It has been announced that Charles is to marry Camilla Parker Bowles possibly on April 6th...

Story here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4252795.stm)

What do you all think of this?

I just heard it on Radio One!!!!

I suppose if they love each other and make each other happy why shouldnt they be married??? Wonder if we will get a day off for a "Royal Wedding" :w00t:

My views on this have changed over the years but really why shouldn't he marry her? They are in love, anyone can see that. There is absolutely no reason why they should not be married. He won't be the first man to marry his mistress, so why not!

I suppose if they love each other and make each other happy why shouldnt they be married??? Wonder if we will get a day off for a "Royal Wedding" :w00t:

The schools will be off anyway as it will be the Easter Hols, but why shouldn't it be a public holiday? He is after all our future King.

If he wants to marry her fine, but imo he should give up his right to be King!

If he wants to marry her fine, but imo he should give up his right to be King!


Why should he?

My views on this have changed over the years but really why shouldn't he marry her? They are in love, anyone can see that. There is absolutely no reason why they should not be married. He won't be the first man to marry his mistress, so why not!
here here Bella - he has spent years "doing the right thing" and it hasnt made him or (in the past) Diana happy, so surely him and Camilla deserve some happiness in the years they have left.......who are we to judge?

Because he is marrying the woman who imo had a lot to do with the break up of his marriage to the Princess of Wales and indirectly her death....

Because he is marrying the woman who imo had a lot to do with the break up of his marriage to the Princess of Wales and indirectly her death....

Oh c'mon ILS, you can't blame Camilla for Diana's death and if you really want to get into the nitty gritty of it all, I suppose it was Charles marrying Diana that split up him up with Camilla! She was seeing him long before Diana came along and let's face it Charles & Diana's marriage was an arranged marriage. Charles should have stood up to The Queen or whoever sanctioned the marriage of them both, and he should have followed his heart and stayed with Camilla, but he done what he thought was right for his family. In the end though he has never given up on his love for Camilla. Yes, it is sad about the whole Diana fiasco but if you really really look close at the whole story, it really is a love story. You read any love story or watch any love story it is full of tragic twists and turns, but it has a happy ending and it's not as if Charles was out cheating with loads of women, it was only Camilla. He deserves to marry her and he deserves still to be King.

As I have said, he will not be the first person who has made a mistake of marrying the wrong person, and he will not be the first person to marry his mistress.

Diana's death was an accident, it was fate, it had nothing whatsoever to do with Camilla!

Because he is marrying the woman who imo had a lot to do with the break up of his marriage to the Princess of Wales and indirectly her death....
I used to feel like that ILS - I loved Diana as you know, and yes I agree that Camilla had a massive part in the break up of Chas and Di's marriage, but you cant help who you fall in love with can you - if anyone should take blame its the "Royal Institution" - Charles has spent his life trying to please them, perhaps he should have put his foot down, who knows??

I just think that everyone deserves to find happiness and who are we to deny it - imho Charles will probably make a better King if he is happy in his personal life.....

But what if the Queen died in the near future, would Prince William be in a position where he'd be able to run the country? He's far too young and inexperienced.

Prince Charles doesn't particularly appeal to me, but he is older (and with years comes maturity, wisdom). From what I've heard (Prince Williams documentary) Prince Charles does an awful lot of Charity work etc behind the scenes. Doesn't that count for more than doing everything very publically for your own recognition?

I think its great that he's making an honest woman of her. He should never have married Diana though, and she'd probably be leading a very happy life right now.

I think he is unfit to be king, nothing anyone can say will change the way I feel.

I don't believe Diana's death was an accident but then that is another thread all together....

I suppose it was Charles marrying Diana that split up him up with Camilla! She was seeing him long before Diana came along and let's face it Charles & Diana's marriage was an arranged marriage. Charles should have stood up to The Queen or whoever sanctioned the marriage of them both, and he should have followed his heart and stayed with Camilla, but he done what he thought was right for his family. In the end though he has never given up on his love for Camilla. Yes, it is sad about the whole Diana fiasco but if you really really look close at the whole story, it really is a love story. You read any love story or watch any love story it is full of tragic twists and turns, but it has a happy ending and it's not as if Charles was out cheating with loads of women, it was only Camilla. He deserves to marry her and he deserves still to be King.

Actually Camilla chose to marry someone else before Diana was on the scene so their marriage didn't split Charles & Camilla up. Charles should have stood up to the Queen or whoever and not agreed to marry Diana if he was still in love with Camilla and that is one of the reasons why I don't he is fit to be king. I am not saying he shouldn't marry her but sometimes you have to give up things to have what you really want and imo he should be giving up the throne if he wants to marry this woman.

But what if the Queen died in the near future, would Prince William be in a position where he'd be able to run the country? He's far too young and inexperienced.





The king or queen doesn't run the country Claire the goverment do, they are just figureheads. William is an adult and imo quite old enough to be King.

Just been watching this on the news.

Get on with it, I say, don't really give two hoots about it all.
I think Charles really shouldn't have married Diana in the first place, it was doomed before it even began.
As others have said, Charles should have stood up to the "royal institution" and said he didn't want the arranged marraige to Diana.

Actually Camilla chose to marry someone else before Diana was on the scene so their marriage didn't split Charles & Camilla up.

Ok, I stand corrected, I haven't actually followed the whole Camilla/Charles affair but kind of get the jist of it all.

The Royal Institution is a strange thing, for centuries now brides have been "found" for Kings and future Kings and now, maybe is the time to let the Royal family rule with their hearts instead of trying to find "the nice girl" who looks the part. I hope to God they have learnt their lessons from this, that love will stand the test of time and they do not make the same mistake with William.

Edward gave up the throne when he married Wallis Simpson forcing George VI to take the throne, The Queen Mother was very bitter about this. In making Charles give up the throne and forcing, his son William to take his place will only add to more bitterness. I very much doubt that William would do this anyway, and I am sure that Charles has consulted his sons before making the announcement. Do we really want to go back to those days, this is the 21st Century? Let's not make the same mistakes and let them marry and Charles be King.

The king or queen doesn't run the country Claire the goverment do, they are just figureheads.

Sorry I don't actually know all that much about the Royals. :blush:

Regarding Diana's death... I don't think it was an accident either.

I'm not into the Royals but I do like a bit of romance!

Good luck i say, and if means he can't be king then i would think that would be a bonus for him and the nation!

The Royal Institution is a strange thing, for centuries now brides have been "found" for Kings and future Kings and now, maybe is the time to let the Royal family rule with their hearts instead of trying to find "the nice girl" who looks the part. I hope to God they have learnt their lessons from this, that love will stand the test of time and they do not make the same mistake with William.

Edward gave up the throne when he married Wallis Simpson forcing George VI to take the throne, The Queen Mother was very bitter about this. In making Charles give up the throne and forcing, his son William to take his place will only add to more bitterness. I very much doubt that William would do this anyway, and I am sure that Charles has consulted his sons before making the announcement. Do we really want to go back to those days, this is the 21st Century? Let's not make the same mistakes and let them marry and Charles be King.

I see what you are saying Bella but it doesn't change my mind. I still don't think he should be King.

William has been brought up to know one day he will be King unless he dies before the Queen & his father, where is the George VI wasn't he was like Harry is, so imo it wouldn't be same for William it would just that he would take the role earlier than was expected.

Looks like I stand alone in my views here! :laugh:

Sorry I don't actually know all that much about the Royals. :blush:

Regarding Diana's death... I don't think it was an accident either.

Don't worry Claire - it's just I use to be a royalist at one time!

William has been brought up to know one day he will be King unless he dies before the Queen & his father, where is the George VI wasn't he was like Harry is, so imo it wouldn't be same for William it would just that he would take the role earlier than was expected.


Yes, William is a future King, but I am sure he would not want to take that role from his father and force him to abdicate.

And no, I don't think you are alone in your views, there will be many who think the same, but I just think it is time to move on, what is done is done.

Oh dear, what mixed feelings I have about this. I can't help thinking back to poor Edward who was forced to abdicate because of his love for a divorcee. Princess Margaret wasn't allowed to marry Peter Townsend. How things have changed - Royal divorces are the norm these days. Now the future King of England is not only a divorcee himself but is planning to marry a divorcee!!

As a man and a woman I wish them well and agree that they deserve some happiness. Not sure how I feel about having her as Queen though. I suppose I am OK with that too.

I do feel that she should never take the title of Princess of Wales. That would cause a public outcry. I do feel that Diana was just used to provide the heir and the spare and was treated badly in that respect.

