The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #2241  
Old 12-16-2016, 05:19 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by American Observer7 View Post
Why can't some of you just accept that Prince Harry loves Meghan! Many keep bring up the fact that Meghan is divorced!! SO WHAT? We don't know the reasons behind their divorce, so how can anyone judge that? I mean, REALLY now!!

Charles is heir to the throne and he is divorced and married to a woman who is divorced and he cheated on his first wife! So, how can anyone judge Meghan or complain about her past etc?

And finally if there were a problem of any kind (including religion) with him dating or marrying Meghan, it would ended by now and lasted for 8 months.

Harry is going to marry Meghan if that what he wants and it won't matter to him what anyone thinks. Harry is going to exactly what he wants regardless of so-called public opinion and the Queen will give her blessing.

Meghan is a self accomplished successful woman and mature! We all should be happy for Harry!
I couldn't care less if he marries her or not but issues, such as what the state if this marriage will be in the eyes of the Church of England, do matter as the British Monarchy, to which Harry belongs, has a significant link to it. I've got to laugh at the irony of people insisting that monarchies should be all modern in this day and age. The very idea of a family that is taxpayer funded and unelected is technically ridiculous but if we're going to have this old fashioned notion then we can't expect it to go hand in hand with modern ways of thinking. People who want to retain royal families simply don't want to have seen their princesses simulating sex scenes and being divorced etc. I have nothing against Meghan or Sophia of Sweden, as another example, but as I have said before, for those who hate Monarchy they hate it and that is that but people who support it have certain expectations and if they are not met you also lose your supporters and the end won't be far away. I don't say this as a condemnation of individuals but as an acknowledgement of the way things are. Similarly, will Harry be judged for his past relationships and naked behaviour in the same way Meghan is? No way. Is it fair? No. Does that sound old fashioned? Yes. Is it the truth nonetheless? Absolutely.
__________________

  #2242  
Old 12-16-2016, 05:35 PM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 5,894
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophie25 View Post
No the C of E wouldn't see her as a divorcee. It's correct that although in the past it was exactly the same as the Catholic Church in never, ever marrying divorcees who had been married in church before ( remember Princess Margaret's statement when she decided not to marry the divorced Townsend? She said she was"mindful of the Church's teaching that Christian marriage is indissoluble") it will now consider doing so in SOME cases. I presume these may be cases where the person wishing to remarry in Church had no or a much lesser role in the breakdown of their first marriage. It's perhaps not surprising that in the case of Charles and Camilla no offer of full remarriage was forthcoming by the Church, only a blessing. Meghan, as far as I know, didn't have a church wedding first time around so it wouldn't be a problem theologically for her to marry in either an Anglican or Catholic Church. This won't, unfortunatley, stop some people still regarding her as damaged goods, but that is a different matter.
Sorry but you are a little off. The Church of England would consider her a divorcee. Unlike the Catholic Church, they recognize civil unions. The difference is they do allow a divorcee to marry in the church with permission. So it's not like the clergy would say that Meghan was never married and therefore free yo marry in the church. They round dimply say you were married, but we recognize your divorced she permit you to marry here. There is a huge difference.
__________________

  #2243  
Old 12-16-2016, 05:50 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,455
sophie25 you make some really good points. Interesting post thank you.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
  #2244  
Old 12-16-2016, 06:00 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Posts: 1,400
I dont find her suitable at all. Not because she is a commoner or something, not at all! But I just cannot think of a soap star in a tacky series as a british royal duchess! Reminds me much too much of a certain Sophia Hellqvist....
  #2245  
Old 12-16-2016, 06:06 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Woodbridge, United States
Posts: 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal rob View Post
Someone said she didn't have anyone between her marriage and Harry. I thought there was hockey player, a golfer , and a well known chef who she was with when Harry first started texting her. Also I haven't read where she was married but guess it wasn't a church still not sure that means she wasn't married by the Church of England. This has most likely been asked before but as we don't know what religion she is but guessing not CoE would she have to agree to bring any children up CoE


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
People do go on dates, it's what young people do. And just like with Harry taking your picture with a member of the opposite sex does not mean you are in a relationship. Nor does celebrity gossip equal the truth.
  #2246  
Old 12-16-2016, 06:10 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Washington DC, United States
Posts: 335
Charles is heir to the throne. He is a divorcee and he is married to one and he was a cheat!

