The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1101  
Old 08-14-2012, 12:12 PM
EIIR's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Somewhere, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,624
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame Royale View Post
Not so. I'm no "Diana fanatic" and I'm very much in favour of the proposed alternative and have been since it was announced. Not everyone who happens to endorse the proposal should be subject to such whimsical stereotypes.
It's impossible to make everyone happy.

It's my personal opinion that the suggestion that the King's wife should be called 'Princess Consort' is a complete and total disgrace. It would be humiliating for Camilla to be denied the title to which she is entitled by law and by convention. It suggests that Camilla is somehow unworthy of the term, that she's somehow defective. I don't feel that she should face the prospect of potentially decades of having to carry that around. She and Charles stood in front of the Archbishop of Canterbury, admitted their sins and asked for forgiveness. Who are we to continue to judge their actions and, in doing so, dictate that Camilla be publicly humiliated by being told she's not worthy of being called 'Queen'?
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1102  
Old 08-14-2012, 03:04 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Brooklyn, United States
Posts: 159
When all is said and done, I do hope that Queen Elizabeth and Camilla are placing bouquet of roses on Wallis Simpson's tomb.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1103  
Old 08-14-2012, 03:25 PM
olebabs's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Århus, Denmark
Posts: 283
Hear hear, Hilda Thomas
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1104  
Old 08-14-2012, 03:54 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,272
Oh good gracious it's been 7yrs since she was married. When the time comes just give her the freakin title of Queen already. It's about time people stop dictating Charles and Camilla's future based on the ghost of his first wife.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #1105  
Old 08-14-2012, 04:39 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by EIIR View Post
It's impossible to make everyone happy.

It's my personal opinion that the suggestion that the King's wife should be called 'Princess Consort' is a complete and total disgrace. It would be humiliating for Camilla to be denied the title to which she is entitled by law and by convention. It suggests that Camilla is somehow unworthy of the term, that she's somehow defective. I don't feel that she should face the prospect of potentially decades of having to carry that around. She and Charles stood in front of the Archbishop of Canterbury, admitted their sins and asked for forgiveness. Who are we to continue to judge their actions and, in doing so, dictate that Camilla be publicly humiliated by being told she's not worthy of being called 'Queen'?
I don't at all have an issue with your opinion, I just don't believe it rational to be stereotyped for mine because it's the skapegoat of choice.

Needless to say, I come at it from a different view point and not one that harbours any ill prejudice towards the Duchess.
__________________

"Dressing is a way of life" - Monsieur Saint Laurent
Reply With Quote
  #1106  
Old 08-14-2012, 05:03 PM
Daria_S's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: My own head, United States
Posts: 6,935
Quote:
Originally Posted by EIIR View Post
It's impossible to make everyone happy.

It's my personal opinion that the suggestion that the King's wife should be called 'Princess Consort' is a complete and total disgrace. It would be humiliating for Camilla to be denied the title to which she is entitled by law and by convention. It suggests that Camilla is somehow unworthy of the term, that she's somehow defective. I don't feel that she should face the prospect of potentially decades of having to carry that around. She and Charles stood in front of the Archbishop of Canterbury, admitted their sins and asked for forgiveness. Who are we to continue to judge their actions and, in doing so, dictate that Camilla be publicly humiliated by being told she's not worthy of being called 'Queen'?
I could not agree more. It's ridiculous that people are still hung up on the past after all this time. What happened, happened, and it cannot be changed. I think the best thing anyone can do is just move on; Charles, Camila and the rest of the Royal Family certainly did. If she's entitled to be styled as 'Queen' after Charles ascends the throne, then so be it. Why change something that's not broken?
__________________
"My guiding principles in life are to be honest, genuine, thoughtful and caring".
~Prince William~


I'm not obsessed with royalty...I just think intensely about it.
Reply With Quote
  #1107  
Old 08-14-2012, 05:04 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,353
Remember that the situation will be as follows:

Queen dies
Charles becomes King and Camilla Queen

Then Parliament, while the nation and Charles are in mourning for the Queen, will have to have a debate on stripping Camilla of her new title, pass that through both houses of Parliament and then ask Charles to sign that legislation.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1108  
Old 08-14-2012, 05:11 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Top End, Australia
Posts: 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Remember that the situation will be as follows:

Queen dies
Charles becomes King and Camilla Queen

Then Parliament, while the nation and Charles are in mourning for the Queen, will have to have a debate on stripping Camilla of her new title, pass that through both houses of Parliament and then ask Charles to sign that legislation.
Just out of interest, what about the other countries of which Charles would be king? We've heard that the proposals for succession based on primogeniture rather than gender will have to be approved by the parliaments of all those countries, will they also have to pass legislation stripping Camilla of her title?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1109  
Old 08-14-2012, 05:14 PM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Remember that the situation will be as follows:

Queen dies
Charles becomes King and Camilla Queen

Then Parliament, while the nation and Charles are in mourning for the Queen, will have to have a debate on stripping Camilla of her new title, pass that through both houses of Parliament and then ask Charles to sign that legislation.
Actually, there is an alternative. Camilla is granted the title "The Princess Consort" (female equivalent of Prince Albert's "Prince Consort") in her own right and then can chose to be known under that title - while legally and officially remaining a Queen.