What about Camilla's children - she has a son and a daughter apparently. Will they have trumped up titles too. How can they lead a normal life when their mother could be Queen?

These are just thoughts going round my head at the moment. It's all quite exciting though isn't it? Await with interest further developments. I doubt it will all be plain sailing.

April the 8th has been confirmed as the date as I type this.

Yes, William is a future King, but I am sure he would not want to take that role from his father and force him to abdicate.

And no, I don't think you are alone in your views, there will be many who think the same, but I just think it is time to move on, what is done is done.

I'm sure William wouldn't him too, who in their right mind would want to be king or queen, especially at his age. But they are brought up to put country before themselves and have many many privileges (sp) that most other people don't to compensate, he would see it as his duty to take over, if his father gave up his right to become King on the death of the Queen. Charles can't abdicate as he is not King!

Yes I agree, it is probably time they were married, but I will never change my mind, he should never be King and she should never be his consort!

I do feel that she should never take the title of Princess of Wales. That would cause a public outcry.

Apparently .. she is to be known as HRH Duchess of Cornwall...




I do feel that Diana was just used to provide the heir and the spare and was treated badly in that respect.

I agree - the establishment has a lot to answer for.

Ok, Charles can't "abdicate" but he would give up his right to be King, in the end it really means the same.

There is no doubt that Diana was brought in as the girl next-door to provide an heir, and so were many Queens, Princesses before her.

I reckon this marriage will divide the nation, could even spell the end of the Monarchy as we know it!!! :shocking:

I reckon this marriage will divide the nation, could even spell the end of the Monarchy as we know it!!! :shocking:

Well, I would rather that than see him as King and her as his consort!

I reckon this marriage will divide the nation, could even spell the end of the Monarchy as we know it!!! :shocking:
Well that should save us taxpayers a few quid a year!!!!!!! Seriously, get rid of the "hangers on" and put the others out to work like the Monarchies in other European Countries.....

I find the luxury and splendor that the Royals and their "Courtiers" live in very obscene and offensive when you consider what the rest of us have to "put up with" with regards to Health, Education, Housing, Crime, etc, etc, and we are the ones ultimately footing the bill for their lifesyles.....:glare:

Like Dol - I like a bit of romance - and old Charlie isn't too bad, bit potty, but his heart is in the right place.

The wedding is to be the weekend after Easter weekend [I think] - so it bodes well for a day in leiu if nothing else - oh I do love a right Royal Wedding!! I can't wait to comment on the clothes, the ceremony, whether Camilla will get all of Charles' names int he right order, the bridesmaids, the coaches etc etc etc oh roll on the Wedding.

I am really pleased that they are both finally going to be happy and be with each other - I have had many mixed emotions in the past about Charles/Camilla/Diana - but at the end of the day the past is the past and should not be dwelt upon - cake for ALL!!!!

I agree Queenie, it was only a few weeks ago it was reported about how money Prince Andrew spent on helicopters to get to and fro to play Golf!!! I wouldn't have their role for all the money in the world, but why should we pay for him flying all over the country?! :mad:

She is to be know as Princess Consort when he becomes King it has been announced - so it looks like he has no intention of giving up his right to become King. Shame on him!

Apparently he is to make a statement at 11.30am ......

I have had my ipod on all morning so this is the first I've heard about it!

I think it's fine, if they want to be married then fair enough. I don't think that anyone should have to spend their whole lives paying for their past and it seems reasonable for everyone to move on, I hope they'll be happy. As for being King, well I don't mind that either, it's often said that the royals are outmoded and out of step with the modern world and this is one indiction that they are trying to catch up at least.

Somehow I doubt we'll get a holiday out of the wedding day.

It's going to be a private family civil ceremony and then a blessing by some Bishop.
I wonder if it's going to be paid privately, or whether the GBP will be footing the bill. If we are paying for it, I think we deserve a holiday to help them celebrate:laugh:

I guess it will give the nation something to get excited about, but brace yourselves for hours of tedious press and TV coverage.

The only time I will get excited is if he announces he is going to give up his right to the throne.....

I don't see Charles ever being monarch, and didn't before this announcement either. For one thing, I don't think he himself ever wanted it, and for another, I believe his parents' view is that there is 'something not quite right with the boy'.

I believe his parents' view is that there is 'something not quite right with the boy'.
and who would be with an institution like that running their lives???????

I like Chas and I think he is dissed far to often about not being in touch with reality - hes the future king ffs, he aint gonna be in touch like we are :glare:

Hmm I don't know how I feel about this, tbh.

One the one hand, like Dol, I'm a sucker for a love story, but on the other hand I don't really care :bye: .

I can't help but be cynical and wonder about the timing though - royal weddings always bring out the Tory in people, and coming so close to a general elecetion, well, you know where I'm going with this....

On the third hand :bag: , I do think the reigning monarch should not be the head of the Church of England, that position should be held by an elected church official. How can a person be forced to believe and head a religion in which they may not believe?

Now seems like a good time to remove this title from the monarch and re-assign it somewhere more fitting.

but brace yourselves for hours of tedious press and TV coverage.
I thought exactly the same thing.
Call me cynical, but I wonder what's happening in Downing Street today.
Any major changes/bills being passed that can be done behind all the hype of Chuck's announcement.

Do you know Andrea, I was just about to log onto BBC news to see what "desperate" news they must be trying to bury today.........and then I read Floopys comments too - very valid points both of you!!!!

GAWWWWD we are a cynical bunch arent we!!!

and who would be with an institution like that running their lives???????

I like Chas and I think he is dissed far to often about not being in touch with reality - hes the future king ffs, he aint gonna be in touch like we are :glare:

What I meant was that it seems there are influential people who do not consider him a suitable monarch, and he himself has made it known he is not keen, so for that reason I think it unlikely that it will happen.

Not being too cynical I hope, but the timing of this announcement seems to coincide with the questioning of Charles' finances and how much he spends on Camilla!! Will this stop all the speculation now, as after all she will be entitled to the money if she is his wife.

I do believe though that however suspect the timing is, the sentiment is real and it was just a matter of time before this marriage happened. I think they were going to move towards this just before Diana's death but then thay had to put it on the back burner until the public were ready.

I wish them all the best, and have no problem with them either marrying or becoming King and Consort. Charles will never give up his birth right, unless he dies before the queen he will become King - and good luck to him.

He never should have agreed to the arranged marriage with Diana and I am glad that at this late stage in his life he can have what he wants. After all he has been emotionally faithful to Camilla since his 20's!

Oh dear, what mixed feelings I have about this. I can't help thinking back to poor Edward who was forced to abdicate because of his love for a divorcee. Princess Margaret wasn't allowed to marry Peter Townsend. How things have changed - Royal divorces are the norm these days. Now the future King of England is not only a divorcee himself but is planning to marry a divorcee!!



What is the big deal about being a divorcee? So is a person that isn't a divorcee a better person? Everybody has their history. Nobodys perfect.

I just stumbled over something on a news site, and that is that Mrs PB is RC - and according to this act, its forbidden for a "Royal" to marry a Catholic - but I dont know how true it is that Mrs PB IS an RC..... or, if in fact an official Act superceeds this.........

http://www.worldfreeinternet.net/parliament/settlement.htm

Come on Blink - you are the "legal eagle" :smartie:

I dont like the thought of Charles and Camilla being King and Queen. I dont know why ... but i dont like Camilla. I cant tell you why as i dont know, but i just dont :glare:

I would love for William to take the throne when his Grandmother steps down, but if Charlie and Cam took the seats i wouldnt like it at all.

I dont mind them being married, although i personally think he is mad .... but i dont want him to be King whilst married to Camilla.

On the ITV news channel they have a poll on whether they should marry and at the moment the vote is 61% against.

I didn't know she was RC - maybe that is one of the reasons they didn't marry back when they met. No one has mentioned this on the TV so maybe she isn't anymore. I don't know if that act has been superceeded or not, but I don't remember reading about it, if it has.

Will her mum and dad pay for the wedding?

I actually dont really give a monkey's unless of course the poor British Taxpayer is going to be expected to cough up for it. It would be great if we got a day off though but I doubt if it will be a pomp and ceremony public spectacle like the last one, it will probably be a quiet and private affair. I definitely wouldnt want a "Queen Camilla" though.

Will her parents pay for the wedding?
dont be daft SF, it will be the good old British Taxpayer that foots the bill - as usual!!!!! THATS when I get annoyed about the Monarchy to be honest.....do what you like, just dont expect me to pay for it!!!

If we're paying for the wedding I'll be miffed if we're not invited!