Now, what makes him acceptable and his divorce and that of his current wife a non issue?

It's non issue for them but it's an issue for Harry and Meghan if they want to marry? Oh! That makes a lot of sense!! It's hogwash is what it it is!!

It's an issue to some simply because it's Meghan.
  #2247  
Old 12-16-2016, 06:11 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Woodbridge, United States
Posts: 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by wartenberg7 View Post
I dont find her suitable at all. Not because she is a commoner or something, not at all! But I just cannot think of a soap star in a tacky series as a british royal duchess! Reminds me much too much of a certain Sophia Hellqvist....
Suits is not a soap, it is a legal drama so there is one thing to cross off your list.
  #2248  
Old 12-16-2016, 06:31 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 4,455
True, it's a drama about a legal firm and the people who work in it. Meghan has been in two raunchy scenes in it in six seasons. Suits isn't a tacky series at all, just a cable show about lawyers.

Princess Sofia of Sweden was a reality TV star in a truly tacky series and was crowned Miss Slitz by a man's magazine of the same name. She's never been an actress. If you are contracted to do a sex scene in a film or series then that's what you do as an actor or actress.

If Grace Kelly had been born fifty years later she would probably have appeared in the same sort of scenes in films. Over the past several decades bedroom scenes have become so commonplace people don't even raise an eyebrow any more.

I can remember in my youth seeing 'Women in Love' with Alan Bates and Glenda Jackson. That film contained scenes of simulated sex that were considered truly shocking at the time, yet Ms Jackson later became quite a prominent Labour MP and a CBE. People didn't associate those scenes she did with the person she became later in any way.
  #2249  
Old 12-16-2016, 06:40 PM
Angel.10's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Rome, Italy
Posts: 107
^ ^

Suits, soap? I didn't understand.. Meghan is an independent woman who has always earned her own money, is a social cause activist, represents women at the ONU, works in philanthropy in Africa, is intelligent, balanced, articulate. In the interview with Larry King she did very well, I don't understand so much prejudice of some people…It's ridiculous and absurd.
  #2250  
Old 12-16-2016, 06:43 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Posts: 1,400
Shes not an "actress". Maggie Smith or Judi Dench are actresses. Grace Kelly was an actress and Meryl Streep or ladies standing on stages in Londons west end theatres are real actresses and artists. But this girl? Come on!

Of course there are some slight differences between Hellqvist and Markle. But in essence they´re from the same block. They even look like sisters. If this wouldn´t be so sad and dramatic for the institution of monarchy it would be simply ridiculous.
  #2251  
Old 12-16-2016, 06:49 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 11,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by wartenberg7 View Post
Shes not an "actress". Maggie Smith or Judi Dench are actresses. Grace Kelly was an actress and Meryl Streep or ladies standing on stages in Londons west end theatres are real actresses and artists. But this girl? Come on!

Of course there are some slight differences between Hellqvist and Markle. But in essence they´re from the same block. They even look like sisters. If this wouldn´t be so sad and dramatic for the institution of monarchy it would be simply ridiculous.
Okay, I will bite...if she isn't an actress than what is she

I bet the Screen's Actors Guild would dispute your assessment. She might not be in the same league as Maggie Smith or Judi Dench [we are gonna have to spilt hairs about Grace Kelly] but she is most certainly an actress. A working one at that.
__________________
.

  #2252  
Old 12-16-2016, 06:53 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 8,910
I think its very easy for people to read the words "actress" and "cable show" and put the connotations of a airhead woman using her body in scintillating scenes to make a mark for herself. Although this has proven to be true on many occasions as we all know that sex sells, being an avid watcher of the USA channel which Suits plays on, I can attest that the quality of the programming this channel airs are some of the best in my book.

