The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #261  
Old 09-04-2017, 01:31 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 3,807

Princess Anne's first marriage took place in November, so I think that would work for Harry as well.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #262  
Old 09-04-2017, 01:31 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Posts: 5,711
It would be lovely, if it happened in fact.
I also have a feeling that Harry asked Meghan this most important question in the romantic settings of African sunset (like William did with Kate).
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #263  
Old 09-04-2017, 01:38 PM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 6,530
I still stand by my thought all the more reason he wouldn't propose there.

I think Harry will find the perfect timing and location special to him and Meghan. Perhaps a return trip to see the northern lights this winter, and a May wedding. It was their first trip as a couple and the northern lights were special for them. Who knows.
Reply With Quote
  #264  
Old 09-04-2017, 01:43 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 9,393
Seeing that we knew that Harry spent August 31st at KP with Meghan and they went away for the weekend, its even possible that he proposed to her while walking the corgis at Balmoral with HM throwing an engagement BBQ.

I can picture HM and Meghan happily chatting while washing the dishes clean after everyone has eaten.
__________________
“In my walks, every man I meet is my superior in some way, and in that I learn from him.”
~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #265  
Old 09-04-2017, 01:47 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 5,570
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirabel View Post

Princess Anne's first marriage took place in November, so I think that would work for Harry as well.
The Queen's 70th (I think that's the one) wedding anniversary is in November...I think they are having a big party....so not sure they'd do anything then.


LaRae

Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post
I still stand by my thought all the more reason he wouldn't propose there.

I think Harry will find the perfect timing and location special to him and Meghan. Perhaps a return trip to see the northern lights this winter, and a May wedding. It was their first trip as a couple and the northern lights were special for them. Who knows.
Me too..I don't think there was an African proposal.


LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #266  
Old 09-04-2017, 01:52 PM
Emme's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: East Coast, United States
Posts: 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirabel View Post

Princess Anne's first marriage took place in November, so I think that would work for Harry as well.
Elizabeth was a November bride as well!

I think that given Meghan’s age with regards to fertility, and the advanced age of Harry’s beloved grandparents, this is going to come together quickly in the neR future.

P.S. No offense to Meghan re: age. I had baby #3 it was all routine. When I returned to my OB about 10 months later, pregnant with #4, I was suddenly classified “advanced maternal age.” I used to joke with him (OB) about how seemingly overnight I got really old!!
Reply With Quote
  #267  
Old 09-04-2017, 01:59 PM
Skippyboo's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 4,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Seeing that we knew that Harry spent August 31st at KP with Meghan and they went away for the weekend, its even possible that he proposed to her while walking the corgis at Balmoral with HM throwing an engagement BBQ.



I can picture HM and Meghan happily chatting while washing the dishes clean after everyone has eaten.


Well considering the Queen, Philip, Charles were all at the Highland Games on Saturday and church on Sunday doesn't seem likely.
Reply With Quote
  #268  
Old 09-04-2017, 02:03 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Somewhere in, United Kingdom
Posts: 401
Reading this thread, it seems like there really is a big event every month, which would prevent an engagement announcement or wedding, so I'm thinking, that these events won't stop Harry and Meghan, if/when the announcement happens.
Reply With Quote
  #269  
Old 09-04-2017, 02:09 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 5,570
I look for late October, December or Jan ....if that soon.


LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #270  
Old 09-04-2017, 02:17 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 2,602
Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post
Honestly if there was any chance the queen wouldn't give her approval I dont think it would have gone even this far. Honestly this far from the throne, I think the queen's main concern is her grandkids are happy.

In this day and age, even Charlotte has minimal chance of seeing the throne. Spares in modern age of medicine and lack of assassinations and royals going to war, are very uncommonly actually needed. Since marrying a divorcee is allowed, no worry George would pull a King Edward.

