Prince Harry: Relationship Suggestions and Musings 2016-2017 - Page 171

Cocoasneeze · #**3401** 01-25-2017, 04:24 PM

I'm thinking there are enough causes and charities to spare, plenty to do and be involved in. The US Weekly link said, that Meghan likes to get really informed, prepare etc, not just show up, so that would keep her busy.

And like Osipi said, I'm thinking they'd work as a team, it wouldn't be a competition.

HistoryGirl · #**3402** 01-25-2017, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by miche

People do know that actors/celebs get paid to be ambassadors for UN, UNICEF, ETC right? Its another part of the job

Really? Goodness and here I thought it was donating time for a worthy cause. I should've known better.

American Observer7 · #**3403** 01-25-2017, 06:55 PM

You all,

Harry will not lose his title or his place in line for the throne. Where are you getting this stuff?

If that were the case, I doubt Harry would have pursued a relationship with Meghan if that were the case at 32 years old. At his age Harry is thinking about getting married and starting a family. And I doubt he would be with Meghan at this point in his life if marriage was not on his mind and long before now in fact.

I highly doubt Charles has any issues with Harry dating or marrying Meghan if that is what he wants. And too, Charles is no place to make any judgments on Meghan considering his past, track record, and who and what he is currently married to.

I think many of you just don't want to accept that Harry is in deep in a very serious relationship with Meghan Markle. He is in deeper in this relationship than any other relationship he has had including that with C. Davy because Meghan has more than that her or any of the others.

I think this is headed marriage so you might as well prepare yourselves.

Osipi · #**3404** 01-25-2017, 07:07 PM

Actually we have no clue whatsoever how "deep" the relationship is or where it is headed. It could be a "lets get together when we both have time" kind of thing or any number of different definitions we could put on relationships.

We are also not Harry so we cannot measure one relationship against another and the feelings and emotions that went and go with them.

What is seemed to be is that a lot of people are assuming that a+b=c when there's only a mathematical hypothesis.

Until either Meghan or Harry deem fit to fill us in on what is going on, we need to stay away from assuming things.

jacobstevens.87 · #**3405** 01-25-2017, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Osipi

Actually we have no clue whatsoever how "deep" the relationship is or where it is headed. It could be a "lets get together when we both have time" kind of thing or any number of different definitions we could put on relationships.

We are also not Harry so we cannot measure one relationship against another and the feelings and emotions that went and go with them.

What is seemed to be is that a lot of people are assuming that a+b=c when there's only a mathematical hypothesis.

Until either Meghan or Harry deem fit to fill us in on what is going on, we need to stay away from assuming things.

Uhh, this is an entire thread literally dedicated to assumptions, speculation, etc. What do you expect?

Further, my opinion is that we have indeed been shown that this is a serious relationship. The royals don't make public press statements for casual flings.

Osipi · #**3406** 01-25-2017, 07:39 PM

There are things that come to light that can be taken as factual. The statement that Kensington Palace released was a fact. They are seeing each other is a fact. Meghan went to India is a fact. We don't know for a fact that this relationship is headed for marriage as a fact but discussing the various odds and ends related to the "what if" come into play with royal duties, careers and bits and pieces of how a royal marriage would work.

To state outright that this is a "deep" relationship and even deeper than any other relationship Harry has had is claiming as fact something that we don't know is true or not. There's a difference between giving an opinion saying "I think it looks like..." (and giving sources and reasons why) and stating something as fact that cannot be substantiated are horses of two different colors.

American Observer7 · #**3407** 01-25-2017, 08:08 PM

You wants facts? Here are some:

1. Harry issues an emotional statement from KP about Meghan and their relationship to the press.

2. He has considered and very well may have paid for a bodyguard for her out of his own pocket to keep her safe.

3. He has traveled across the pond to be with her many times and her him and have stayed in each others homes.

So Harry has done all this and possibly more for just a fling, now at 32 years old?? Oh please!

Get real!

I stand by what said before! Those that don't want to accept it, that is you. Have at it.

Ish · #**3408** 01-25-2017, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by American Observer7

You wants facts? Here are some:

1. Harry issues an emotional statement from KP about Meghan and their relationship to the press.

2. He has considered and very well may have paid for a bodyguard for her out of his own pocket to keep her safe.

3. He has traveled across the pond to be with her many times and her him and have stayed in each others homes.

So Harry has done all this and possibly more for just a fling, now at 32 years old?? Oh please!

Get real!

I stand by what said before! Those that don't want to accept it, that is you. Have at it.

Your number 2 is not factual, it's a rumour.

And your number 3 is mostly rumour too - we know he went to see her in Toronto once, because it was after the Caribbean tour. We have rumours of other visits, but rumours aren't fact.

Likewise, we know she made a visit to London once, around Remembrance Day, because she was photographed there. Other "spottings" are actually unconfirmed rumours; neither Meghan nor Harry are confirming the rumours, nor is any other verifiable source.

Rumours aren't fact.

And we don't know that this is heading to marriage. We can assume that it is serious, based on the verifiable facts, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're looking to run down the aisle. Or go down it at all; we're assuming that part.

Ish · #**3409** 01-25-2017, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by American Observer7

You all,

Harry will not lose his title or his place in line for the throne. Where are you getting this stuff?

If that were the case, I doubt Harry would have pursued a relationship with Meghan if that were the case at 32 years old. At his age Harry is thinking about getting married and starting a family. And I doubt he would be with Meghan at this point in his life if marriage was not on his mind and long before now in fact.

