The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #201  
Old 10-03-2007, 04:07 PM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Nowadays it's quite popular in Germany's upper class family kids to go to university. We even have a real problem especially with girls who were actually good at school, so they have the marks to apply for a place to become a veterinarian. That topic is well-loved for all these girls had horses, of course... They start to study and a lot of them even finish their education. But they don't work as vets! Or if they do they concentrate on small animals like rabbits, dogs and cats.

While the male students who would work as vets for larger breeds like cattle don't get a place as these are occupied by the girls who had the better marks in their exams. So at the moment there is a discussion about restricting the acceptance of female students for this topic....Which is a difficult thing to do due to gender equality laws...
__________________

__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
Reply With Quote
  #202  
Old 10-04-2007, 05:28 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
It is strange how times move on. I went to uni after the demise of my first husband and my parents were horrified even then. When my own boys and girls went to uni, everyone thought it was acceptable, although for the girls that was after finishing school.

Now if children don't go to a 'good' university and study certain 'accepted' degree courses, or go to RMAS, they are seen as failures by some.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #203  
Old 10-06-2007, 01:34 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Merseyside, United Kingdom
Posts: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon View Post
It is strange how times move on. I went to uni after the demise of my first husband and my parents were horrified even then. When my own boys and girls went to uni, everyone thought it was acceptable, although for the girls that was after finishing school.

Now if children don't go to a 'good' university and study certain 'accepted' degree courses, or go to RMAS, they are seen as failures by some.
Surely this thread has rather strayed off its topic of Charles and Camilla's marriage and whether it would have been possible in the 1970s. The fact is that in 1972/3 Prince Charles being under 25 years of age could not have got engaged to Camilla without the express permission of the Queen. That is what the Royal Marriage Act of 1772 (as amended in 1956) says. We also know (thanks to docments released by the Public Record Office in 2002 after the Queen Mother's death) that the Queen was so determined to retain her powers under the Royal Marriage Act that she rejected the suggestion of the Lord Chancellor (the highest judge in the country) that the Act should be abolished because it was "totally anachronistic".
The law is still on the UK statute book to this day despite an attempt by a Labour peer (Lord Dubs) to put through a bill to abolish it in January 2005, with what he thought was Tony Blair's approval. When he stood up in the House of Lords to speak to the Bill, shortly after Blair had had his regular meeting with the Queen, he found to his surprise that government support ws withdrawn and the Bill therfore fell without being voted on.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #204  
Old 10-06-2007, 01:58 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Yes it has strayed, however in our defense, we started off discussing why in some quarters Camilla was considered unsuitable and how parents ensured that their offspring married into the family of their choosing.

More to do with parental strictures than any legal objections.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #205  
Old 10-06-2007, 02:13 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
skydragon and BellaFay,

I think you are both saying the same thing, am I not right?

BellaFay is saying that the lack of the Queen's permission would be enough to stop the marriage with Camilla.

skydragon is saying that in some quarters Camilla was considered unsuitable and parents ensured their offspring married into the family of their choosing.

It seems to me that the same forces were at work behind the Queen not wanting to give permission to a marriage with Camilla and the noble families wanting to ensure that their children married a suitable spouse.
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
Reply With Quote
  #206  
Old 10-06-2007, 02:25 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel View Post
I think you are both saying the same thing, am I not right?

It seems to me that the same forces were at work behind the Queen not wanting to give permission to a marriage with Camilla and the noble families wanting to ensure that their children married a suitable spouse.
In a nutshell!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #207  
Old 10-06-2007, 02:25 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Dallas Fort Worth, United States
Posts: 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel View Post
skydragon and BellaFay,

I think you are both saying the same thing, am I not right?

BellaFay is saying that the lack of the Queen's permission would be enough to stop the marriage with Camilla.

skydragon is saying that in some quarters Camilla was considered unsuitable and parents ensured their offspring married into the family of their choosing.