I think may wedding at earliest. Possibly June if they go with a wedding say at Windsor. May choose a smaller wedding like Edward.
Albert II of Belgium was a spare and both he and his eldest son ended up being kings because King Baudouin didn't have children of his own. That might happen also in Luxembourg if Guillaume and Stéphanie don't have children and the succession ends up passing to Felix and his children. So, although it is highly unlikely that a spare would become monarch nowadays, it is not completely unheard of, even in recent times.
Reply With Quote
  #271  
Old 09-04-2017, 02:19 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: central valley, United States
Posts: 821
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helen6010 View Post
Regardless of Royal status, The Hague convention would prevent her taking any children back to the US.
I've actually handled Hague Treaty cases in court several times, and the Treaty doesn't 'prevent' a change of domicile. The Treaty simply provides that British law would govern custody/domicile of any children of the couple, assuming they were living in Britain at the time of separation.
The treaty usually comes into play when one parent has taken the children to a different Country without the left behind parent's permission. In those cases the Court of the taking parent's country orders that the children be returned to their original country of habitual residence so that courts in that country can decide with whom and where the child/children will live going forward. This applies in straightforward cases where both countries are signatories to the treaty and the left behind parent's Hague petition makes it to court within 1 year of the taking.
Sorry for the thread drift, but wanted to clarify what the Hague treaty on International Child Abduction actually can/cannot do.
I do not think Harry and Meghan, should they marry, will ever need the lawyers digging into an international treaty regarding children they haven't yet had
Reply With Quote
  #272  
Old 09-04-2017, 02:23 PM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 6,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
Albert II of Belgium was a spare and both he and his eldest son ended up being kings because King Baudouin didn't have children of his own. That might happen also in Luxembourg if Guillaume and Stéphanie don't have children and the succession ends up passing to Felix and his children. So, although it is highly unlikely that a spare would become monarch nowadays, it is not completely unheard of, even in recent times.
Note I said uncommon. Minimal. Not never or zero. Even before the birth of new baby Cambridge, Harrys necessity in line was vastly minimal at best. The chance for Charlotte is slim but possibly there. But beyond that no.

Last time the heir to the throne didn't succeed the throne was in the case of George V following the death of his older brother in 1892. Though there was doubt Edward viii could have kids, so even if he didn't abdicate, his niece may have followed.
Reply With Quote
  #273  
Old 09-04-2017, 02:38 PM
Tianna's Avatar
Newbie
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Gainesville, United States
Posts: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emme View Post
Just my opinion...

I think Harry and Meghan are engaged. I think an announcement will be made by Harry’s birthday in September. I think they will wed somewhere between November and February.

Again, just my opinion.


ITA. I think Harry proposed to Meghan she was in London with her mother.
Reply With Quote
  #274  
Old 09-04-2017, 02:43 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 5,570
Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post
Note I said uncommon. Minimal. Not never or zero. Even before the birth of new baby Cambridge, Harrys necessity in line was vastly minimal at best. The chance for Charlotte is slim but possibly there. But beyond that no.

Last time the heir to the throne didn't succeed the throne was in the case of George V following the death of his older brother in 1892. Though there was doubt Edward viii could have kids, so even if he didn't abdicate, his niece may have followed.
I think there were rumors he had at least 1 illegitimate child.


LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #275  
Old 09-04-2017, 02:57 PM
duchessrachel's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Birmingham, United States
Posts: 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by O-H Anglophile View Post
How were BF/GF gradually introduced to the public before getting engaged? Gradually because they mostly dated for many years?

Living together before marriage is not a necessity--commitment to your spouse and life together is the necessity.

If Harry and Meghan have spent their times together wisely, (and since they are not hitting the nightclub scene, I'd say they may be) they are finding out about each other and their commitment to each other, and the possibility of building a life together.

And BTW--there are cell phones and skype nowadays for the times apart.
I agree. I think the fact that the times they are together seem to be actually time spent together instead of out in public, they are probably getting to know each other better than people who have dated for years but have spent a lot of their time together on the nightclub circuit and out in public. Amen, about the not living together

Quote:
Originally Posted by princesslily View Post
My main concern is Meghan getting fed up of not being able to voice her strong minded opinions and finding it difficult with all the restricting protocol both in public and in private during family gatherings. This isn't just about dealing with the media.
I do agree that not being able to express her opinions publicly are something she has to consider. Hopefully, by spending time together she will learn if she loves him enough to make those sacrifices, because it will be her making more sacrifices than him. I also agree that there is really no huge rush on the children issue either. My husband has a cousin who did not get married until she was 40 and had a child at 42 and then one at 44. I don't agree, however, that she is not "suitable" for the Royal Family given the baggage the BRF have accumulated, and not just since the 80's. But I do respect your right to your opinion and your freedom to express it. All of our different opinions is what makes for good discussion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post

Of course another two children to the Cambridge's and HM won't have to give consent anyway - so Kate, Harry needs you to have twins asap
I had that same thought about the consent issue but, somehow,I think he would still seek the Queen's approval out of love and respect for her, and I believe that she would give it.
Reply With Quote
  #276  
Old 09-04-2017, 03:14 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 5,570
It's not like she's (previously) been out every day off with a bullhorn spouting her viewpoints. Everyone self censors due to jobs, family etc.


LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #277  
Old 09-04-2017, 04:21 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 3,807
I hope that, if they do get married, it's a royal wedding at the Abbey or St. Paul's, and not something low-key at Windsor.

I want the works! (Not that the RF cares what I want).
Reply With Quote
  #278  
Old 09-04-2017, 04:45 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Somewhere in, United Kingdom
Posts: 401
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
It's not like she's (previously) been out every day off with a bullhorn spouting her viewpoints. Everyone self censors due to jobs, family etc.


LaRae
Didn't she tweet one tweet about the last US election, but other than that, she hasn't been loud about politics.
It seemed to be no issue for her to shut down The Tig, walk away from her Reitmans deal. I don't really think not voicing her opinion about politics in public is a big issue for her.
Reply With Quote
  #279  
Old 09-04-2017, 05:07 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 2,602
The "first six in line" cutoff is a rule that was put forward by the politicians when the Succession to the Crown Act was passed. Whether consent is legally required or not, I can't imagine Harry getting married without the Queen's and , incidentally, the PoW's consent, so IMHO it doesn't really matter in practice if Harry is 6th or 7th in line.

Having said that, I still think it is unlikely the Cambridges will have more than 3 children and Harry will move up again in the order of succession when Charles is king, so he is probably going to stay within the first six in line anyway.

Quote:
I hope that, if they do get married, it's a royal wedding at the Abbey or St. Paul's, and not something low-key at Windsor.

I want the works! (Not that the RF cares what I want.
As I said before, I'm pretty sure the wedding will be televised, but it will be more like Edward's wedding than William's , which is OK and makes more sense.
Reply With Quote
  #280  
Old 09-04-2017, 05:14 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 5,570
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cocoasneeze View Post
Didn't she tweet one tweet about the last US election, but other than that, she hasn't been loud about politics.
It seemed to be no issue for her to shut down The Tig, walk away from her Reitmans deal. I don't really think not voicing her opinion about politics in public is a big issue for her.
Yeah...she really hasn't, IMO, been what I consider politically active when you compare her to other known figures.

IIRC she has done interviews in the past about her desire for a family and willingness to give up acting or a realization they might not go together. To me it seems that yes if she's asked about political issues she has been willing to talk about them...but past that she's not the type to push herself forward about it.


LaRae

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirabel View Post
I hope that, if they do get married, it's a royal wedding at the Abbey or St. Paul's, and not something low-key at Windsor.

I want the works! (Not that the RF cares what I want).

I have said before here it wouldn't surprise me if they keep it lower key due to her past marriage and the fact they want to be more private about their lives...however by the same token, because of who he is I can also see them having a wedding in London but not on the scale of Williams.

Myself I think it would be funny if they decided to do something like Pippa did ...no media allowed in, only pics gotten as they enter/leave the Church etc. Although I don't think this is likely ...the security would be a nightmare for a small Church/rural setting.


LaRae
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 34 (7 members and 27 guests)
Alliec76, AlowVera, American Observer7, JuliSt, O-H Anglophile, Princess of Durham, teddymac
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"Harry and Meghan: The Love Story" eya Royal Library 30 10-28-2017 02:39 AM




Popular Tags
affair best outfit birthday carl gustaf chris o'neill crown princess mary crown princess victoria current events denmark duchess of cambridge style duke of cambridge dutch earl of snowdon fashion poll general news hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duchess stéphanie's fashion & style hereditary grand duke guillaume infanta cristina infanta leonor infanta sofia iñaki urdangarín king abdullah in australia king felipe king felipe vi king philippe king willem-alexander letizia liechtenstein monarchy news official visit picture of the week prince alexander prince carl philip prince daniel prince felix prince gabriel prince harry prince nicholas prince oscar princess beatrice princess claire princess claire of luxembourg princess estelle princess leonore princess madeleine princess of asturias princess sofia princess victoria queen elizabeth ii queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen mathilde queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania queen silvia state visit stephanie sweden swedish royal family united kingdom victoria



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:34 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017
Jelsoft Enterprises