The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #661  
Old 04-29-2008, 07:21 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,894
General discussion about religion and ethics should be done in the chat room, please.
__________________

  #662  
Old 05-01-2008, 01:34 PM
Empress's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 3,123
Frankly, I think that it all boils down to a few things. Camilla, as a divorcee, was not entirely acceptable as a spouse for a future sovereign historically speaking. Diana or no Diana. However, times change, and she was accepted. Frankly, I find this a bit sad, not because I like her or don't like, I don't have any particular feelings for her or Diana, but I think that it is sad because as a future monarch and supposed "upper crust" it is the job of Charles to set the standards for his "people". Anyone who is in any position of influence should realize this and take it seriously. I think the behaviour of all three was appalling! And not at all respectable, and then to follow it up by breaking entirely with tradition in one fell swoop, marrying a divorcee, and then giving her a lesser title is just stupid.

Now as to whether a new title should be created for Camilla, I should hope not. Titles should have some historic signifigance and not be thrown about willy nillly as an "I'm sorry" or other senseless gesture.

And I agree that her children from a previous marriage should not benefit from her current marriage publicly at least.
__________________

__________________
  #663  
Old 05-01-2008, 02:07 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by Empress View Post
..... I find this a bit sad, not because I like her or don't like, I don't have any particular feelings for her or Diana, but I think that it is sad because as a future monarch and supposed "upper crust" it is the job of Charles to set the standards for his "people".
Divorces have happened within the 'upper crust' (upper class & Aristocracy) long before Charles' time, even before Henry. I find it hard to believe that anyone from Charles' social circle or class, expects anyone to set them an example.

Aristocrats and upper classes are still human.
  #664  
Old 05-01-2008, 02:20 PM
Empress's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 3,123
I agree that they are still human, and it's not so much the divorce that is sad, but the behaviour that surrounded it, before and after. And so publicly...
__________________
  #665  
Old 05-01-2008, 02:32 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by Empress View Post
I agree that they are still human, and it's not so much the divorce that is sad, but the behaviour that surrounded it, before and after. And so publicly...
Unfortunately it wasn't Charles or Camilla that fed the gossip or made accusations. Separations are invariably messy and if the media and buying public had allowed them to 'sort it out', in private, who knows what might have happened. There were suggestions that Princess Alexander and Prince Joachim had other partners, but discretion and dignity allowed for a less public separation and divorce.

Do I blame Diana, Charles or Camilla for the debacle, yes in part, but the biggest contributors were the media and the celebrity obsessed public.
  #666  
Old 05-02-2008, 08:07 AM
LadyCat's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: WM, United States
Posts: 371
Quote:
Originally Posted by scooter View Post
Look, it was going to be an uphill battle when they decided they wanted to marry, constitutionally as well as the man in the street issue. There was a BBC poll at the time of the engagement that about 2/3 of the respondants took the position that if Charles wanted to marry Camilla he should step down from the succession.
Charles and Camilla's engagement announcement was not even a blip on my radar, unfortunately. My life was pretty crazy at the time it happened so it went pretty much unnoticed by me.

I really didn't intend to come across as blaming Diana and her still loyal following for the situation. Usually I refrain from responding to various posts or voicing my opinions in the heat of the moment because it ends up sounding much like a rant, as in this case.

I place little faith in these so-called public opinion polls, as they usually are not in keeping with actually public opinion for various reasons. Let's face it, the person most likely to respond to an open poll is the person strongly against the subject. Those who are ambivalent or "for" it generally feel no need to voice it, the detractors are not so silent.

There are quite a few irrational minds when it comes to Camilla. Some dislike her because of Diana, some for other reasons. But is it not all water under the bridge after so many years? Charles and Camilla are obviously happy, despite claims by various news outlets to the contrary. Camilla carries out her duties with grace, dignity, class and warmth. She has proved to be quite an asset to the Royal Family despite the bad press from years ago. In short, she has been excellent Duchess of Cornwall, and will make an excellent Queen.

