Charles & Camilla to marry :

[limerickman]

The media is full of the news that Charles is to marry Camilla in April 2005.

Any views on this ?

 

[FredC]

The media is full of the news that Charles is to marry Camilla in April 2005.

Any views on this ?

About bloody time, he's always been a bit slow behind the bike sheds. Good for them. Just in time to get the nation in a jolly good mood for the General Election. I am so pleased for them, they do love each other.
Now, so long as Blair doesn't talk to Bush he'll be home and dry.
Now who's Hecht? the opposition leader.
Blair has already stuffed Hecht on Immigration controls.
Pigs might fly, but not for the next few years at least.

 

[limerickman]

Just watched Newsnight and they're getting themselves in to a state.

Paxo arguing with a Bishop from the CoE about the fact that C&C cannot get wed (they'e only having a blessing) on the 8th April.
Paxo was banging on about being divorcees and Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson.
The Bishop did a bit of hopping round but Paxo wouldn't let go.

I am indifferent to be honest about it - they ought to have married when they met back in the 1970's.
So in a way, i feel sorry for them, having both had unhappy marriages.

I think the Constitutional question is interesting - can a head of state really be the head of the CoE, after being divorced ?
Time to call in the canon lawyers.
Is there a Jesuit in the house ?
Sorry, wrong team - but, that wouldn't prevent them having an answer.
They had an answer to everything when I was in their school.

 

[FredC]

Just watched Newsnight and they're getting themselves in to a state.

Paxo arguing with a Bishop from the CoE about the fact that C&C cannot get wed (they'e only having a blessing) on the 8th April.
Paxo was banging on about being divorcees and Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson.
The Bishop did a bit of hopping round but Paxo wouldn't let go.

I am indifferent to be honest about it - they ought to have married when they met back in the 1970's.
So in a way, i feel sorry for them, having both had unhappy marriages.

I think the Constitutional question is interesting - can a head of state really be the head of the CoE, after being divorced ?
Time to call in the canon lawyers.
Is there a Jesuit in the house ?
Sorry, wrong team - but, that wouldn't prevent them having an answer.
They had an answer to everything when I was in their school.

Henry VIII did it years ago, so where's the modern day precedent. We don't really have a constitution, it is like Law, a moveable feast.
The Cof E have adapted to modern day attitudes without the blips from the fundamentalists, and this is another occasion whereby in Case Law it has happened before and therefore must stand.
In that case I wouldn't sitting in with the Jesuits on this one.

 

[limerickman]

Henry VIII did it years ago, so where's the modern day precedent. We don't really have a constitution, it is like Law, a moveable feast.
The Cof E have adapted to modern day attitudes without the blips from the fundamentalists, and this is another occasion whereby in Case Law it has happened before and therefore must stand.
In that case I wouldn't sitting in with the Jesuits on this one.

This business about a Constitution.
Newsnight had this bloke on - a Professor - and he's chairman of a group called Republic, who want the Monarchy done away with.
Paxo said to him that there was no written constitution - the prof said that there was.
I presume when people refer to a Constitution they're referring to the Magna Carta and every single piece of statutory law since ?

We have a Constitution here : it was written in 1939 and to amend or change it, we have to have a referendum.

 

[MountainPro]

i am not pro or anti monarchy...but i am glad that they are marrying. I just dont know why he didnt marry her years ago before the whole Diana marriage fiasco...

basically i think its because wouldnt be able to give him children and heirs.

the CoE issue is going to rumble on and on...best not get involved...

 

[bcbob]

Is it just me or has the media / current opinion gone barmy????
who cares if he marries Camilla? The fact that the idiot might become King either way should be far more worrying!!!!

Maybe he can get his own little club going with Prince Phillip, President Bush and maybe Ronald reagan could join in aswell!

 

[FredC]

Is it just me or has the media / current opinion gone barmy????
who cares if he marries Camilla? The fact that the idiot might become King either way should be far more worrying!!!!

Maybe he can get his own little club going with Prince Phillip, President Bush and maybe Ronald reagan could join in aswell!

Don't worry about it, the Royal Family are only titular heads of state, and have no political control whatsoever. Why don't you go and live in Zimbabwe to find a leader of the peoples? Are you a Lambeth luco?

 

[FredC]

i am not pro or anti monarchy...but i am glad that they are marrying. I just dont know why he didnt marry her years ago before the whole Diana marriage fiasco...

basically i think its because wouldnt be able to give him children and heirs.

the CoE issue is going to rumble on and on...best not get involved...

No it won't, its already sorted.

 

[Fixey]

He is going to marry that god awful woman? ack
Going from Di to that would be like going from a Rolls to a Vauxal

 

[bcbob]

Don't worry about it, the Royal Family are only titular heads of state, and have no political control whatsoever. Why don't you go and live in Zimbabwe to find a leader of the peoples? Are you a Lambeth luco?