They are saying the reason the marriage has been announced now is because when his accounts were published Camilla now appears on his expenses for the 1st time.

If we're paying for the wedding I'll be miffed if we're not invited!

Hey - you can watch it on the telly :unsure:

If we're paying for the wedding I'll be miffed if we're not invited!Apparently Liz and Pip are gonna do the catering themselves, Liz has got a cash and carry card and they'll get the mini sausage rolls from Iceland. Anne's going to pop round and butter the baps before the service :) Should be a good do!

Oh, I do a mean Quiche Lorraine, I wonder if they need my help.

In fact, Flip, where are you, Lizzie needs your help.

I hope they have bridge rolls and trifle with those shiny silver balls on.

I wish them all the best but...........Jolly hockey-sticks!! (thanks Tara!)

Oh, I do a mean Quiche Lorraine, I wonder if they need my help.

In fact, Flip, where are you, Lizzie needs your help.
Actuaaaaaaaally I am awaiting my Royal Command to attend the Royal Kitchens with orders for their wedding breakfast .... organic porrage and for that extra bit of luxury - Clotted Cream!!!:laugh:

We are a cynical bunch - aren't we??

Shall we not from henceforth, put the past behind and say 'yay Charles and Cammy Knicks are in love, we will be happy they can finally marry {like us mere mortals can}, I doubt we will pay for the wedding - The Duchy of Cornwall made profits of millions last year - and as Cammy will be Duchess, I am sure that they will pay, lets just wish them well and think for there but for the Grace of God go I?'

Shall we not from henceforth, put the past behind and say 'yay Charles and Cammy Knicks are in love, we will be happy they can finally marry {like us mere mortals can}, I doubt we will pay for the wedding - The Duchy of Cornwall made profits of millions last year - and as Cammy will be Duchess, I am sure that they will pay, lets just wish them well and think for there but for the Grace of God go I?'

But they are not mere mortals like us Flip are they ? They live a life of privilege (sp) paid by the taxpayer. I don't object to them marrying at all, they are both divorced but they should NEVER be King and consort......

If he gives up the right to the throne, his titles and everything that goes with it, then fine but he wants his cake and to eat it too!

But they are not mere mortals like us Flip are they ? They live a life of privilege (sp) paid by the taxpayer. I don't object to them marrying at all, they are both divorced but they should NEVER be King and consort......

If he gives up the right to the throne, his titles and everything that goes with it, then fine but he wants his cake and to eat it too!

Not one of us pays a penny for Charles upkeep, he is not on the Civil List, and is financially independant in his own right. He, in fact, has already raised over 1/2 a billion pounds for charities, he owes you nothing at all.

Not one of us pays a penny for Charles upkeep, he is not on the Civil List, and is financially independant in his own right. He, in fact, has already raised over 1/2 a billion pounds for charities, he owes you nothing at all.

But if he becomes King he will be on the civil list as will his wife!

What is the big deal about being a divorcee? So is a person that isn't a divorcee a better person? Everybody has their history. Nobodys perfect.


You misunderstand me Claire - I did not intend to imply that divorcees were 2nd class citizens (especially being one myself - lol) but simply the changes in the rules over the years.

Charles and Camilla getting married eh? Never saw that coming. :rolleyes: The only problem I have is with the C of E having a problem with divorced people remarrying.

But they are not mere mortals like us Flip are they ? They live a life of privilege (sp) paid by the taxpayer. I don't object to them marrying at all, they are both divorced but they should NEVER be King and consort......

If he gives up the right to the throne, his titles and everything that goes with it, then fine but he wants his cake and to eat it too!

They are mere mortals though, they are human. As far as I am aware neither of them possess superpowers or anything like that.

As Censor points out, yes we may pay something towards them, but Charles and Camilla do a lot of charity work. Charles also has his own organic business. Not every single penny is given to them by the taxpayer. He just wants to remarry his partner like any normal person, and aside the priviledges, Charles is just that, normal!

They are mere mortals though, they are human. As far as I am aware neither of them possess superpowers or anything like that.

That is not what I meant Bella - I think you know that, but they live in a completely different world to the rest of us.....

I don't really see what the big hoo haa is about this. If they want to get married, they should get married. End of!

But if he becomes King he will be on the civil list as will his wife!


You seem to have got a scratch on your record player.

I seem to remember reading in the paper that the Queen actually gets her money from the Duchy of Lancashire in a similar way that Charles does with the Duchy of Cornwall. I have to say also that he has turned it into quite a profitable estate, while holding his values of good organic food. I think Charlie over the past few years has really come into his own and tends to talk quite a bit of sence (am a big fan of having respect for the countryside and knowing where your dinner came from). He has done huge amounts of good work - The Princes Trust etc, etc.

But yet he had a glamourous wife who has managed to overshadow this in life and in death. Even in Charles and Chamilla's wedding she plays a role. As she is one of the main reasons people don't want him to be happy. This may get some peoples backs up, just because Diana was good looking and did charity work does not mean in anyway she was easy to live with. We seem to get a very one sided story as the royal family hold their tongues. With marital breakdowns, there is normally only two people that know the real story, everyone else is outsiders. I'm not saying the Royals were the easiest of in laws, but Diana had a lot of personal baggage before she even became a royal. She admitted to having mental health problems, and this has to be a factor in their marriage.

The RC debate is an interesting one. The law you are thinking about comes in with William of Orange who came to liberate Britian from its Catholic King James, a few decades after the English revolution. William was married to Mary, James daughter. James had remarried a niece of the pope and had a son, Mary heard her sisters jealous account of a baby being smuggled in in the warming pan to ensure a catholic succession. The future baby becomes James the old pretender and his son Bonnie Prince Charles raises an army, but doesnt retake Britain. Anyway William and Mary pass a law that no monarch or partner could be catholic. This as far as I am aware has not been over turned. However it may have been with equal opportunities legislation.

As for Charlie not being head of Church of England as he is a divorcee we should again look at history. The Church of England was formed because some fat old man could't get a divorce from Rome even though he married his brothers wife and so he formed the church of England.


Sorry for the long rant.

I have no real interest in Charles and Camilla, married or not. I always thought he was ill advised stating on tv that he never loved Diana. A low blow. Its a long time ago now and this new union has absolutely no impact on me. Maybe I am too cynical to even consider it as a romantic story!

Sorry for the long rant.
Don't apologise Becks, I found it very interesting and it is one of the longest posts I've read on this board in a long time!

I find the media's influence on how we perceive the royals really really tiresome; the way they constantly criticise Charles irksome and as for comparing Camilla's looks with Diana's really shallow and loathsome; the way they fawn over the older son and disparage the younger stomach churning!

And this wedding will be another chance for tv prog after tv prog to roll out ill researched documentaries of Princess Diana's death and all the "conspiracies" surrounding that as well as magazine after magazine giving what they think would be Diana's opinion!


btw - always gets on my nerves when Diana is made out to be some nursery nurse who found her prince!!! what utter tosh!

mind you, if I were Mr Parker-Bowles and I was suddenly offered a free chauffeured drive round Paris, at night, I'd be a bit worried :ninja:

The only problem I have is with the C of E having a problem with divorced people remarrying.
But do they Tiggs? I thought they had reformed or relaxed the divorce/marriage laws in the C of E. I know my old Vicar [before he retired] was more than happy to marry divorcees in our Church. And theirs is to be a Civil Ceremony anyway.

but they live in a completely different world to the rest of us.....
Charles may do, but Camilla doesn't .. she may now, of course. But she is just an ordinary person like the rest, her sister often comes up here to visit some friends who live nearby - and she is just ordinary person.

You seem to have got a scratch on your record player.

I seem to remember reading in the paper that the Queen actually gets her money from the Duchy of Lancashire in a similar way that Charles does with the Duchy of Cornwall. I have to say also that he has turned it into quite a profitable estate, while holding his values of good organic food. I think Charlie over the past few years has really come into his own and tends to talk quite a bit of sence (am a big fan of having respect for the countryside and knowing where your dinner came from). He has done huge amounts of good work - The Princes Trust etc, etc.

But yet he had a glamourous wife who has managed to overshadow this in life and in death. Even in Charles and Chamilla's wedding she plays a role. As she is one of the main reasons people don't want him to be happy. This may get some peoples backs up, just because Diana was good looking and did charity work does not mean in anyway she was easy to live with. We seem to get a very one sided story as the royal family hold their tongues. With marital breakdowns, there is normally only two people that know the real story, everyone else is outsiders. I'm not saying the Royals were the easiest of in laws, but Diana had a lot of personal baggage before she even became a royal. She admitted to having mental health problems, and this has to be a factor in their marriage.