Now, I happen to agree completely with EIIR: if Camilla is known, officially or privately, as anything but Her Majesty The Queen, that will be quite derogatory. Unless, of course, the Parliament passes a legislation whereby the wives of all future Kings will be Princesses Consort; that I would be perfectly fine with.
Reply With Quote
  #1110  
Old 08-14-2012, 05:15 PM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by VictoriaB View Post
Just out of interest, what about the other countries of which Charles would be king? We've heard that the proposals for succession based on primogeniture rather than gender will have to be approved by the parliaments of all those countries, will they also have to pass legislation stripping Camilla of her title?
Definitely. In fact, as long as the Union of Crowns exists, a decision like that would have to be unanimously approved by every single country of the Realm.
For instance, when Edward VIII abdicated, Acts from each of Dominions were required. Had even one of them not given their consent, there could be a situation when the Duke of Windsor was no longer King of the United Kingdom, but remained Monarch of, say, Canada. That would break the Union of Crowns (although since he died childless, Elizabeth II would have restored the Union anyway).

This is assuming Acts of Parliament will be passed at all; as I said in my previous post, it is possible to go ahead with the whole Princess Consort situation without resorting to it.
Reply With Quote
  #1111  
Old 08-14-2012, 05:46 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,353
There were no acts of parliament required in the other realms in 1936 because the relationship between the countries was different in those days - they weren't separately the monarchs of the other realms.

All that was needed was the agreement of the PMs of the dominions - as they were then called. The colonies didn't even get a say.

The realms would have to also pass the legislation saying that she is not an equal to every other woman in their countries and as a woman I find that suggestion insulting to all women.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1112  
Old 08-14-2012, 05:58 PM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
There were no acts of parliament required in the other realms in 1936 because the relationship between the countries was different in those days - they weren't separately the monarchs of the other realms.

All that was needed was the agreement of the PMs of the dominions - as they were then called. The colonies didn't even get a say.
That is not entirely accurate, to the best of my knowledge.
Under the Statute of Westminster passed five years before the abdication, a single Crown for the entire British Empire was replaced by Crowns of each individual Dominion. In essence, the countries gained full independence but remained in Personal Union of Crowns (a situation that exists, with a few changes, to this day).

Edward VIII's abdication had to be and was approved by each state of the British Commonwealth. Because only the Parliament of Australia was in session, while the others were in recess, the consent was given by the Parliament of Australia, as well as the Governments of other Dominions. The only exception was the Irish Free State, which used the opportunity to severe all ties to the Crown altogether. Edward VIII then gave his Royal Assent to those Acts, whereby they came into legal force and he became a mere The Prince Edward.
Reply With Quote
  #1113  
Old 08-14-2012, 06:51 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,353
The fact is that even that the Statute of Westminster had been passed in London it hadn't been ratified in the dominions which is why they didn't have to pass legislation - Britain was still able to make those decisions - just as in 1939 the dominions didn't declare war separately but were automatically at war once Britain declared war, except for South Africa which had ratified that Statute by 1939. Australia ratified it in 1942.

Edward VIII couldn't give assent to any acts outside of the UK unless there in person as that was the job of the GG so he only signed the one act - the British act.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1114  
Old 08-14-2012, 07:08 PM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425

While the parliaments of the dominions like Australia and New Zealand did need to ratify the Statute of Westminster, other dominions, such as Canada and Union of South Africa, did not: in the latter cases, the Statute was effective there the moment it was passed. This said, both Canada and South Africa did pass legislations related to the Statute of Westminster later.

One of the key passages of the Act states: "No Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom passed after the commencement of this Act shall extend or be deemed to extend, to a Dominion as part of the law of that Dominion, unless it is expressly declared in that Act that that Dominion has requested, and consented to, the enactment thereof."

For the abdication to actually come into effect, consent of the Dominion Governments was required. In fact, the very text of the 1936 Abdication Act states that the Dominion of Canada consented to the Act under the Statute of Westminster, while Australia Union of South Africa and New Zealand gave their separate consent. In particular, the Parliament of South Africa formally gave its consent in February of 1937 through passage of the Abdication Act, while Canada passed the Succession to the Throne At 1937, which ratified the British Abdication Act. Ireland (the Irish Free State) passed the Executive Authority Act 1936, which dated Edward VIII's abdication to December 12 1936 - meaning he was King of Ireland a day longer than elsewhere.