It seems to me that the same forces were at work behind the Queen not wanting to give permission to a marriage with Camilla and the noble families wanting to ensure that their children married a suitable spouse.
I have a question, since the UK is a member of the EU, do you think the EU's judiciary would find the Marriage Act in contravention of basic guaranteed human rights? How can you allow some citizens the freedom to marry at will at age say 18 and deny a tiny minority that right until age 25?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #208  
Old 10-06-2007, 03:49 PM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamondBrg View Post
I have a question, since the UK is a member of the EU, do you think the EU's judiciary would find the Marriage Act in contravention of basic guaranteed human rights? How can you allow some citizens the freedom to marry at will at age say 18 and deny a tiny minority that right until age 25?
It's not so easy. Any member of the Royal family may marry in a civil marriage when he or she is over 18 years old. I'm pretty convinced that this marriage would be seen as legally binding. But there are the consequences to pay - a removal from the line of succession etc.

It was the same with the Imperial and Royal Habsburgs: they could marry without the consent of the emperor and the marriage was legally binding, but they were removed from the "House of Habsburg" immediately, thus loosing their priviledges.

But the Human rights laws in the EU are not about retaining privileges after marriage but about the ability to marry. This is not endangered with the Marriages Act. IMHO, of course.
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
Reply With Quote
  #209  
Old 10-06-2007, 04:01 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Dallas Fort Worth, United States
Posts: 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine View Post
It's not so easy. Any member of the Royal family may marry in a civil marriage when he or she is over 18 years old. I'm pretty convinced that this marriage would be seen as legally binding. But there are the consequences to pay - a removal from the line of succession etc.

It was the same with the Imperial and Royal Habsburgs: they could marry without the consent of the emperor and the marriage was legally binding, but they were removed from the "House of Habsburg" immediately, thus loosing their priviledges.

But the Human rights laws in the EU are not about retaining privileges after marriage but about the ability to marry. This is not endangered with the Marriages Act. IMHO, of course.
Thank You very much! If they have the "legal" ability to marry then that is really all that matters. IF they fail to follow the rules and protocols to retain their "Royal" status and privileges then that is on them, as they have no "right" to them otherwise, imo.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #210  
Old 10-06-2007, 05:58 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamondBrg View Post
I have a question, since the UK is a member of the EU, do you think the EU's judiciary would find the Marriage Act in contravention of basic guaranteed human rights? How can you allow some citizens the freedom to marry at will at age say 18 and deny a tiny minority that right until age 25?
Like any subject of the UK, members of the royal family are free to enter into a civil marriage at any time without permission of The Sovereign. However, the Royal Marriages Act states they may not marry without permission of The Sovereign up to age 25. After that, they are free to marry without permission, provided they declare their intention to the Privy Council and wait one year.

From a practical standpoint, today The Queen has little room to maneuver under the RMA unless the person is HRH Prince/Princess and in close succession to the throne. The penalty for marrying without permission under the RMA is limited to Parliament's right to act by passing a Bill in opposition to the marriage. Once that happened, the loss of all royal titles, styles and rights, and possibly exile from the UK, would be the weapons of punishment.

Since the modern trend has been for The Sovereign not to be unreasonable in withholding approval, I doubt any member of the royal family would dramatically marry without permission as required under the RMA.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #211  
Old 10-06-2007, 06:02 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamondBrg View Post
Thank You very much! If they have the "legal" ability to marry then that is really all that matters. IF they fail to follow the rules and protocols to retain their "Royal" status and privileges then that is on them, as they have no "right" to them otherwise, imo.
Their titles and styles are enjoyed as a consequence of their precedence and place, however, they can be granted or withheld by The Sovereign at any time and for any reason.