The RC debate is an interesting one. The law you are thinking about comes in with William of Orange who came to liberate Britian from its Catholic King James, a few decades after the English revolution. William was married to Mary, James daughter. James had remarried a niece of the pope and had a son, Mary heard her sisters jealous account of a baby being smuggled in in the warming pan to ensure a catholic succession. The future baby becomes James the old pretender and his son Bonnie Prince Charles raises an army, but doesnt retake Britain. Anyway William and Mary pass a law that no monarch or partner could be catholic. This as far as I am aware has not been over turned. However it may have been with equal opportunities legislation.

As for Charlie not being head of Church of England as he is a divorcee we should again look at history. The Church of England was formed because some fat old man could't get a divorce from Rome even though he married his brothers wife and so he formed the church of England.


Sorry for the long rant.

No need to be sorry Becks, you make some very good valid points.

I just feel really strongly about this subject hence the broken record :laugh:

I have always been a royalist all my life and I think on the whole the Queen and her children do a very good job... and I don't have a problem with the Queen etc receiving money from the civil list for their royal duties.

But I lost a great deal of respect for them because of the way they treated Diana and I think her irratic behaviour was mostly down to the way she was treated by him, by the royal family and their hangers on. So if she is still overshaddowing him then they only have themselves to blame. I know my views are not popular but this is what I truely believe.

Charles may do, but Camilla doesn't .. she may now, of course. But she is just an ordinary person like the rest, her sister often comes up here to visit some friends who live nearby - and she is just ordinary person.

I have to disagree Flip, her mother was the eldest daughter of a baron, her ex husband was a friend of Prince Charles and godson of the Queen mother, Princes Charles is Godfather to her eldest child, one of her ansestors was mistress to a previous Prince of Wales & she has been Charles's mistress on and off for 35 years, you could hardly class that as ordinary like you or me.

.....I miss Princess Di.....:(

But do they Tiggs? I thought they had reformed or relaxed the divorce/marriage laws in the C of E. I know my old Vicar [before he retired] was more than happy to marry divorcees in our Church. And theirs is to be a Civil Ceremony anyway.

Divorced people are allowed to remarry in the C of E, but it is for each individual minister to decide if they are happy to perform a service. Some will do it for anyone, some will do it if the divorcee is the aggreived party in the original marriage, some won't do it at all. The main objection tends to be if you have broken the vows you made before God once - will you do it again. As someone that is separated from my husband I doubt I would want to be married in Church again.

Think Charles has taken sensibal decision to get a civil wedding, it negates the whole should they or should'nt they, its so disrespectful arguement. Kind of feel sorry for him - hes dammed if he does and dammed if he doesn't

Divorced people are allowed to remarry in the C of E, but it is for each individual minister to decide if they are happy to perform a service. Some will do it for anyone, some will do it if the divorcee is the aggreived party in the original marriage, some won't do it at all. The main objection tends to be if you have broken the vows you made before God once - will you do it again. As someone that is separated from my husband I doubt I would want to be married in Church again.

Think Charles has taken sensibal decision to get a civil wedding, it negates the whole should they or should'nt they, its so disrespectful arguement. Kind of feel sorry for him - hes dammed if he does and dammed if he doesn't

It's quite amusing really considering the C of E Church was originated so as to allow divorce.

But I lost a great deal of respect for them because of the way they treated Diana and I think her irratic behaviour was mostly down to the way she was treated by him, by the royal family and their hangers on. So if she is still overshaddowing him then they only have themselves to blame. I know my views are not popular but this is what I truely believe.

I do agree here, ILS. I think your views are shared by a lot of people. I wasn't a huge Diana fan, but she did not deserve to be treated in this way. Their upbringing was very different, although they were both from aristoric (sp?) families. I think Diana was brought up in a very loving, touchy feely family wheras Charles was not, and that was going to become significant in their marriage. Charles was sent off to boarding school at a very early age and even though he had loads of privledges, he never really had a normal upbringing, he was brought up by nannies, courtiers and as ILS has mentioned, it would have been instilled into him at a very early age that he would be King one day. He had a huge reputation to live up to. That said though, the Spencers really led their daughter like a lamb to the slaughter when they let her marry Charles. She was only 19 for heaven's sake and he was in his 30's. Even in marriages of us "mere mortals" there would difficulties to overcome, but this was a 19 year old marrying the Heir to the Throne. Even at the engagment when Charles announced "whatever in love means", truly showed that this was a marriage of inconvenience. The Spencer family really must have known that Charles and Diana were not "in love", that Diana was simply being used as a pawn to produce an heir. I do think it was sad that she was stripped of her HRH status when they divorced. Yes, she may not have been no longer married to Charles but she was still the mother to a future King.

Their upbringing was very different, although they were both from aristoric (sp?) families. I think Diana was brought up in a very loving, touchy feely family wheras Charles was not, and that was going to become significant in their marriage. .


Don't think the loving touchy family were really like they way they have been depicted. From what I remember her own parents marriage was abit of a nightmare and eventually broke down. Her father remarried and she really did'nt get on with her new step mother. Diana was also sent off to boarding school and then to a finishing school in Switzerland.

Even before Diana got married I think there was a desperate need to be loved and so when the handsome prince comes along and says Ill take you away from the ugly stepmother, and your fathers goings yeah this is a great idea what 19 year old would say no.Life in the spot light just magnified her personal problems.

Towards the end though I think she became very street wise and used the media abit to make her postion easyier.

I saw the programme “Diana’s Men” on Saturday and they said that Prince Charles was the only man that Diana truly loved. Unfortunately despite her stunning looks he did not love her and she was used basically as a brood mare. It’s such a sad sad story. I cannot understand why the Queen was so cold to her children as she had a loving upbringing herself. These people are so cosseted and surrounded by physophants that they are cocooned in a world of their own and out of touch with the real world. I serously don’t think Charles is capable of being King. William is the last chance of a saviour of the monarchy; I can’t see the GPB putting up with Queen Consort Boot Face.

I can’t see the GPB putting up with Queen Consort Boot Face.


Had Camilla been a stunner would she have been received better?

R we a nation obsessed with looks

I saw the programme “Diana’s Men” on Saturday and they said that Prince Charles was the only man that Diana truly loved. Unfortunately despite her stunning looks he did not love her and she was used basically as a brood mare. It’s such a sad sad story. I cannot understand why the Queen was so cold to her children as she had a loving upbringing herself. These people are so cosseted and surrounded by physophants that they are cocooned in a world of their own and out of touch with the real world. I serously don’t think Charles is capable of being King. William is the last chance of a saviour of the monarchy; I can’t see the GPB putting up with Queen Consort Boot Face.
I have to agree with some of your points MariaRob - ie the sycophants and the living in an "ivory tower"........

I find it a bit harsh what you have said about Camilla though - beauty comes from within, we dont know her - she cant be all that bad if Chas is going to marry her can she??? And Wills and the lovely Harry (I liiiiike him, hes got the devil in him) have given their blessing and it seems to me that they are the only ones who should be having an opinion on the marriage, so if they are happy, what more is there to say?

I find it a bit harsh what you have said about Camilla though - beauty comes from within, we dont know her - she cant be all that bad if Chas is going to marry her can she???

It does come from within I agree but we are talking about a woman who has no morals here. She met Charles fell in love but because she couldn't marry him, married his friend and had 2 children by him, whilst carrying on with Charles, carried on with him whilst he was dating Diana etc etc, hardly someone with inner beauty imo.


And Wills and the lovely Harry (I liiiiike him, hes got the devil in him) have given their blessing and it seems to me that they are the only ones who should be having an opinion on the marriage, so if they are happy, what more is there to say?

But is this something they have to say? from what was said on the tv this morning (so how true it is I don't know) they are not particularly happy with it (especially Harry) but as they hardly see him now, they just want him to be happy.

I can see where you are coming from ILS.......

but we dont KNOW them do we, we only know what we are told about them.....often by gossip mongering tabloid hacks....can you imagine having your life under a microscope, having every tom, dick and harry give their 2penneth on something that probably isnt even true any way??

Ohhhh im glad to be a common old guttersnipe sometimes :laugh:

I saw the programme “Diana’s Men” on Saturday and they said that Prince Charles was the only man that Diana truly loved. Unfortunately despite her stunning looks he did not love her and she was used basically as a brood mare. It’s such a sad sad story. I cannot understand why the Queen was so cold to her children as she had a loving upbringing herself. These people are so cosseted and surrounded by physophants that they are cocooned in a world of their own and out of touch with the real world. I serously don’t think Charles is capable of being King. William is the last chance of a saviour of the monarchy

There have been several polls on the itv news channel ......