The Royal Assent to His Majesty's Declaration of Abdication Act 1936 was indeed effective for the United Kingdom only; the moment Edward VIII gave the assent (or rather, when it was delivered on his behalf by Lords Commissioners), he was King no more.
Reply With Quote
  #1115  
Old 08-14-2012, 07:13 PM
csw csw is online now
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Columbus, United States
Posts: 377
I rather wish the BRF webpage would take out the note about the intention for her to be known as princess consort. It's not necessary and just keeps the issue if front of the world. It's an insult.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1116  
Old 08-14-2012, 07:15 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,261
Actually Canada did in fact declare war separately from the UK. It was signed by Lord Tweedsmuir the then Governor General and later brought to England to be signed by the King of Canada. The Canadian Parliament was even called back to debate the declaration of war. It was done to stress the independence of Canada since the 1931 Statute of Westminster. Just because the UK was at war did not mean that Canada was automatically at war with Germany and later Japan, but perhaps Australia was different.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1117  
Old 08-14-2012, 07:15 PM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by csw View Post
I rather wish the BRF webpage would take out the note about the intention for her to be known as princess consort. It's not necessary and just keeps the issue if front of the world. It's an insult.
I agree. Either make all future wives of Kings Princesses Consorts, or just stop that nonsense in regards to Camilla only.
Reply With Quote
  #1118  
Old 08-14-2012, 07:19 PM
maryr0249's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Franklin, NC, United States
Posts: 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
For her to not be Queen Parliament has to pass legislation to strip her of the right of all wives to take the title and status of her husband.

Being Duchess of Cornwall is still taking the style and title of her husband as he is the Duke of Cornwall and has in fact had that title for longer than Prince of Wales.
A month or so ago someone mentioned the possibility of a COE leader declaring that Camilla deserves to be called Queen. The writer thought such a public declaration would resolve the issue. How would that work? Unofficially, I assume, but thought to sway public opinion? There remains the fact that the BRF and PoW websites still have to back out of the "Princess Consort" statements, unless they just disappear. Given the test "you never know" answers given by both Charles and Camilla around autumn of - I think it was 2010 - to the question, "will Camilla be Queen?" they have given the matter some thought.
Sometimes I think Charles' confusion about his occasional drastic misreading of cultural trends, especially when it comes to Princesses, still has his head spinning. He took a courageous and perhaps revolutionary step in marrying Camilla. I believe he's a great thinker, and she's incredibly admirable. If it were up to me, she'd be Queen of … okay, too far. Anyway, I think he's not quite sure what to do to keep both of them, and the Monarchy, safe.
The "test" of "how will people feel about Camilla being Queen?" is floated periodically, sometimes by polls, sometimes by CH, at the cost to some unsuspecting journalist: "Camilla Says She Still Doesn't Want To Be Queen", and we wait to see how many people write nasty comments following the article. But public opinion is fickle and odd, and to me, Charles' little weathercast in Scotland marked a change for him - and by extension for Camilla. Anyone who heard him say to her, "you don't have to, I promise", had to melt, just a little. Then he looked so proud on the balcony at the fly-past; it's hard to believe he would accept being crowned without her. I'd stay home. (Like I had a choice.)
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1119  
Old 08-14-2012, 07:27 PM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by NGalitzine View Post
Actually Canada did in fact declare war separately from the UK. It was signed by Lord Tweedsmuir the then Governor General. Just because the UK was at war did not mean that Canada was automatically at war with Germany and Japan, but perhaps Australia was different.
Once the Statute of Westminster was adopted, Canada, Australia and other dominions became fully sovereign states, equal with Britain - and not bound by any declarations of the latter. Canada's Prime Minister of the time Mackenzie King was adamant that a decision to enter war will be only that of Canada's and Canadians, and not influenced by London, He thus instigated debates in Parliament and after lengthy discussions, declared war on Germany on 9 September 1939 - 6 days after Britain.

Australia had similar path, although it declared war on Germany immediately after Britain, on 3 September 1936. It was, however, completely the decision of the Australian Government who was not bound by Britain's declaration of war. Australian Government explained their decision by the fact the country's interests were too closely linked to those of Britain and that Britain's potential defeat could have harsh consequences for Australia (most notably, threat from Japan was mentioned). Unlike Canada, where the decision to enter the war was somewhat controversial, the majority of Australians strongly supported their government's position.

I have to note though that some argued that since Britain's declaration of war was made in the name of their common Monarch, it might have meant all the Dominions automatically entered war as well. That viewpoint was not shared by the Dominions themselves, so it's moot.
Reply With Quote
  #1120  
Old 08-14-2012, 07:36 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,261
We may have a common monarch but they reign as monarch of the UK and the monarch of Canada, different legal entities. That was why Canada brought its Declaration of War to be signed by George VI as King of Canada after it had already been signed by his Governor General in Canada. It stressed the point that the acts of the British monarch had no effect in Canada.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

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


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 4 (2 members and 2 guests)
Emily Lou, MichelleQ2
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





Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events duchess of cambridge style fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta cristina infanta elena infanta leonor infanta sofia jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg ottoman pom prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince laurent prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess claire princess elisabeth princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess marie princess mary princess of asturias queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia spain state visit wedding william


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

RV & Travel Trailer Communities

Our RV & Travel Trailer sites encompasses virtually all types of Recreational Vehicles, from brand-specific to general RV communities.

» More about our RV 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 2002-2012 Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:48 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]