a disgrace in my opinion

Posted by: dundee 01-May-2006, 04:06 PM
voted no ... they are getting pretty cheap. i remember reading one of the requirments back in the chivalris days... was to stay up all night in prayer soul searching... before recieving it... back then it wasnt given lightly NOR recieved lightly... give them an honorary doctorate if they got do something.

...I do hereby swear
By mouth and hand
To be a good and worthy Knight
To be a Lamp of Chivalry unto the Populace
To be ever courteous and reverent
To seek excellence in all my endeavours
To be courageous and faithful
To be always loyal and true
To temper justice with mercy
To defend my Crown and my liege
To be temperate and humble
To shelter the weak
To help the needy
To champion the right
And uphold the good
To teach what I know
To learn what I can
To be true to my Faith
And to be faithful to my duties
All this in each area of my life.
So swear I...

Posted by: NBEHTM 01-May-2006, 09:21 PM
I think apples & oranges are being compared. Pop figures such as Elton John & Bob Hope are honourary knights. Not true knights. The definition I found on states:

British honours system is a means of rewarding individuals' personal bravery, achievement or service to the United Kingdom.

I do think that many of the "choices" loosely follow these definitions & are highly politically motivated.

I think the fame tends to over focus the accomplishments of the celebrities because of the loose fitting into the definitions.

Overall a stricter standard could be set & better public relations set. The core intent is a good one, but time & depredation have left it abused.

Posted by: sisterknight 02-May-2006, 09:36 AM
well guess i'll put my two cents in on this one......knighthood should be earned, not bought or sold at any price!!! there is a sacred responsibility attached to them that should never be taken lightly!!!

Posted by: teashoci 02-May-2006, 10:53 AM
people with knighthoods are not knights, modern knighthoods have nothing to do with knighthoods awarded in the middle ages.

knighthoods and other british empire ( laugh.gif ) aards do not reflct englands curent status in the modern world.
they also do not recognize the value contribution people have made if they are anti monarchy and pro republic.
hundreds of these awards have been rejected by various british citizens as they are outdated and conflict with their political ideology.

this whole farce must be scrapped now.

Posted by: Seumas Dubh 20-Nov-2007, 10:54 AM
QUOTE (teashoci @ 02-May-2006, 11:53 AM)
people with knighthoods are not knights, modern knighthoods have nothing to do with knighthoods awarded in the middle ages.

knighthoods and other british empire ( laugh.gif ) aards do not reflct englands curent status in the modern world.
they also do not recognize the value contribution people have made if they are anti monarchy and pro republic.
hundreds of these awards have been rejected by various british citizens as they are outdated and conflict with their political ideology.

this whole farce must be scrapped now.

Go on, tell us how you really feel.

Just because it is highly unlikely that YOU will ever be offered recognition at the level of the Honours List, doesn't mean it is useless, or outdated, or unwanted, or unmerited.

Sure, some stupid sods are ungrateful enough to first accept one, and then return it as a political statement, but that just shows how little they actually deserved the recognition in the first place.

Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)