Should Charles & Camilla marry
Should Charles be King
If Charles is King should Camilla have a title


They all came out as no! and actually the vote that asked if Charles should be King the majority said - there should be no monarchy after the Queen dies...

I think they have judged the public feeling totally wrong!

There have been several polls on the itv new channel ......

Should Charles & Camilla marry
Should Charles be King
If Charles is King should Camilla have a title

They all came out as no! and actually the vote that asked if Charles should be King the majority said - there should be no monarchy after the Queen dies...

I think they have judged the public feeling totally wrong!
Oh I dunno ILS, it would be one less thing for me to get on my soapbox about if they did away with the lot of em :)

but we dont KNOW them do we, we only know what we are told about them.....often by gossip mongering tabloid hacks....

I can see what you are saying but the palace also feeds the papers with things that they want us to believe as well, so swings and roundabouts, I think....


can you imagine having your life under a microscope, having every tom, dick and harry give their 2penneth on something that probably isnt even true any way??

No I wouldn't do it for all the money in the world, but she could opt out you know, if it bothered her that much!

Charles is rich, famous and powerful. I’ve no doubt he could have had his pick of young beautiful women, but he chose Camilla. It makes a refreshing change to see that a man in his position can see beauty within, and for that alone I congratulate him and wish them the very best in the future.

I personally see no reason why Charles shouldn’t be king. His views which were once ridiculed have turned out to be common sense. And his memo regarding the education system was IMO spot on.

I think Charles will make a good king and if Camilla makes him a good and happy king, so much the better. It's just a shame no one realised this 25 years ago and avoided the fiasco that was Charles and Di.

It makes a refreshing change to see that a man in his position can see beauty within,
I don't particularly warm to Camilla but she is not ugly.

I wonder what lessons William will learn from this whole thing. He is going to be faced with choosing a future queen and mother of the heir and spare too isn't he. But then following on the precedent set by his father, he won't have to be quite so choosy - lol. Or will they still carry on this farce of him having to have a virgin bride?

Although a lot of people seem to want William to be King and not Charles, it is a lot for a young lad to take on (although it will depend on how old he and his father are when the queen eventually goes). If the Queen lives as long as her mother did Charles may either predecease her or decide that he is too old to be King anyway and may well stand down in favour of William who would be more mature by then.

On a "female" train of thought - it will be quite nice watching Camilla's fashion successes and failures, her being a normal size woman (nearer my own age) with a few lumpy bits like most of us. It was quite refreshing to see her with a few extra pounds on the hips and belly in her finery at the engagement do. I do hope she doesn't suddenly turn into a fashion icon and a size 10 :laugh: I think they may try and do a "Fergie" on her and get her into all sorts of unsuitable fashions. I hope and believe that she is a strong enough character to say "I'm not wearing that!" :)

The queen plays it safe by wearing the same basic clothes in different colours so I'd like to see a bit of variety on Camilla.

I am such a fluff-head aren't I? With all the political and religious ramifications all I can think about it what will she wear!

Oh and Claire, I have nothing against virgins either :laugh: (see page 6)

Do you think Geri Halliwell will be invited to the wedding?

Apparently .. she is to be known as HRH Duchess of Cornwall...






I agree - the establishment has a lot to answer for.

Doesnt it just ! As someone pointed out on here, Charles and Diana were an "arranged" marriage, what a pity that someone didnt point that out to the naive 19year old Diana at the time, who was head over heels in love with Charles at the time.
Their engagement interview makes me cringe actually, when they are asked, "are you in love", and Diana gushes immediately "oh gosh yes" and Charles mumbles, "whatever love is......"

I honestly cannot stand Prince Charles. He comes across as a completely out of touch, spoilt wimp who spectacularly messed up his marriage to Diana, causing an emotionally fragile, hysterical woman to go off the rails entirely.

Im with ILS, if he wants to marry Camilla, he should do what other Royals in the past have been forced to do - and not become King. The Queen will probably rule for about another 20 years anyway.....

I cant honestly understand what has changed in the past few years to allow Charles to do and have everything his predecessors werent allowed to do. Has there been a change in the law?
The reasons for Edward and Mrs Simpson, and Princess Margaret and Peter Townsend not being allowed to marry, cant possibly have been because "the people would resent it" ..... there mustve been some constitutional law being broken had they been allowed to marry....... so why is Charles being allowed to do what he wants?

As far as Camilla is concerned, I couldnt care less what she is or isnt wearing - I just think the way she and Charles conducted themselves during his marriage was despicable.
I think they will both be rather surprised at the distinctly muted response of the great british public on the 8th April ..... :angry:

I cant honestly understand what has changed in the past few years to allow Charles to do and have everything his predecessors werent allowed to do. Has there been a change in the law?
The reasons for Edward and Mrs Simpson, and Princess Margaret and Peter Townsend not being allowed to marry, cant possibly have been because "the people would resent it" ..... there mustve been some constitutional law being broken had they been allowed to marry....... so why is Charles being allowed to do what he wants?



I think they are making up the rules as they go along!

Well have you heard the latest interesting development?

The Church of England reformed their marriage laws and made divorcee marriages in Church discretionary upon the particular and individual minister. So by the law of the Church Charles can actually marry Camilla in Church. But apparently the laws relating to Sovereigns to be marrying divorcees in Civil Ceremonies was not changed - so a legal arguement could arise if they have a Civil Ceremony - and thereby causing Charles to abdicate by virtue of the 'type' of marriage ceremony he chooses.

Interesting point. Wonder if these laws will also be changed and if not how can this be explained.

The most important point, with respect, is will Geri Halliwell be invited to the wedding?

Well have you heard the latest interesting development?

The Church of England reformed their marriage laws and made divorcee marriages in Church discretionary upon the particular and individual minister. So by the law of the Church Charles can actually marry Camilla in Church. But apparently the laws relating to Sovereigns to be marrying divorcees in Civil Ceremonies was not changed - so a legal arguement could arise if they have a Civil Ceremony - and thereby causing Charles to abdicate by virtue of the 'type' of marriage ceremony he chooses.

Interesting point. Wonder if these laws will also be changed and if not how can this be explained.

I hadn't heard this Flip, I really think this has been a rushed job with the palace making up things as they are going along.

I can't see how he can become the head of the Church Of England (as he will be when he is King) if he wasn't married in Church.....

I am not sure but I heard that the Church will marry divorcees if they are not the 'guilty party' in the breakdown of the marriage but not if they are.. (I am not sure how true this is tho) So that would rule out Camilla wouldn't it?

The most important point, with respect, is will Geri Halliwell be invited to the wedding?
Only if George Michael and Elton John are going.

Sorry:offtopic: :ninja:

Only if George Michael and Elton John are going.

Sorry:offtopic: :ninja:

And that, is the most important bit, aint that the truth??

I see the Queen is not going to the civil ceremony only to the blessing and reception. Seems to me she is not as happy with this marriage as was first made out.

I tell you, she os so.o.o. difficult:angry:

I tell you, she os so.o.o. difficult:angry:

How do you cope Camilla? :bye: :w00t: :laugh:

I am so bitterly disappointed with the media's response to this whole debacle. I would love for Charles to be happy and likewise Camilla, they are fellow homosapiens [I wish the same for all - well??].

I do understand why the Queen won't go - I wouldn't want my son to be married int he Guildhall in Windsor, lovely as it is, if I were Queen. I wouldn't want the media reportagefest that is ensuing, I wouldn't want to be centre stage blah blah blah [oops yes I would want to be centre stage]. Maybe the Queen is thinking that she would be - and that is why??

No I can fully understand her reasons behind the reported snub. But snub - I don't think!! She made a Royal Decree in the Sunday papers [well the Times and Guardian - that I know] that all clergy thorughout the land say a special prayer for Camilla - I have not heard of that one before. I am sure she is fully supportive of Charles and Camilla - but her roles as Mother and Queen are blurred. We can never understand and we really should not try to, we are never going to be Monarch [I was going to say Queen - but you never know???].

My over-riding thoughts on this are that the bloody press should back off.

I totally agree with you Flip in regards the press and their frenzied media coverage of Charles and Camillia especially as Camillia seems so uncomfortable in the spotlight...it must be tough

But regarding the Queen, whether we agree with it or not it is obvious that there is going to be huge, mass coverage of the wedding.

The Queen knows this full well and imo would know that whatever her own personal resons are, by not attending the wedding she is going to even create a bigger media frenzy and her actions woould be assumed as a huge public snub.