Cat
  #667  
Old 05-02-2008, 09:51 AM
Empress's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 3,123
I don't think that (at least for me) that it has anything to do with the current situation of Charles and Camilla. I think that everyone has a right to be happy. For me it is simply that they all (all 3 of them) behaved badly, especially since they were in a public sphere and knew that everything they did would be detailed minutely in the papers, and both Diana and Charles encouraged that by airing their dirty laundry in public with interviews. Wrong on all accounts. Camilla should have stayed away from a married man just as Charles should have had the gumption to either stay true to his vows or bow out gracefully, whilst Diana should have stayed true to her marriage vows, or at the very least they should have been discreet.

The lack of respect for the state of marriage is my problem with all three of them. And the fact that they clearly did not consider the children involved when they started trashing one another publicly just makes me angry. Why should I feel sympathy for any of them or think that Charles deserves to be King any more than Diana or Camilla deserved/s to be Queen when none of the three managed to behave with a modicum of respect in the past. Granted Camilla did not air her dirty laundry in public, and for that I commend her, but she did conduct an affair with a married man. I think that a monarch should be an example of how people should lead their lives. And if they choose to do things that are morally reprehensible then they should at least be discreet. I think that it would be difficult for anyone to follow in QEII's footsteps, but they should at least attempt to do so if they want to be a respected monarch.

Now, having said that, I think that Camilla has done well since becoming Charles' wife. But for me, her previous actions can't be wiped out any more than the other two.

However, if I must choose which one I think behaved with the most class (and I use that term sparingly) then I would have to choose Camilla, because she at least attempted to keep the whole mess quiet, at least from her end.
__________________
  #668  
Old 05-02-2008, 11:15 AM
jcbcode99's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Richmond Area, United States
Posts: 1,978
I agree that all parties in this debacle share the blame--who holds the most blame? That is a question for considerable debate (as this thread has amply demonstrated) but as much as I admire and respect Prince Charles perhaps he is at the most fault for being so charming, having two women love him must have not always been a walk in the park, and he should have married Camilla when he had the chance. I do think he loved Diana and wanted to make it work but she had her own set of issues, he had his, and both were probably rather selfish. The least selfish person in this whole situation was probably Camilla, who never really wanted anything more than Charles' love and was probably quite happy going on her way in the country wearing her muddy boots. I believe she has been unchanging or unwavering in her love and committment to him--and quiet to the tabloids, televison, and books. Her discretion is what makes me applaud her; it is that type of trait which will make her an excellent Queen, because she is the wife of the monarch it is the title she deserves, and in my opinion, has earned.
__________________
Janet

"We make a living by what we do; we make a life by what we give" Winston Churchill
  #669  
Old 05-02-2008, 11:26 AM
Empress's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 3,123
And there is the crux of the matter. Frankly I don't think (and I hope) that she does not give a fig about whatever her title is. If she truly married for love and would be happy with her muddy botts, then she does not care is my opinion. And if she does care, well, then I would think less of her. A person should choose to be with someone for who they are and not what they are to become. Or what they can gain from the marriage.
__________________
  #670  
Old 05-02-2008, 11:39 AM
Al_bina's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: City, Kazakhstan
Posts: 7,402
With all due respect, jcbcode99, but your depiction of Duchess of Cornwall is a way too ideal and somewhat Utopian. She is supposed to be human with all negative and positive traits. Am I correct? She made her choices after pondering over them, I dare to assume. Yes, she was and is discreet, but selfless is questionable. No one is selfless, when it comes to love.
Generally speaking, people expect too much from the British Royal family that is keen on showing their human side. Saving the face is not so important nowadays anyway. People, who dislike Duchess of Cornwall for any reason, should keep in mind that everything tends to be temporary in this world. It is as simple as that.
By the way, I am in fully agreement with Empress' opinions on the matter.
__________________
"I never did mind about the little things"
Amanda, "Point of No Return"
  #671  
Old 05-02-2008, 01:17 PM
jcbcode99's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Richmond Area, United States
Posts: 1,978
It may be too idealized and utopian (a word I love, by the way, that is not used much anymore) but I honestly see her that way. Now, I agree that everything is more complicated than I stated--but it was a quick summation of my take on it. But, honestly, Camilla never talks to tabloids, her friends don't talk, there is none of this behavior that we have seen elsewhere; she is happiest in the country and those Camilla-gate tapes prove that she loves Charles for Charles.
That being said (and apologies to Warren for moving away from topic brieflyl), Empress raises a point that has not been discussed as much as I thought it would have been: Camilla doesn't really care about her title. I have to say that I would probably agree with that statement--she doesn't strike me as the sort to ride a tricycle around Buckingham Palace singing "I'm going to be Queen"--she's very low-key. But, even if she doesn't care about her title does that mean she should receive a lesser title? I don't think it does--I base my rationale for Camilla being Queen on the fact that as the wife of a King she should hold the same rank. If that does not happen, I do like the idea of HRH The Princess Consort, Duchess/Countess of something she can pass down (even if Tom doesn't necesssarily deserve it I'm sure the grandchildren would appreciate the gesture). I happen to think that is a good compromise not dissimilar to what occurred with Prince Phillip.
__________________
Janet

