|
prince charles and camilla???????
These two "prince charles and camilla" are getting wed in april i just thought we could have a vote should charles marry camilla
my opinion is i don't care about it and his sly ways wat do the rest of you think? |
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
whoop's sorry didn't see that one............................................... .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ......................
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
not really bothered but at the same time it will mean he ll have to abdicate wont it ? and dont think william is ready but then again they dont mean much to me besides a novelty tourist attraction and as for the other little git he should be stripped of his title he s disgrace to the country just shows whats become of the royalty the lot of them arent a fraction of there ancestors
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
Quote:
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
lol wouldnt go as far as beheading but a fair few in our jails deserve the death sentence there wouldnt be as many crimes if it was brought back
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
>>just shows whats become of the royalty the lot of them arent a fraction of there ancestors<<
On the contrary mate they are very much like their ancestors. If anything they are a little more restrained. What would today's media have made of Edward VII when he was Prince of Wales, or George IV for that matter? What would they have made of Queen Victoria's "inappropriate" relationships with male servants? Or her Grandson's even more inappropriate relationships with post office telegram boys. And then there was Edward VIII's relationship with Noel Coward. And the Queen Mother's cousins locked up in a mental institution and ignored all their lives - too embarassing. And George V's idot son. Mental instability appears to run riot in that family. |
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
you have to laugh at Diana Spencers complaint that the Queen was a little too cold with her. Considering her ancestors and what H.M. could have been been like, I don't really think she had all that much to complain about.
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
didnt one of them feed information to hitler during ww2..?
anyway back on topic lol i think the guy should marry who he wants its not realy our buisness or concern the only problem i have with it is that the tax payer will pay for his wedding |
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
Errm, as I understand it the wedding will not be a state occaision and so the taxpayer won't be asked to cough up for the festivities. Though they are bound to more than cover the cost by flogging the pictures to the likes of Hello and OK magazines.
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
I've heard the cost of the wedding will be met by sponsorship by a private firm. Apparently the company is called Tampax.
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
Quote:
either way we pay for it one way or another :( |
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
You don't have to - just don't read the news!!!
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
Quote:
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
Well.....I now have enough pictures of Camilla to keep the kids from falling in the fire!
On another topic entirely.......ooh-er A-B I do like your new alter ego! |
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
And a few extra pics of her to keep the cats off the 'petty' wall!
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
Quote:
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
I'm not sure that any information was "fed" although I could be wrong about that but wasn't the Duke of Windsor (he who chose a woman in preference to the throne) a bit fond of Hitler?
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
ime not sure which royal it was but there was definatly proof that one of them was feeding information to hitler and was covered up to avoid scandle
its been a while since i watched the documentary but there definatly were documents prooving it lets face it the royals are of german orogin so its plausable |
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
There is a brief but interesting profile of Edward VIII on the BBC website...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2701965.stm It might be considered by some that we were well shot of him. |
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
Well that doesn't actually say he leaked information to Hitler but that he was, as I said, rather fond of him.
And as you said A-b we were well rid of him. |
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
I don't really care but i don't think he should give up his throne it is rightfully his even though the royal law says different, by the way who pays for this wedding? taxpayers?
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
Where does the "royal law" say he is giving up the throne? From what I've read he will be king, there's just a bit of a hooha about whether or not she will be allowed to be queen but that's where a royal precedent is being set if she isn't.
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
my mistake then!
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
I was under the impression that as head of the Church of England he could not marry a divorcee and become King. That was the reason that Edward abdicated.....Wallis Simpson was divorced.
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
Or he would be head of the Church of England if he became King!
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
[QUOTE=chav1]ime not sure which royal it was but there was definatly proof that one of them was feeding information to hitler and was covered up to avoid scandle
It is alleged that the Duchess of Windsor had Nazi connections before and during WW2. The Duke was not directly involved in "spying" but had definite leanings towards Nazism, but then so had most of the "aristocracy" of that age. The Windsors, after the war, were close friends with Sir Oswald and Lady Mosely and, largely, shared their fascist ideals. In the case of Charles and Camilla, I am indifferent to what they do, as long as you and I don't pay for it. Do, however, bear in mind that the announcement of their forthcoming marriage came hot on the heels of the announcement of a financial investigation into the cost of maintaining Mrs Parker-Bowles. It is reported that Charles and the queen will pay for the wedding - but we will foot the bill for the enormous police security surrounding the event. There is nothing in the (unwritten) constitution that says the monarch cannot marry a divorcée. The established church was founded on just such a premise. Edward VIII abdicated because the rest of the royal family would not accept Wallis Simpson and, following their example, neither would the Establishment. The whole Windsor abdication question is complicated, involved and fascinating and I could bore you to death with it - but I won't. ;) |
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
Quote:
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
>>If it wasn't for Henry VIII wanting a divorce we wouldn't have a Church of England.<<
It beats me why the adherants of a religion that is supposedly founded on tolerance, understanding, forgiveness and love are so unwilling to, or incapable of, exercising such virtues. They bang on and on about human imperfections and frailty and how they must try to accept and understand, but when those very frailties and imperfections present them with the ideal opportunity to practise what they preach they inevitably fail the test. As far as I am concerned whoever HRH chooses as his wife is a matter for his own conscience and should be of no concern to anyone other than himself. I certainly do not think that it should barr him from the succession. It was a mistake to marry that dreadful Spencer woman. And though I think that the manner of her death was truly apalling, in retrospect, I have to conclude that it was probably for the best. Had she lived, the damage she would have continued to cause is incalculable. It is not outside the realms of possibility to imagine that in her petulant rage she could well have brought an end to the monarchy. I, for one, would rather have The Queen, with all her faults, as head of state than "President" Blair. Everyone seems to be obsessed with the fact that Camilla Parker-Bowles is not the most attractive woman in the world. Well, that may be so, but by the same token neither is dear Cherie. Does that make her unfit to be the Prime Minister's wife? Should Tony Blair resign immediately because his wife puts everyone in mind of a wide-mouthed frog? For goodness sake people, we are all adults, well most of us are, we should all by now be aware that the heart chooses for reasons that often have nothing at all to do with fashion sense, style, or a photogenic profile. Can we not just celebrate the fact that the man has at last found somebody to share his life with who makes him happy and wish them both everything that they wish for themselves? |
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
Some interesting comment in this article in the Sunday Times...