IMO she is fully aware of how her actions will look and i think it is very very bad form.

Charles, also, should learn not to get himself embroiled in media bun-fights, cos he'll never ever win.

He obviously loves Camilla very deeply, and I'd have had far more respect for him if he's kept his dignity and married her quietly in a private ceremony without making accusatory comments to journalists about the whole of the General Public lacking compassion.

Many of us have no strong feeling either way, I dont lack compassion for his relationship, I simply lack interest.

I just want a tea towel for my brothers birthday next week...any ideas?

I just want a tea towel for my brothers birthday next week...any ideas?
how awful is this, but i thought wouldnt it be good to get 2 cardboard face masks of them?

I just want a tea towel for my brothers birthday next week...any ideas?

Don't you like him? :wink2: :laugh:

Re: Queen Camilla.

There was an item in the news today which said that the Department of Constitutional Affairs has announced that Camilla will in fact become Queen if Charles ascends the throne. The labour MB for Thurrock, Andrew McKinlay has accused Charles of being 'less than frank' when he announced that she would become 'Princess Consort' not Queen, and has added that a change in legislation would have to take place if Camilla is to be prevented from having the rights of a Queen.

Why does this not surprise me! :sad:

I think it is disgusting!

Mind you - what's wrong with it? If Charles ascends the throne his wife becomes Queen. Period. So what if it's Camilla and not Diana?

Live and let live!!! I can't see the problem, she is going to be the wife to the King, it makes perfect sense for her to Queen!

I just don't think either of them are fit to represent our country as King & Queen...

Im beyond caring to be honest. I dont think Charles will ever be King, so its not a big deal. Im sure that she is waiting for William to be old enough / ready enough to take the crown - and because of all the hoo ha i think Charles will gladly hand the reign down to his son.

I just don't think either of them are fit to represent our country as King & Queen...
To be honest, i dont think there is any reason to question Charles fitness to become King. He has been well trained for the job, that's for sure. The blemish really is around extra- marital affairs and the Diana hooha.
There is no reason to think Camilla is trained to be Queen. However, that is not generally a prerequisite in other royal marriages. Although, what would happen if they became King and Queen and then Charles died. Would she remain as the ruling monarch??

I just don't think either of them are fit to represent our country as King & Queen...

For what reason..........because they had an affair?? C'mon Kings.....and probably Queens have been having affairs for centuries. What about Henry VIII, crikey it's a wonder he didn't die of some sexual transmitted disease with the amount of shagging he done outwith his marital bed!

Just because you have an affair does not mean you should be condemned as some kind of devil incarnated. :devil:

Would she remain as the ruling monarch??

No she is not blood line Tonee so William would then become King. Normally she would be come HM The Queen Mother but I doubt she would be given that title as she is not his mother.

She is to be mummified and laid to rest with Charles, I believe.

She is to be mummified and laid to rest with Charles, I believe.


Now, that is a strange thing to happen at a Wedding!!! :D

No she is not blood line Tonee so William would then become King. Normally she would be come HM The Queen Mother but I doubt she would be given that title as she is not his mother.
Its all a bit messy isnt it? Messing with the traditions of the royal family.

She is to be mummified and laid to rest with Charles, I believe.


That's the best idea I have 'heard' all day :laugh:

Its all a bit messy isnt it? Messing with the traditions of the royal family.

It is, the easiest thing would just to skip a generation and William to be heir!

For what reason..........because they had an affair??
NO, not because he has had an affair, but because IMHO I don't think he has conducted his life in the way an heir to the throne should have..



Just because you have an affair does not mean you should be condemned as some kind of devil incarnated. :devil:

I don't think I actually said that I thought he was some kind of devil incarnated because he has had an affair! I just said I don't think he is fit to be King.

Get rid of the lot of them, sell off their possessions (leave them enough money to buy an ex-council house (like ours) to live in and put them out to work for a living or claim their state pension - let them see what its like to be a real person!) ...............

then feed the profit from that into the NHS, Education, Affordable Housing, Bobbies on the Beat, Youth Clubs for teenagers where they can learn life skills which will benefit them in later life, there is LOADS we could do with the money saved from keeping the Royals secure in luxury!

NO, not because he has had an affair, but because IMHO I don't think he has conducted his life in the way an heir to the throne should have..



I don't think I actually said that I thought he was some kind of devil incarnated because he has had an affair! I just said I don't think he is fit to be King.

In what way has he conducted life that deems him not fit to be heir to throne, you keep saying he isn't fit but you don't actually say why he isn't fit!

In what way has he conducted life that deems him not fit to be heir to throne, you keep saying he isn't fit but you don't actually say why he isn't fit!

Because I have said it all before Bella, and to be honest I don't want to keep repeating myself....

Get rid of the lot of them, sell off their possessions (leave them enough money to buy an ex-council house (like ours) to live in and put them out to work for a living or claim their state pension - let them see what its like to be a real person!) ...............

then feed the profit from that into the NHS, Education, Affordable Housing, Bobbies on the Beat, Youth Clubs for teenagers where they can learn life skills which will benefit them in later life, there is LOADS we could do with the money saved from keeping the Royals secure in luxury!

Actually Queenie, as much as I am not bothered whether or not Camilla becomes Queen Camilla or if they get married or not, this is the best thing I have heard. I am not a huge fan of the Royal Family, and it is more to do with the hangers on, like your Andrews, Edwards, Michaels of Kent, the ones that sit around and don't do very much but reap the rewards and the priviledges. I know Andrew is a naval officer but let's face it he didn't exactly start and the bottom and work his way up to his rank did he, but he can command helicopters to pick him up whenever he wants and drop him off at the nearest golf club at THE TAXPAYERS EXPENSE!!!!

In fact I think there should be a new reality TV programme where the Royals live as commoners and be stripped of their priviledges, their servants and they have to make their own living just to see if they can hack it.

I don't believe that the Royals are an asset and that they help tourism, other countries have Royal families but they have a much smaller profile than our Royal Family.

Because I have said it all before Bella, and to be honest I don't want to keep repeating myself....


Actually ILS, you haven't, you have repeated on many occassions that he isn't fit to be King and the only reason you mention is because he is marrying the woman who broke up his marriage to Diana and indirectly caused her death..............

I don't believe that the Royals are an asset and that they help tourism, other countries have Royal families but they have a much smaller profile than our Royal Family.

I totally agree, maybe years ago, it was a big deal to come to the UK and see where the Queen lived, but things and times have changed, and its time the Monarchy fitted in with that!

I find the opullence (sp?) and luxury that they live in, when there are kids living rough on the streets in the same City they live in and the NHS is falling apart at the seams, frankly quite obscene and disturbing.......and I thought old Queenie held the moral high ground.................looks like she has lost sight of it! :glare:

Actually ILS, you haven't, you have repeated on many occassions that he isn't fit to be King and the only reason you mention is because he is marrying the woman who broke up his marriage to Diana and indirectly caused her death..............

Actually Bella, I have... :bored:

But I am not going to argue with you about it....... :bored:

Actually Bella, I have... :bored:

But I am not going to argue with you about it....... :bored:

If you say so............ :wallbash:

I'm quite happy that Charles is marrying Camilla if only because I like a good old royal wedding. OK, so we don't actually get to see the wedding service, but at least I can enjoy the pomp and ceremony of the blessing. That is if there is any pomp and ceremony. I hope they're going to pull all the stops out and it's going to be more than cheesy nibbles and knees up mother brown. And I bet you all comment on her dress the following day ;)

I just don't think either of them are fit to represent our country as King & Queen...

Why not though ILS? Because they are divorced? Maybe in a somewhat mixed up society like ours where divorce is common it's better to have a monarch who is representative of that society? Or should the monarch be above all that?

Or is it nothing to do with divorce. Are you saying that they both contributed to an innocent woman's death and for that reason they are not fit to rule? If so who can be above such things. Eg a woman and her husband argue, he leaves in a huff and is involved in a fatal car accident. Is she responsible for his death?

Why not though ILS? Because they are divorced? Maybe in a somewhat mixed up society like ours where divorce is common it's better to have a monarch who is representative of that society? Or perhaps the monarch should be above all that?

As I have said many times SF, no not because they are divorced but for the way they have both conducted theirselves throughout their lives....

As I have said many times SF, no not because they are divorced but for the way they have both conducted theirselves throughout their lives....

But what aspect of the way they conduct themselves? You mean he talks to trees and she likes a gin and tonic and a fag?

But what aspect of the way they conduct themselves? You mean he talks to trees and she likes a gin and tonic and a fag?