Ah thanks for that i had no idea!
As for being " Only titular heads of state" this may be true but being, the head of state means that he will represent our country. Now like i said i find the fact that he will represent our country a lot more disturbing than the fact that he will marry Camilla!
Of course its only my opinion. so, i suppose now that i have an opinion that is different than Freds i shall have to go and live in Zimbabwe and find a leader of the people??????

 

[FredC]

Ah thanks for that i had no idea!
As for being " Only titular heads of state" this may be true but being, the head of state means that he will represent our country. Now like i said i find the fact that he will represent our country a lot more disturbing than the fact that he will marry Camilla!
Of course its only my opinion. so, i suppose now that i have an opinion that is different than Freds i shall have to go and live in Zimbabwe and find a leader of the people??????

Charlie boy would have become King whether or not he remarries. Idiots are not barred from getting married, or sitting on the throne.
He should have married Camilla in the first place, and not that ghastly Diana. You only have to go to Zimbabwe to see how King M'gabi behaves, then you'll be pleased that we have Charlie in reserve.

 

[FredC]

Henry VIII did it years ago, so where's the modern day precedent. We don't really have a constitution, it is like Law, a moveable feast.
The Cof E have adapted to modern day attitudes without the blips from the fundamentalists, and this is another occasion whereby in Case Law it has happened before and therefore must stand.
In that case I wouldn't sitting in with the Jesuits on this one.

There we are then, the Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer has agreed with me that the marriage of Charles and Camilla is indeed legal. So much for Paxo and his assembled clowns. There are many reasons for it to take place, not least The Human Rights Act. Therefore confirming that there is no Royal constitution in place.
Remember the Burrell case? QE11 would have had to appear in open court.

 

[limerickman]

Charlie boy would have become King whether or not he remarries. Idiots are not barred from getting married, or sitting on the throne.
He should have married Camilla in the first place, and not that ghastly Diana. You only have to go to Zimbabwe to see how King M'gabi behaves, then you'll be pleased that we have Charlie in reserve.

Do you reckon that Charles is an idiot ?

I don't know what to make of him.
From what i have read, he had a tough time of it when he was a kid being sent off to Gordonston.
His father gave him a difficult time - by all accounts.

I think his eyesight needs testing.

 

[FredC]

Do you reckon that Charles is an idiot ?

I don't know what to make of him.
From what i have read, he had a tough time of it when he was a kid being sent off to Gordonston.
His father gave him a difficult time - by all accounts.

I think his eyesight needs testing.

Not at all, but his father is. Methinks that his family reconsidered, and therefore sent no more of their children off to the Gordonston Boot camp.
I think that Camilla is nice, and scrubs up well.
Good for him, even though the rest of the defendis difelis regia aren't going. The boss priest is doing it, and Lord Falconer says it's all legal.
One point to consider here is that the Archbishop of Canterbury is doing the job.
Is he snubbing the Queen?
What a bleedin' family.
I might put Paxo on shortly !! might, no I will.

 

[FredC]

Do you reckon that Charles is an idiot ?

I think his eyesight needs testing.

Give the lad a fair crack of the whip, they are a delightful couple. What's more wonderful than giving each other a good loofering in the bath, drying off into fluffy bathrobes, and cutting each others toenails at leisure.
You're just jealous.

 

[Carrera]

In some ways, I sympathise with the Royal Family. The so-called subjects seem to thoroughly enjoy knocking the Royals, accusing them of being spoiled, stuck-up, selfish and eccentric.
In the tabloids last week, there was outright mockery of the Queen, Charles and Camilla via fake letters sent to an agony aunt. The Queen's letter started something like, "One is writing in to ask whether one should attend the wedding or not..."
Seems really mean to me to quash these peoples' hopes of happiness over some antiquated laws. As things stand the Royals seem to be always on hand to be given a verbal kicking in the press whenever the opportunity arises.
Maybe the country would be happier if they crowned David Beckham instead?

The media is full of the news that Charles is to marry Camilla in April 2005.

Any views on this ?

 

[zapper]

Give the lad a fair crack of the whip, they are a delightful couple. What's more wonderful than giving each other a good loofering in the bath, drying off into fluffy bathrobes, and cutting each others toenails at leisure.
You're just jealous.

I thought he just wanted to be her “feminine hygiene product”???

 

[jhuskey]

The media is full of the news that Charles is to marry Camilla in April 2005.

Any views on this ?

With all the media muck is it possible that the keys to the kingdom may skip a generation and pass to William when the Queen Mother is no more. He seems to be popular and well liked and respected.
He is old enough ,is he not.

 

[FredC]

I thought he just wanted to be her “feminine hygiene product”???

She's probably a bit past that stage now. Perhaps an incontinent pad might be the modern day equivalent.