I highly doubt Charles has any issues with Harry dating or marrying Meghan if that is what he wants. And too, Charles is no place to make any judgments on Meghan considering his past, track record, and who and what he is currently married to.

I think many of you just don't want to accept that Harry is in deep in a very serious relationship with Meghan Markle. He is in deeper in this relationship than any other relationship he has had including that with C. Davy because Meghan has more than that her or any of the others.

I think this is headed marriage so you might as well prepare yourselves.

You might want to check up on your succession laws.

Harry is in no danger of losing his title, true, but if he marries without his grandmother's permission he will lose his place in the succession. This is actual law not only in Britain, but in all 16 of the realms which have Queen Elizabeth II as their monarch.

Osipi · #**3410** 01-25-2017, 08:56 PM

Sorry but the statement issued by Kensington Palace was not "emotional" but straightforward letter listing complaints to the media of the undue harassment of Meghan and her family. They crossed the line and Harry and KP asked them to back off and treat her and her family with respect.

For your other statements that you believe are facts. Do you have credible sources to back them up? We do not know the itinerary of their private life other than a few facts.

Its nice you have such a positive opinion on where this is all headed and to be honest, I agree with you that its very possible. The important thing to remember though is to state things as an opinion and not fact unless you can back them up with credible sources. Last I checked, that's the rules here and how postings should be. Took me a while to get used to that too.

cepe · #**3411** 01-25-2017, 09:48 PM

I don't know if this was ever posted on here but this is a tweet from Richard Palmer, Royal Correspondent on 16th January

QUOTE:
There's concern in royal circles at the antics of some of Meghan Markle's relatives but Prince Harry's happiness will be paramount. END

Concern was understandable (about her family, not her)

I think that really is how it is.

Abbigail · #**3412** 01-26-2017, 12:42 AM

As you guys know, Suits returned tonight and the showrunner gave an interview afterwards where he was asked about Meghan's relationship with Harry. He clarified that Meghan only asked for one day off and they were happy to give it to her. He also spoke about the added publicity on set. You can read it here: Suits' Boss on Midseason Premiere, Jessica Void | Hollywood Reporter

Rudolph · #**3413** 01-26-2017, 02:09 PM

Quote:

There have been whispers of a royal engagement ever since Prince Harry publicly named Meghan Markle as his girlfriend back in November.

And the actress's co-star Patrick J. Adams has done little to quell the rumours after hinting that she could be a 'future princess of England'.

The Suits star took to Reddit on Wednesday night to take part in a Q&A with fans, and while some wanted to know about the show, talk soon turned to the royal romance.

Read more: Meghan Markle's co-star hints she is 'a future princess' | Daily Mail Online

Cocoasneeze · #**3414** 01-26-2017, 02:28 PM

^
He was asked something along the lines 'What does it feel like kissing a possible future princess of England?' He replied 'The same it did before she was the possible future princess of England.' i thought it was funny, actually.

Osipi · #**3415** 01-26-2017, 02:40 PM

Once again, its the press insinuating into an article headline something that in reality, isn't there. We all know its very possible that Meghan could be a future princess of the UK (not England) but in actuality, the Suits co-star wasn't even remotely talking about Meghan's relationship with Harry but just candidly answering a question in the vein it was asked.

Ish · #**3416** 01-26-2017, 03:25 PM

As ridiculous as the headline is, it does help support the argument that Meghan is going to be bombarded with these types of questions if/when she starts promoting the show.

If her co-stars are being asked about her relationship, then there's no way she won't be as well.

Osipi · #**3417** 01-26-2017, 03:33 PM

Hopefully Meghan will be adept at deflecting such questions. Its inevitable though, as you say, that questions about her relationship with Harry will come from all angles at her.

Enquiring minds want to know and there's only so many ways to graciously field the questions before it starts getting really annoying.

QueenPenny · #**3418** 01-26-2017, 03:47 PM

For Suits publicity events, I am sure the press corps can be forewarned that Meghan's relationship with Harry is off-limits, and any questions or comments on the subject will not be responded to. No doubt the showrunners would love that type of publicity, but I would imagine that at this point Meghan is aware that highlighting her relationship with Harry in that arena would not sit well with Harry or his family. JMO

Abbigail · #**3419** 01-26-2017, 04:03 PM

This was a fan Q&A. I don't think it tells us anything about what Meghan will have to deal with since I doubt she will be answering any questions in that particular format. If/when she does interviews for the show, I'm sure she will let reporters know that she doesn't want to talk about her personal life.

Daily Mail is shameless and desperate for any news when it comes to this relationship. No surprise that they would write a misleading headline/article about what her co-star said.

Osipi · #**3420** 01-26-2017, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by QueenPenny

For Suits publicity events, I am sure the press corps can be forewarned that Meghan's relationship with Harry is off-limits, and any questions or comments on the subject will not be responded to. No doubt the showrunners would love that type of publicity, but I would imagine that at this point Meghan is aware that highlighting her relationship with Harry in that arena would not sit well with Harry or his family. JMO

Not only the points you brought up but actually, it would not serve the PR purposes for Suits itself. It kind of defeats the purpose of promoting a show when the emphasis is one one the actor's private life.

Meghan and Harry have kept their lives together very firmly under the radar and under wraps and I hope they can keep it that way.