No SF you know that's not I mean, but hey ho!!!

*I am getting a sense of Daja vu here :wacko: I'm not sure what is with you and Bella these days, if I didn't know better I would have thought E & G were back in disguise, following me around questioning everything I post and putting words in to my mouth :wacko: *

No SF you know that's not I mean, but hey ho!!!

*I am getting a sense of Daja vu here :wacko: I'm not sure what is with you and Bella these days, if I didn't know better I would have thought E & G were back in disguise, following me around questioning everything I post and putting words in to my mouth :wacko: *

No you have me wrong ILS. You see, I don't know what you mean, it isn't clear, that 's why I'm asking. Is it because they had an affair while he was still married. If so I can see that people might think that is a bad example to set to the public. But I'm not sure it's reasonable to expect our public figureheads to behave in a whiter than white way. When you look back at Charles and Diana's marriage you can see how incompatible they were as a couple - she was suitable in asmuch as she could produce offspring but surely in everything they were poles apart. I think it was a fake marriage put on for people who love a fairytale wedding and to create heirs. and I can understand why Charles sought companionship elsewhere.

No SF you know that's not I mean, but hey ho!!!

*I am getting a sense of Daja vu here :wacko: I'm not sure what is with you and Bella these days, if I didn't know better I would have thought E & G were back in disguise, following me around questioning everything I post and putting words in to my mouth :wacko: *

ILS, we are not putting words into your mouth and neither are we following you around, I assure you I have better things to do with my time!

You have repeated on many occassions that Charles and Camilla are not fit to be King & Queen by the way they have conducted their lives, but you haven't mentioned the reason why you think that or in what way they have conducted their lives that you think is so wrong.

And as for your remark about E & G........well, I am lost for words! :blink: :wacko:

I'm guessing that Diana wasn't aware that her marriage was fake though.

I have no strong feelings either way about her, but I do think that she was a naive young girl who was taken advantage of by the monarchy, who tried her best to make her fairytale come true, but neber really stood a chance.

I don't know the true extent of Charles' guilt/deception, but I can understand people's anger at the way he treated Diana, and that he doesn't now deserve a happy ending.

Personally I think they have every right to marry, and I don't much care who becomes King, as they all seem as corrupt as each other.

I don't know the true extent of Charles' guilt/deception, but I can understand people's anger at the way he treated Diana, and that he doesn't now deserve a happy ending.



I appreciate that Floopy and I do think that this is the reason why a lot of people think he shouldn't marry Camilla or become King, but really what is the point in being bitter about it. Yes, Diana was an icon, a very much loved lady but she had her faults too. I just think it is time to move on, he won't be the most popular King but just because he married the wrong woman doesn't mean that he should not be allowed to be happy.

And as for your remark about E & G........well, I am lost for words! :blink: :wacko:

I have to echo that. I'm posting here because Camilla is front page news today. And ILS as you seem to have stong anti-Charles/Camilla feelings I thought it might be something interesting to discuss, although it's fine if you don't want to. I assure you I am not following you around the MB!

I don't know the true extent of Charles' guilt/deception, but I can understand people's anger at the way he treated Diana, and that he doesn't now deserve a happy ending.

I understand what you are saying as well Floops.
I also think that Diana wasn't the whiter than white character that she is often portrayed to be.
I really think she was very manipulative in the marraige, and I think she had alot of problems herself.

As for Charles and Camilla, let them get on with it. So what if Queenie isn't going to the civil ceremony, she's going to be at the church service.
I will probably watch it, for the same reason Nox has said. The pomp and ceremony.
I'm not really a royalist but I do see it as part of the history of Britain, and to be able to tell my grandkids in the future about all this furore of the wedding and tell them about the day, to me is important.

Edited to say, I also like Queeenie's idea. Why don't we have a royal Big Brother or I'm a royal, get me out of here :laugh: Now that would be fun.

I understand what you are saying as well Floops.
I also think that Diana wasn't the whiter than white character that she is often portrayed to be.
I really think she was very manipulative in the marraige, and I think she had alot of problems herself.

As for Charles and Camilla, let them get on with it. So what if Queenie isn't going to the civil ceremony, she's going to be at the church service.
I will probably watch it, for the same reason Nox has said. The pomp and ceremony.
I'm not really a royalist but I do see it as part of the history of Britain, and to be able to tell my grandkids in the future about all this furore of the wedding and tell them about the day, to me is important.

Edited to say, I also like Queeenie's idea. Why don't we have a royal Big Brother or I'm a royal, get me out of here :laugh: Now that would be fun.

How did Queenie manage to bag herself an invite and why isn't she going to the civil ceremony??!!! :D Hope you have yourself a nice bag and matching hat, Queenie? I could even do you a lovely necklace to match! ;)

Diana wasn't the whiter than white character, Andrea you are right. I do think she was manipulative and very clever to let the public see the "victim" side of her. Didn't she after all have an affair with Will Carling whilst he was still married to Julia?

The point is Charles had an affair with Camilla, but in all honesty that really his private life. If he had done something like sanction a horrendous act of humanity then maybe yes, I would question if he was fit to be King. I do think that Charles is out of touch with the "real" world but isn't the Queen and Prince Phillip. Let's face it, how many times has Prince Phillip put his size 10's firmly where they shouldn't be and yet he is still by the Queen's side. Charles does an awful lot for charity as does Camilla, he just didn't go out and get the profile that Diana got. He does a lot for organic farming and cares about our food industry and a lot of the comments he has made on this are true.

The media are hugely to blame for Charles's wrongful portrayal, there is the famous photo taken of The Royal Yacht Britannia when we see Diana with her arms open wide and the two boys running towards her..........what we didn't see after that was the two boys also running with just as much love and happiness on their faces towards Charles.

I wish these two all the happiness in the world - they are lats 50's now and deserve some happiness, the boys are happy, the family are happy, what the hell else really matters?

Good luck to them I say, I hope they finally get their Happy Ever Afters.

Well only a week to go, have we got our hats & flowers on order?

What a shame for poor Charlie yesterday, shows that he is human after all with saying what he really feels about the media. To be honest, I don't blame him and from all accounts the majority of the public are behind him.

I know they are expected to have this press conference every time they are at Kloisters with the media then leaving them alone to enjoy the rest of the holiday and I know that they are do live a priviledged lifestyle, but I am so glad I am not a Royal.

We have all been in Charles's position at one time or another, having to be pleasant to people you really don't want to, muttering under your breath ( I am thinking visits to the mother in law here and such like). He hasn't helped his relation with the press, but there is a part of me that actually admires him for saying what he did! Good on him and bless William & Harry who really held the whole thing together, it does show that they are close and that they really do care for their dad.

I wish them all them all the best for next week and hope that the media back off. Wishful thinking though.........

Well only a week to go, have we got our hats & flowers on order?

What a shame for poor Charlie yesterday, shows that he is human after all with saying what he really feels about the media. To be honest, I don't blame him and from all accounts the majority of the public are behind him.

I know they are expected to have this press conference every time they are at Kloisters with the media then leaving them alone to enjoy the rest of the holiday and I know that they are do live a priviledged lifestyle, but I am so glad I am not a Royal.

We have all been in Charles's position at one time or another, having to be pleasant to people you really don't want to, muttering under your breath ( I am thinking visits to the mother in law here and such like). He hasn't helped his relation with the press, but there is a part of me that actually admires him for saying what he did! Good on him and bless William & Harry who really held the whole thing together, it does show that they are close and that they really do care for their dad.

I wish them all them all the best for next week and hope that the media back off. Wishful thinking though.........

Well I thought it was really funny when I saw the clip on the news, and if anything, it has warmed me to Charlie - glad to see he is human like the rest of us!! Just because he is future King doesnt mean he has to like everyone!

I'm another one who thought good for him! And he's so right about Nicholas Witchell - he is an awful man. :laugh:

I heard on the radio today that Harry Hill has released a record called 'don't let her be queen' or words to that effect. I'm getting a bit sick of all this anti feeling. It's like one big bullying excercise.

Well I thought it was really funny when I saw the clip on the news, and if anything, it has warmed me to Charlie - glad to see he is human like the rest of us!! Just because he is future King doesn't mean he has to like everyone!

I agree just because he is future King it doesn't mean he has to like everyone, but this shows to me that is his just not suitable to be our future King. Of course he is entitled to his opinions but he should make sure that he keeps them to himself when he is at a photo call with the press.... You wouldn't get the Queen behaving in that way!

.... You wouldn't get the Queen behaving in that way!