Meghan is an actress by profession and being cast in a role for Suits is an accomplishment that a multitude of young, aspiring women are aspiring for. What we need to do though is look beyond what she does to support herself and her lifestyle. A profession does not define the person. From all that I've read about Meghan since she came to the forefront by dating Harry, this is a person that wants to make a difference in the world. A woman that is a far cry from being the proverbial "airhead" and has found outlets in which she has thrown her efforts into to make this world a better place and she does it from the heart because she wants to and not for publicity or to stroke her own ego.

I think Harry just may have stumbled upon a woman that is very much like he is. They're both down to earth and unassuming and feel that the positions that they have found themselves in has opened doors for them where they find themselves being able to make a difference in someone else's lives. Its my opinion that from what I know now of the couple, they will make a formidable team for the good if they, sometime in the future, decide that is what they want to do. We know Harry does things from the heart. We know Meghan does things from the heart. Can it really get any better than that?

All careers start somewhere. Oprah Winfrey started as a talk show host in Chicago and is known today for her humanitarian work. Time honored actors and actresses that have made their mark on the entertainment world all started with auditions and working meager jobs to make ends meet.
__________________
“In my walks, every man I meet is my superior in some way, and in that I learn from him.”
~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
  #2253  
Old 12-16-2016, 06:58 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Posts: 1,400
Never heard of this lady before she became liked to the Prince. She´s pretty (well,that´s what some might call her at least...) and she performs in some sort of dubious soap (sorry, series) that will be forgotten in a few years time, like many girls without any real talents do. If this is what some people call "working" I wished she wouldn´t work at all...
Still I hope Harry or she herself come to their senses, have a nice little affair and end it in a couple of months!
  #2254  
Old 12-16-2016, 07:01 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Somewhere in, United Kingdom
Posts: 359
I'd say an actress is a pretty good background for a royal wife. Already used to the publicity to certain extent. Already used to the 'red carpet' side of the royal life. Already used to PR. That's a hge part of the public royal life, and actresses already are used to it.

And on a side note, soap actors are some of the hardest working people in the industry.
  #2255  
Old 12-16-2016, 07:02 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 4,455
So actors and actresses who appear in Drama series on cable networks aren't actors and actresses? Perhaps you should argue that out with the producers of those shows! Acting is a profession in which there is a 95% unemployment rate at any one time. Would you characterise Cressida Bonas (another ex of Harry's) as an actress? After all, she's appeared on the London stage in a few productions. An actress? Or are only people who appear in prestigious productions 'true' actors and actresses.

Meghan has made her living from film and TV roles since the early 2000's. She's appeared in small parts in eleven films. She's also had roles in TV films and other shows. Not an actress, then, remembering the huge unemployment rate in the profession?

There are huge differences between Meghan and Princess Sofia. Without going into excruciating details, Sofia was a nude model for men's magazines as a teenager. She was a Miss Slitz in Sweden. She appeared in an extremely tacky reality show in which she kissed another woman. She, again without going into detail, led a very colourful private life during this time.

Slight differences? Can you point me to any nude modelling for men's magazines that Meghan has done? Any reality show work in which she showed herself off, to put it politely!
  #2256  
Old 12-16-2016, 07:06 PM
zaika's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: london, United Kingdom
Posts: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by American Observer7 View Post
Charles is heir to the throne. He is a divorcee and he is married to one and he was a cheat!

Now, what makes him acceptable and his divorce and that of his current wife a non issue?

It's non issue for them but it's an issue for Harry and Meghan if they want to marry? Oh! That makes a lot of sense!! It's hogwash is what it it is!!