"We make a living by what we do; we make a life by what we give" Winston Churchill
  #672  
Old 05-02-2008, 01:56 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,978
Strictly regarding Camilla and Charles

Quote:
title she deserves
I admitt, I find this interesting and it make's one think, for the first time throughout the whole process, about what is entitled by tradition, and what is deserved via action's.

There is needless to say, a comparable difference and it is here that I find it becomes a question of substantial bearing on the matter.

I live not in a world of ignorance, and I fully understand, as I always have, that the Princess Consort alternative was mentioned, and proposed, only because of the circumstances in which Camilla, a married woman, sought (or rather, was the one sought out perhaps) the extra marital companionship of another, the Prince of Wales, who himself being a married man, consented to an affair. An adultress, a mistress, a homewrecker and a cheat, who against the sanctity of her vows, endeavoured to partake in a sexual liaison with a married man and in the process, would not forgo the pursuit even when it became public knowledge. Unfortunately, and I mean unfortunately, for a great many Camilla, no matter the style or titles she now hold's and will proceed to bear as a lawful and devoted wife, will, as a consequence of all those years back, be 'the other woman', and that is something which, I believe, a vast array of peoples in Britain continue to begrudge her for.

Adultress, wife, Duchess, Queen? Perhaps Clarence House has made the best decision, no matter the traditional entitlements of a reigning consort. The situation, no matter what anyone says, is unique and should be accorded the diligence it so deserves.

The thought of Camilla being crowned Queen does leave a bad taste in the mouths of more than perhaps it should, and what a society of hypocrites we live in. Though of our leaders and figureheads we expect (though realise they are human themselves), that they represent what is good and wholsome in society. Charles and Camilla however represented the opposite and the public can remain relatively unforgiving of people who they believe have let them down, one way or another. And though it may sound weird to some, the royal family really is the centre of British culture and nationalism and their actions have a kind of ripple effect through society. No matter the class.

So, while she may be entitled to become Queen, it perhaps has more to with what scoiety percieves as being deserved and what it is they believe inspires that confidence.

Now, the above does not expresses my personal thoughts on the affair, because it has always remained my strong belief that what's their business is their business and my wanting of Camilla to be created Princess Consort is not influenced, in any way, by her past actions, or the past actions of her husband. It just so happened I really liked it, and through it all was able to identify a very real and supportive opinion of it for an array benevolent reasons which I continue to stand by...
__________________