No, her hubby makes up for it!!! :laugh:

I agree just because he is future King it doesn't mean he has to like everyone, but this shows to me that is his just not suitable to be our future King. Of course he is entitled to his opinions but he should make sure that he keeps them to himself when he is at a photo call with the press.... You wouldn't get the Queen behaving in that way!

no, you wouldnt, her head is far too up her own ass to do something like this! She relies on her biggoted husband to embarrass her WORLDWIDE doesnt she :unsure:

At then end of the day, we are in the 21st Century, and I for one would like a forward thinking monarch (well, actually I would prefer NO monarchy, but if we have gotto have one......) who is in touch with the times and not stuck in a "Victorian" timewarp!

no, you wouldnt, her head is far too up her own ass to do something like this! She relies on her biggoted husband to embarrass her WORLDWIDE doesnt she :unsure:

At then end of the day, we are in the 21st Century, and I for one would like a forward thinking monarch (well, actually I would prefer NO monarchy, but if we have gotto have one......) who is in touch with the times and not stuck in a "Victorian" timewarp!

Me too Queenie, Charles can't do right for doing wrong. If he doesn't say anything he is stuffy and if he speaks his mind he is not fit to be King! Just because he speaks his minds, says what probably the majority of the British Public think of the press does not make him not fit to be King IMO. I thought he was quite funny when he answered bakc "oh, you've heard about it then" when asked about his wedding! It showed to me that there was a human, witty, kind of funny side to him, and why shouldn't he say what he what he thinks about the lowlife press!

no, you wouldnt, her head is far too up her own ass to do something like this! She relies on her biggoted husband to embarrass her WORLDWIDE doesnt she :unsure:

At then end of the day, we are in the 21st Century, and I for one would like a forward thinking monarch (well, actually I would prefer NO monarchy, but if we have gotto have one......) who is in touch with the times and not stuck in a "Victorian" timewarp!

Well yes her husband does embarrass her as well as her children but I think she always behaves well..

IMO Charles is hardly in touch with the times as he didn't know about chaining up on stag do's! :shocking:

I am starting to think like you Isis that I would prefer NO monarchy rather than him as monarch...

IMO Charles is hardly in touch with the times as he didn't know about chaining up on stag do's! :shocking:

I am starting to think like you Isis that I would prefer NO monarchy rather than him as monarch...

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: I dont suppose Chas has been on many east-end stag do's do you ILS.........

I DO like Charlie, he is always being slated for what he says, like when he commented on Global Warming and the kids of today thinking that they can have a wealth of riches by basically doing begger all to get them..... I have to agree with him on these and many other points he has been criticised for!

IMO Charles is hardly in touch with the times as he didn't know about chaining up on stag do's! :shocking:

I am starting to think like you Isis that I would prefer NO monarchy rather than him as monarch...

Maybe this is the time for the Royals to take a back seat, it clearly shows that they are uncomfortable with all the press coverage.

Although I think the Queen has had no doubt a few embarrassing hiccups, we just don't get to hear about them. She is more out of touch than Charles.

And it's not a bad thing that he hasn't heard about being chained up at stag-do's..........why do men insist on doing this ridiculous thing anyway?

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: I dont suppose Chas has been on many east-end stag do's do you ILS.........


No I don't suppose he has :laugh: But you would have thought he would have heard about what goes on, where has he been the last few years? :laugh:

No I don't suppose he has :laugh: But you would have thought he would have heard about what goes on, where has he been the last few years? :laugh:

stuck in his Ivory Tower with the rest of them......just goes to show that they really dont have a clue as to how the REAL PEOPLE live!

No I don't suppose he has :laugh: But you would have thought he would have heard about what goes on, where has he been the last few years? :laugh:

Why would he have heard about stag do's? As has been pointed out, the upper-upper class are so out of touch with what really goes on, on our everyday life. There was the classic story of a judge a few years ago, where he was on the bench when some youth had been brought in for breach of the peace at an Arsenal game........the judge had to ask who or what was Arsenal!!!!

I don't find it that difficult to believe that Charles really did not have a clue about being chained up at stag-nights, they do live in different circles.

I can't really get worked up about the Royals. Whether they marry, who they marry, who is King etc. I'm just an onlooker at the Royal Zoo and I think it's very entertaining when things go wrong. I laughed my socks off when I saw that interview and him muttering under his breath. After all, that's nothing to what he probably says when he's not in the public eye. I can just imagine them all having a good old rant behind closed doors. It's the slip-ups that make them more interesting to me.

I hope the bride's knickers fall down when she walks up the aisle and that Charlie whispers "Tampax" to her when they greet each other :laugh:

Critique, you've got to stop this - I almost chocked on me tea with laughing at that last comment. :laugh:

Charles is as 'normal' as anyone can be in his position. So what if he doesn't know what traditionally happens at a stag do - that's not going to matter when he's king. I don't think he's as out of touch as people think. In fact in some respects he has his finger on the pulse. His memo about education reflected what a lot of people think but are too scared to say. Charles was into organic farming before people even knew what it was - way ahead of his time not behind.

He might not be able to hold back in the same way the queen does. And I admire her greatly for that - imagine every single day of your life always having to make sure you never say a word out of place. However, I think he will make a caring king which is all I could ask for.

Some of the royals are better than others, but I for one like having a royal family and would be sad to see its demise.

Critique, you've got to stop this - I almost chocked on me tea with laughing at that last comment. :laugh:

In fact in some respects he has his finger on the pulse. His memo about education reflected what a lot of people think but are too scared to say. Charles was into organic farming before people even knew what it was - way ahead of his time not behind.

.

The fact that there was a huge outcry when Charles reflected on the education of young people was taken completely out of control. As you say Nox, he made perfect sense and there was so much truth in it. He does care about the enviroment in a lot of ways and does a lot of work to highlight it, and I would rather have a King that took an interest in these issues rather than knowing what is involved in a tacky stag do.

Critique - LOL!!

I am quite fed up with the Cammy/Charley diatribe, I am sick of the press 'having a go', and I am sick of the pros and cons of this wedding.

The way I see it is that a 'trapped' man is finally marrying the woman he has always loved, and despite our feelings to the contrary, in years to come this will be a love story that will match any Jilly Cooper or Mills and Boon, match did I say match? surely surpass!!!???

Personally I think whether Charles will be King or Camilla Queen is a moot point, I think Charles will undoubtedly put love and life before duty - it is 'his' time with his new wife and his time for happiness. Let's face it he has not had a happy life - forget private jets, butlers, a life of perceived of opulence, forget all of that [for one minute]. This guy wants peace, anonymity, love and happiness - he is not going to get that as King.

I admire ils for her perseverence in the face of adversity - but I think it is a lost battle. Charles won't be King, neither will Camilla be Queen - they just have to sort all of this out before they marry - covering all bases is the term I think?

And despite peoples perceptions of the Royal family - they are just people like you and I at the end of the day, [b]yes they are. There is a huge green eyed, 'silk' thread running through this 'thread' - there are hundreds and hundreds of folks out there as wealthy as the Royals, there are hundreds of folk out there as privileged as the Royals, there are hundreds of folks who live in the same sort of world as the Royals [albeit not royality], there are hundreds of folks who are pushed into arranged marriages to please other people, there are hundreds of people who are hounded like the royals - do we, do any of us wish to be like that?? I really don't think so, I really think that we are all quite happy with who we are.

So in conclusion - why cannot we be happy for a couple of older people who have finally after years of disappointment in their lives, be happy for their their forthcoming proclomation and committment of love for one another??

I really cannot see why everyone is so bothered?

Way to go Flip!!! You have said all I wished to say, only better, I applaud you.


The Nit Pickers.....

You too could have been born into his position, had his life, and had to cope with the sh*t he does. How would you have done?

I too think that Charles will never be King. I think he will stand down (or whatever the phrase is) in favour of William, when Maj dies.

I believe he is a loving caring father, despite his other faults, and that he is protecting William by keeping quiet about his plan so that William can enjoy a semi-normal life and find his true love without the pressure that Charles had to endure.

Here's hoping, anyway.

But what if William doesn't want to be king, or at least not as soon as you suggest Floopy? I think Charles will do his duty when the time comes even if it's only to protect William.

Well said BTW Flip.

Well I have just watched the wedding and they looked lovely together. There was a really touching bit when he turned her page during the service and they both looked so happy and right together.

Every good man needs a good women.

"The past is a foreign country, they do things differently there". Today is the start of what I think will be a very happy marriage and a new start for the royals.

I quite enjoyed the whole coverage....and they really do seem relaxed together.

Lucky them...Charlie, just give some of the money back to the Cornish people.