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...481796,00.html |
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
Quote:
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
As I understand it, our "unwritten" constitution is a set of rights and responsibilities enacted in various Acts of Parliament over the course of centuries of governance dating back to Magna Carta. The "unwritten" bit refers to the fact that these rights and responsibilities are not codified into one document, unlike the American Constitution or Bill of Rights.
Thus when questions are asked as to whether Prince Charles marriage might be "un-constitutional", the questioner is refering to the provisions laid down for Rights of Succession in the 18th century "Act of Settlement" |
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
I'm pleased to say that the church I am about to toddle off to this morning has no objections to solemnising a marriage between couples where either party has been previously married and divorced. That is not to say that the marriage vows are taken lightly and indeed a couple going through a rough patch would be encouraged to try to work through it and overcome their problems rather than simply run away but having said that it is recognised that there are times when something simply isn't working and that is accepted.
The majority of members are tolerant of others' imperfections but even so we get the odd one who can have a "holier than thou" attitude but that's their personal problem. My late husband used to say of such people that they were too Heavenly minded to be of any Earthly use. Many of us here are passing judgement on people (Charles, Camilla, Diana) whom we have never met and are never likely to. I have had a couple of letters from Princess Diana but that doesn't give me any right to feel that I knew her. Seeing her TV interview I did feel sorry for her and the impossible situation she found herself in. Nothing will change the fact that she was the mother of William and Harry and that had either of them attained the throne whilst she was still alive she would have been "The Queen Mother" but she is no longer here. Charles is free to marry. His future wife is legally free to marry. It's nobody else's business but theirs. It's probably a pity Charles didn't marry Camilla in the first place. As for the unwritten constitution, it's a shame we don't have something down on paper, parchment or carved in stone because then there wouldn't be all this kerfuffle about Camilla's right to be queen. If she's married to the king (as Charles will presumably be one day) it would make more sense for her to be queen than otherwise. It's unfortunate that the HRH title was stripped from Diana because despite her divorce from Charles she was still the mother of those princes. As for physical appearance,. well we're all a mottley bunch anyway aren't we? But then again what one person finds attractive another doesn't. It would be a boring old world otherwise. But just look at all the pointless and often downright stupid levels some people go to with plastic surgery to acheive what they consider to be perfection. |
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
The Act of Settlement...
http://www.worldfreeinternet.net/par...settlement.htm The "Unwritten" Constitution... http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk...stitution1.htm |
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
I hear that Cammilla will not be wearing the traditional white wedding dress. She has opted for a saddle and bit
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
Doesn't Cammilla remind you of some guy in drag???????
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
Well i think that if he wants to marry one of his plol ponies he should be allowed to.However he cannot be king.He could be queen but then again thats another matter
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
1 Attachment(s)
the future could have been so much different if he had only listened to cilla and taken contestant number 3 :eek:
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
Interestingly, Panorama on BBC1 last night speculated on whether HRH can legally be married in a civil ceremony in England. Apparently, the Marriage Act, as amended in 1949, disallows members of the royal family from entering into civil marriages, that is the main reason why Princess Margaret was not allowed to marry Peter Townsend. It is OK in Scotland but not in England.
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
Will all the footmen be feeling like they have been jilted now or will they be side dishes.
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
Princess Margaret could have married Peter Townsend, but she would have had to give up her royal status and her rights (such as they were) to the throne.
To put the record straight, Henry VIII did not marry a divorcee. He was himself divorced. All his wives were single or widowed. He claimed that his first marriage should be annulled because she had been married to his deceased brother (another long time thorn). Also, isn't Camilla a Catholic? - that would put the kibosh entirely on her becoming Queen, or him becoming King. He could have married her first time round, if he had only made up his mind, but he shilly-shallied because she had "a past". What has she got now? This "romance" has broken two marriages, and affected four children. Forgive me if I don't say "Aaaah". I don't think he should ever be King, not simply because of Camilla, but because he has shown himself singularly unfit for the job, in many ways. |
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
prince charles cant be king for one simple reason
the cost of extra paper making stamps big enough to accomodate his ears would be too much also would you lik a stamp with that face on it ...? :idunno: |
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
Well said Pendy totally agree with you there.Then again i think they may invite the footmen.Not a royalist myself and i think that the whole affair could turn in their faces and cause themselves trouble.
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
Chav i do not lick stamps, never have doen.Think about it, if the head is on the front where are you licking?
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
Quote:
Adonkey :D |
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
Hi Dean its Luke O'Rourke
|
Re: prince charles and camilla???????
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 19:42. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1
© 2003-2013 AccringtonWeb.com