"Dressing is a way of life" - Monsieur Saint Laurent
  #673  
Old 05-04-2008, 06:08 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame Royale View Post
....SHORTENED QUOTE.... An adultress, a mistress, a homewrecker and a cheat, who against the sanctity of her vows, endeavoured to partake in a sexual liaison with a married man and in the process, would not forgo the pursuit even when it became public knowledge.........
So, while she may be entitled to become Queen, it perhaps has more to with what scoiety percieves as being deserved and what it is they believe inspires that confidence.
I strongly disagree with your label of home wrecker, Charles' marriage to his former wife was going downhill within a week of the ceremony, IMO. Society seems to be a lot more forgiving nowadays, too many are caught up in the 66.6% of marriages that end in divorce and the probable 66.6% of 'survivors' being miserable within their marriages
Quote:
Now, the above does not expresses my personal thoughts on the affair, because it has always remained my strong belief that what's their business is their business and my wanting of Camilla to be created Princess Consort is not influenced, in any way, by her past actions, or the past actions of her husband. It just so happened I really liked it, and through it all was able to identify a very real and supportive opinion of it for an array benevolent reasons which I continue to stand by...
You say what you have written does not express your 'personal thoughts', then who are you suggesting that you are speaking for? Then why are you so strongly against Camilla becoming Queen to Charles' King. You state you have nothing against her and yet you would be happy to see her denied her rightful title. That you like the title Princess Consort, why, because it is a lesser title?
  #674  
Old 05-04-2008, 06:28 AM
MARG's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 6,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon View Post
. . . . You state you have nothing against her and yet you would be happy to see her denied her rightful title. That you like the title Princess Consort, why, because it is a lesser title?
In these few words you seem to have identified the big contradiction in terms.

Nothing against her/May actually quite like her BUT Don't want her to have her rightful title = Queen.

This is so utterly bizzarre. It beggars belief that people can actually rationalise this position.
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
  #675  
Old 05-04-2008, 08:25 AM
LadyCat's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: WM, United States
Posts: 371
If Camilla can be labeled "an adultress, a mistress, a homewrecker and a cheat, who against the sanctity of her vows, endeavoured to partake in a sexual liaison with a married man and in the process, would not forgo the pursuit even when it became public knowledge[Madame_Royale]" can't the same be said about Charles? After all it takes two to tango and they were both married to other people at the time.

For whatever reasons they chose not to extricate themselves from their respective bad marriages before they took up with one another. I'm not saying it's right, in fact it goes against everything I personally believe, but it happens every day, in every walk of life, in every country in the world.

Bertie cheated shamelessly and publicly on Alexandra and still became King. The situations are different as none of his many mistresses became his wife and later Queen, but my point is that it has been happening both inside and outside the Royal Family for generations. And if Camilla is not deserving of becoming Queen then it follows that those who feel this way would consider Charles unworthy of being King.

It is entirely possible that Queen Elizabeth will live another 10 to 20 years. Surely in that length of time people can forgive, if not forget, and judge Camilla by her actions of today and not her past actions. That is all water under the bridge and the people most affected, Charles and Camilla's respective children, seen to be quite happy that their parents are happy.

Charles has done a lot of good as Prince of Wales, I especially like his Poundbury project, his commitment to the environment and organic food production. I love that he abhors cookie-cutter housing developments as I feel much the same. He has been a King in Waiting for a very long time and there is no end in sight.

Separately or together, I have grown to like these two over the past few years, which as always falls in the "for what it's worth" department as I am an American, therefore Charles will not be my King, nor Camilla my Queen.

Cat
  #676  
Old 05-04-2008, 09:22 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: katonah, United States
Posts: 2,582
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon View Post
I strongly disagree with your label of home wrecker, Charles' marriage to his former wife was going downhill within a week of the ceremony, IMO.
Regardless of the rationalization of the state of the Wales Marriage one week into it, Camilla chose to betray her wedding vows to Andrew Parker-Bowles, however many weeks into it (before and after the Wales marriage) to commit adultery with Charles, which effectively 'wrecked' the PB marriage, thus the homewrecker/adulteress description. Look, now they are happy; but must we pretend that the past does not exist? Perhaps people will be more accepting as time goes by. But denying the past and pretending it did not happen costs credibility when discussing the present or the future. JMO.
  #677  
Old 05-05-2008, 01:40 AM
MARG's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 6,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by scooter View Post
. . . . But denying the past and pretending it did not happen costs credibility when discussing the present or the future. JMO.
I think this thread is very good as it exposes the contradictions most of us live with. Basically, I (we) can do whatever we want, but Prince Charles may not!

I don't know about any of you, but I am not the same person I was 15 years ago, nor 10, nor even 5. I am a person who (hopefully) has lived, loved, learned and grown in knowledge. I have learned the shades of grey that inhabit the spaces between black and white. Because I have changed, I expect that everyone else has too, and that includes Charles and Camilla.

