I love monarchies. I think they're awesome. I love the royal feel, the elegance, the whole idea of (constitutional, definitely not absolute) monarchies just fills with me excitement. I think I'd miss them if they were removed. Yet I think it is in the best interest of the people that monarchies - absolute and constitutional - should be removed from today's society. I think it's pretty self-explanatory why we should get rid of absolute monarchies such as the one in Saudi Arabia. However, I think constitutional monarchies are, not just as bad, but still unfair to the people, such as those in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. The royal family is just what it is: a family. It's - as far as we know - pure luck to be born into that family. And when you are, you get everything for doing nothing. You're automatically famous and known all around the world. Life may be unfair, but we all can work hard to make it as fair as possible.
The time for monarchies to be overthrown and abolished is well overdue, specially in the more developed countries. The concept is absurd in itself, that someone should rule a country by birthright, as Paine said, it is as absurd as a hereditary poet or mathematician; however, even if it could be argued that at one point it was a necessary form of government when most of the population was uneducated and poor and someone was required to rule the country, and a hereditary family provided some stability in the transition of power from one leader to the next, that is no longer the case, a lot of the countries that have monarchies, if not most, are either developed or developing, much of the population is educated, there is no need for these people. Now, seeing how they already hold vestigial or no power at all in most of these countries, there is really no excuse to keep them in place.
Monarchies are truly an historic wonder. It is always interesting to see when a new heir to the throne is born. It is also cool to watch the line of sucession play out and see what the new monarchs who come to the throne do in their nations. I rest my case
Let them have their crappy forms of government. Let them have an unhappy population that isn't able to vote for representatives. As long as I live in America than it doesn't affect me. Monarchies in a sense are funny whom ever was in the line for the throne and becomes Queen or King can just destroy everything with little or no interference.
Then "we" have no business getting rid of any. The countries that have a monarchy don't belong to us. Their country, their government, none of our business. I don't know why anyone would ever for a second think that we should get rid of what isn't ours to get rid of.
You will find that the majority of countries who have moarchies and have a constutional monarchy paired with a national parliament tend to be the most succesful and democratic societies such as the UK, Australia, Canada, Denmark, Netherlands, Monaco. This dispells the myth that countries with monarchies are somehow living in terrible opressed regimes with tyrannical despots. However, the other reason to keep monarchies is because of their historical importance. For example, England has has a united monarch since 871 AD, and other countries from even earlier, showing how important an instution a monarch head of state is.
Like the British example. The Queen has no actual power, her duty is to give the British some symbolism of their history. Do not mistake me - I am vehemently against the absolute kind (e.G. Saudi-Arabia) - but the 'figurehead monarchies' of Britain or the Netherlands do no harm and are fun to follow. Why abolish them for no good reason? It would just unnecessarily anger and sadden the people of the countries affected.
A country can be a liberal democracy and still retain a figurehead (Sweden, Japan) or reserve executive (UK, Denmark). It is important to distinguish between a head of state and a head of government. The head of state (figurehead president, king/queen) ensures the smooth operation of politics and is the symbol of the nation. They must be apolitical. What we should be getting rid of are full-executive presidential systems (ie US). The US president, outside of Congress, is allowed to wage war for a limited time - no vote needed. I've even heard clips where congressmen encouraged this!
Monarchs in England don't have that much power. They mainly hold a symbolic role. But they do serve well as a tourist attraction. English castles, and other "monarch related" places draw much more attention that those in other places. Because the English monarchs are still alive, and the places they're visiting are probably still in use.