It's an issue to some simply because it's Meghan.
Because Charles is an Heir to the throne and Camilla comes from one of the oldest British aristocratic families, they can can away with a lot just by the virtue of their birth
Megan is a divorced soap opera American actress - British taxpayers should not have to support her
__________________
princess
  #2257  
Old 12-16-2016, 07:12 PM
soapstar's Avatar
Super Moderator
Picture of the Week Coordinator
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hermosa Beach, United States
Posts: 3,691
Quote:
Originally Posted by wartenberg7 View Post
I dont find her suitable at all. Not because she is a commoner or something, not at all! But I just cannot think of a soap star in a tacky series as a british royal duchess! Reminds me much too much of a certain Sophia Hellqvist....
But there's already an actress in the family (Lady Frederick Windsor) and let's not forget that Mike Tindall has been on a few reality shows. So it's kind of hard to argue that Meghan is unsuitable because of her profession.

Meghan may not be an Oscar nominated actress, but she is an actress. Not every actor will get an Oscar, or achieve worldwide fame. And don't knock soaps, many actors have launched their careers there (Julianne Moore, Morgan Freeman, Brad Pitt, Meg Ryan, Leonardo DiCaprio, Ricky Martin, Sigourney Weaver).
  #2258  
Old 12-16-2016, 07:14 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 8,910
Quote:
Originally Posted by zaika View Post
Because Charles is an Heir to the throne and Camilla comes from one of the oldest British aristocratic families, they can can away with a lot just by the virtue of their birth
Megan is a divorced soap opera American actress - British taxpayers should not have to support her
I would agree with you if it was up to the British taxpayer to determine who Harry marries and would actually be the sole support of her life with Harry. Seeing as neither of those are applicable in this case, it doesn't ring true with me.

Meghan could be a fortune teller with a traveling circus going from town to town and if Harry deems that is good enough for him and its who he wants, that's good enough for me.
__________________
“In my walks, every man I meet is my superior in some way, and in that I learn from him.”
~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
  #2259  
Old 12-16-2016, 07:15 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Somewhere in, United Kingdom
Posts: 359
Quote:
Originally Posted by zaika View Post
Because Charles is an Heir to the throne and Camilla comes from one of the oldest British aristocratic families, they can can away with a lot just by the virtue of their birth
Megan is a divorced soap opera American actress - British taxpayers should not have to support her
British tax payers are not one unified group with an unified opinion, we have nor should we we have any say in who Harry should marry.
  #2260  
Old 12-16-2016, 07:25 PM
zaika's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: london, United Kingdom
Posts: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I would agree with you if it was up to the British taxpayer to determine who Harry marries and would actually be the sole support of her life with Harry. Seeing as neither of those are applicable in this case, it doesn't ring true with me.

Meghan could be a fortune teller with a traveling circus going from town to town and if Harry deems that is good enough for him and its who he wants, that's good enough for me.
yes, but why have the Royal Family then, if it's a just a half Royal half common. In a few generations, it will be just another common family - if they want to stay Royal, then they have to have Royal blood, and it's getting thinner every time they bring a commoner into it. They can't have it both ways, either they are Royal or at least noble/aristocratic or they are not. British women should not have to curtsy to Meghan Markle ( an American ) , that's just ridiculous.
__________________

__________________
princess
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 guests)
 
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





Popular Tags
albania aristocracy best outfit best outfit october 2016 birthday catherine child christening crown prince frederik crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion crown princess victoria crown princess victoria hats denmark duke of edinburgh europe fashion poll kate king abdullah ii marriage maxima in australia and new zealand monarchy monarchy versus republic natural disasters nobel 2016 november 2016 october 2016 parliament picture of the week prince charles prince philip princessanne princess marie princess marie eveningwear princess mary princess mary eveningwear princess mary fashion princess mary hats princess sofia queen elizabeth ii queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia cocktail dresses queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia eveningwear queen letizia fashion queen mathilde queen mathilde daytime fashion queen mathilde fashion queen mathilde in jordan queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania queen rania fashion queen rania in australia rohan romanov royal wedding state visit succession sweden swedish royal family the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:42 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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