There must surely be a cut-off point at which we and they can leave the past behind and emerge as a better person, the sum of all our parts. I am persuaded that Charles and Camilla have more than paid their dues, and it is surely way past time that we allow them to be the sum of all their parts too.

They are a wonderful couple today, and their children have accepted who and what their parents are and are in close and happy relationships with them. If they can move on, it's about time we did!
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
  #678  
Old 05-05-2008, 02:28 AM
cde cde is offline
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Marina del rey, United States
Posts: 235
[QUOTE=scooter;761992]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon View Post
I strongly disagree with your label of home wrecker, Charles' marriage to his former wife was going downhill within a week of the ceremony, IMO. ]
Regardless of the rationalization of the state of the Wales Marriage one week into it, Camilla chose to betray her wedding vows to Andrew Parker-Bowles, however many weeks into it (before and after the Wales marriage) to commit adultery with Charles, which effectively 'wrecked' the PB marriage, thus the homewrecker/adulteress description. Look, now they are happy; but must we pretend that the past does not exist? Perhaps people will be more accepting as time goes by. But denying the past and pretending it did not happen costs credibility when discussing the present or the future. JMO.
Scooter, if you are going to discuss PB marriage and who was the marriage wrecker, at least be accurate Andrew Parker Bowles cheating on Camilla continuously throughout their marriage pretty much from the honeymoon was the real wrecker of their marriage. When Camilla started her affair up again he didn't care, he encouraged it. IMO Andrew's place in this is pretty ignored, but he was, I strongly believe, the domino effect of this whole thing. Camilla's cheating really only became a problem for Andrew when Diana outed Camilla and it made the papers eventually leading to their divorce.
  #679  
Old 05-05-2008, 05:01 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by scooter View Post
Regardless of the rationalization of the state of the Wales Marriage one week into it, Camilla chose to betray her wedding vows to Andrew Parker-Bowles, however many weeks into it (before and after the Wales marriage) to commit adultery with Charles, which effectively 'wrecked' the PB marriage, thus the homewrecker/adulteress description. Look, now they are happy; but must we pretend that the past does not exist? Perhaps people will be more accepting as time goes by. But denying the past and pretending it did not happen costs credibility when discussing the present or the future. JMO.
As cde has pointed out, and as most people know, or so I thought, APB was the homewrecker in the PB household. I have read through my post and the mislabeling I objected to was homewrecker, but I do realise some don't like to miss any opportunity. If you really want to be accurate, Diana wrecked the Parker Bowles marriage when she outed the affair between Charles and Camilla, (whilst omiting her own affairs)!
  #680  
Old 05-05-2008, 08:00 AM
sirhon11234's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,467
Well Charles publicly confirmed in his interview that he and Camilla had an affair. After that they did get a divorce since everyone knew the marriage was over between them.
IMO Charles and Diana were one of the reasons of the breakdown of the PB marriage.
__________________

__________________
"I think the biggest disease the world suffers from in this day and age is the disease of people feeling unloved."
Diana, the Princess of Wales
Closed Thread

Tags
camilla, duchess of cornwall, prince charles, prince of wales, relationships, royal duties


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall: Visit to Portugal - March 28-30, 2011 Princess Agnes The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall 45 04-06-2011 07:24 PM
Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall Current Events 12: February-March 2006 Elspeth Current Events Archive 203 03-08-2006 11:30 AM




Popular Tags
albania best outfit birthday carl gustaf chris o'neill crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion crown princess victoria current events denmark fashion poll general news hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume infanta cristina infanta leonor infanta sofia iñaki urdangarín king felipe king felipe vi king philippe letizia monarchy news november 2016 october 2016 picture of the week prince alexander prince carl philip prince charles prince daniel prince felix prince gabriel prince nicholas prince oscar princess claire of luxembourg princess estelle princess leonore princess madeleine princess mary princess mary fashion 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 mathilde daytime fashion queen mathilde fashion 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 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 victoria


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 09:01 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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