So, they may legally be able to marry anybody they want, but if they defy the Crown, the price would be the loss of their royal rank and title.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #212  
Old 10-06-2007, 07:18 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,076
What I find amusing is that the future head of the COE has a "wife" that his own Church don't recognise as his wife ie he could only get a blessing but not re-marraige to Camilla because the husband she married in the eyes of the COE still lives. So if Charles ever got a Coronation and wanted Camilla crowned Queen with him the COE would be crowning a Queen that they don't officially recognise as his legitimate wife. Isn't the whole thing a joke?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #213  
Old 10-06-2007, 07:55 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
I believe the Church of England does recognize Camilla as Charles' wife.
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
Reply With Quote
  #214  
Old 10-06-2007, 08:04 PM
wbenson's Avatar
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,248
Quote:
Originally Posted by angela View Post
What I find amusing is that the future head of the COE has a "wife" that his own Church don't recognise as his wife ie he could only get a blessing but not re-marraige to Camilla because the husband she married in the eyes of the COE still lives. So if Charles ever got a Coronation and wanted Camilla crowned Queen with him the COE would be crowning a Queen that they don't officially recognise as his legitimate wife. Isn't the whole thing a joke?
The church does recognize Camilla as his wife.

As the Archbishop said at the blessing:

"Charles and Camilla, you stand in the presence of God as man and wife to dedicate to him your life together, that he may consecrate your marriage and empower you to keep the covenant and promise you have solemnly declared."

That looks a lot like the highest spiritual officer of the church recognizing it.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #215  
Old 10-06-2007, 08:26 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,076
To date, the COE will not re-marry divorcees that is why Charles had to marry Camilla in a register office.The problem wasn't with him as he is a widower but with her as the husband she married in the eyes of God still lives.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #216  
Old 10-06-2007, 08:49 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
It was mentioned before that the CoE will marry divorcees under some circumstances. I cannot believe that the only circumstance that the CofE will marry divorcees is if both exes are dead.
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
Reply With Quote
  #217  
Old 10-06-2007, 09:27 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Dallas Fort Worth, United States
Posts: 211
I found this on the COE website;

"The Church of England believes that marriage is for life. But it recognises that sadly, some marriages do fail. In exceptional circumstances, the Church accepts that a divorced person may marry again.
Speak to your parish priest. He or she will want to talk to you frankly about your past and your hopes for the future. Even if it is not possible to do your wedding, they may be willing to offer you service of prayer and dedication after a civil ceremony."



Your marriage in the Church of England | Church of England
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #218  
Old 10-06-2007, 09:38 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: katonah, United States
Posts: 2,533
Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel View Post
It was mentioned before that the CoE will marry divorcees under some circumstances. I cannot believe that the only circumstance that the CofE will marry divorcees is if both exes are dead.
For whatever reason, whether or not the C of E will marry 'some divorcees under some circumstances' the reality is that the C of E DECLINED TO MARRY CHARLES AND CAMILLA. They had to have a civil ceremony. Can anyone tell me why the church refused to perform the ceremony?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #219  
Old 10-06-2007, 09:49 PM
sirhon11234's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,464
Quote:
Originally Posted by scooter View Post
For whatever reason, whether or not the C of E will marry 'some divorcees under some circumstances' the reality is that the C of E DECLINED TO MARRY CHARLES AND CAMILLA. They had to have a civil ceremony. Can anyone tell me why the church refused to perform the ceremony?
But doesen't that make their marriage morgnatic?
__________________
"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
Reply With Quote
  #220  
Old 10-06-2007, 10:14 PM
cde cde is offline
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Marina del rey, United States
Posts: 235
Charles and Camilla couldn't marry in the church because Camilla was a divorcee. COE has a number of questionsthey ask if they marry a divorcee.
One of those questions is "Was their realtionship a direct cause of the breakdown of a previous marriage?" The Church thought their adultery
helped cause the failure of of Andrew and Camilla marriage.

But if Andrew dies before Charles and Camilla, they could be married in the church since then they would both be widowers.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
camilla, duchess of cornwall, marriage, prince charles, prince of wales


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





Popular Tags
belgium brussels carl philip charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events engagement fashion genealogy germany grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jordan king carl xvi gustav king constantine ii king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander letizia luxembourg nobility official visit olympic games ottoman pieter van vollenhoven poland president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince daniel prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess ariane princess astrid princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess mary queen anne-marie queen fabiola queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague wedding



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:16 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]