Charles and Camilla to Marry: February 10, 2005

[Regina]

No, in my opinion they (specially Harry) will never accept her!!

 

[gaggleofcrazypeople]

They way she has led her life, I don't think many Windsors would accept her.

 

[MoonlightRhapsody]

If I wasn't so outraged at the concept of these two marrying, I'd laugh. Honestly, this whole fiasco is turning into a right royal circus! The media must be having the time of their lives in the UK. I predict family secrets will start pouring out soon and this will certainly bring the monarchy down a few notches.

 

[james]

I have read that at English civil wedding services a certain number of public spectators are allowed, by law, to witness the proceedings. I have also discovered that if more than one witness to an English civil wedding, say Prince Charles' for instance, raises an objection then under English law the whole wedding must be stopped. An Anglican priest, whose name escapes me, has vowed to raise an objection from the public gallery when Prince Charles and Camilla exchange vows. No one can stop him and he has publicly stated that he wishes for someone else to raise a similar objection so that all proceedings may grind to a halt. He has said that if no one is brave enough to stand beside him on April 8th then he will still have no objection in shaming Prince Charles and his fiancee' on their big day.

 

[ElisaR]

A plaque at the Guildhall, Windsor.

 

[Genevieve]

They way she has led her life, I don't think many Windsors would accept her.

Of course the Windsors will accept her. It takes two to tango and Camilla didn't have these affairs on her own. Charles was involved too. And to not approve Camilla for her actions is to also not approve one of their own.

 

[aninhas]

Prince Charles has claimed he has been shown "no compassion" by the British public as a result of his relationship with Camilla Parker Bowles.

In candid remarks made to a journalist on a trip to Bulgaria in 2003, Prince Charles claimed his private life had been compromised and hit out at those intent on scaling down the Monarchy.

"I thought the British people were supposed to be compassionate. I don't see much of it," the Prince is reported to have said.

He continued: "I don't see any reason why I should define my private life. All my life, people have been telling me what to do, I'm tired of it.

"My private life has become an industry. People are making money out of it," he complained.

The heir to the throne is due to marry Mrs Parker Bowles in April in a civil ceremony in Windsor.

 

[Elspeth]

I have read that at English civil wedding services a certain number of public spectators are allowed, by law, to witness the proceedings. I have also discovered that if more than one witness to an English civil wedding, say Prince Charles' for instance, raises an objection then under English law the whole wedding must be stopped. An Anglican priest, whose name escapes me, has vowed to raise an objection from the public gallery when Prince Charles and Camilla exchange vows. No one can stop him and he has publicly stated that he wishes for someone else to raise a similar objection so that all proceedings may grind to a halt. He has said that if no one is brave enough to stand beside him on April 8th then he will still have no objection in shaming Prince Charles and his fiancee' on their big day.

Whatever sort of valid objection can there be to a civil wedding? It's not as if either of them was still legally married or one of them was ten years old or something.

 

[semisquare]

wow, i have never seen so many post on one subject before. with that said does no one care that they both cheated on their mates, ruin two families and now they want to get married? i know for me, i 'm not watching the wedding.

 

[michelleq]

I'll state for the record again, They should not have done what they did, but we are to forgive and try to forget (which in this case is impossible). Many feel that if he hadn't cheated on Diana, they would had still been married, and she would not had died in the car crash. I am one also. I don't feel that they will have as long a married life as they would want. You reap what you sow. But I wish them whatever happiness they can have.

 

[Reina]

Here are possible consequences of the marriage

[font=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]

27/02/05 - Mail comment section [/font]

[font=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif] [/font] [font=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]Stumbling Royals are easy prey for their enemies [/font]

[font=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif] [/font] [font=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]Increasingly it seems as if the Monarchy is too important to be left to the Royal Family. [/font]

[font=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]Never in modern times - except during the immediate aftermath of the death of Princess Diana - has the standing of the Crown fallen so low so fast. [/font]

[font=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]The mishandling of the marriage of Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles has provided a new opportunity for open and secret republicans. Declared anti-monarchists now feel safe to sneer at the institution in public. [/font]

[font=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]More dangerously, the bungled nuptials have given weapons to New Labour schemers. As in the Diana crisis, they offer their smiling help while privately intending to do long-term damage, hoping to marginalise the hereditary head of state. They believe that they, not the Monarch, should be the sole focus of loyalty in the land, a major constitutional change for which they are prepared to wait and work with patience and skill. [/font]

[font=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]Destroying tradition [/font]



[font=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]How they must be chuckling at the use of the Human Rights Act to validate a legally questionable union. For were the European Charter on Human Rights to be applied in full to the British Monarchy, it would destroy most of the laws and traditions that hold it together. [/font]

[font=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]It would be easy and partly correct to blame the churning mess on advisers such as the prince's private secretary, Sir Michael Peat, and Press secretary, Paddy Harverson. Once the decision had been taken that Charles was to marry Camilla in a civil ceremony, it was their responsibility to ensure all went well. [/font]

[font=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]They assumed that the prince's painfully won return to public esteem, the fruit of much hard work by their forerunners, was permanent. They did not realise the dangers of raising Diana's ghost by trying to put Camilla in her place. They failed to make the most basic checks on the legal status of the planned ceremony. [/font]

[font=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]Nor has it helped matters that, even as the wedding preparations begin, the prince is involved in an employment tribunal dispute with an ex-employee. Prominent employers usually take all possible steps to avoid such cases ever reaching the public stage. When they do, they usually manage things rather better than Clarence House has done. [/font]

[font=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]Extraordinary disclosure [/font]

[font=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]But now we learn, from the extraordinary disclosures of a private conversation with Charles by Gavin Hewitt, that the real crisis in the prince's household is in the heart of the prince himself. Left high and dry as the sea of royalism has receded, Charles is lonely, diffident, wallowing in self-pity and understandably weary of a world quite unlike the one in which he was brought up. [/font]

[font=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]His quoted remark that "I thought the British people were supposed to be compassionate. I don't see much of it", combined with his petulant complaint that he has been told what to do all his life and is tired of it, suggest that he finds his role increasingly hard to bear and may no longer have the stomach nor the instincts for the tricky times ahead. [/font]

[font=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]As these regrettable events unfold, with who knows what disasters and embarrassments yet to emerge, his position may become increasingly untenable. Let us hope that the House of Windsor can and will survive a crisis that is at least partly of its own making. [/font]

 

[MoonlightRhapsody]

Well, well, isn't this a surprise....

from NEWS.com.au:

Formal objections

From correspondents in London
March 01, 2005
From: Agence France-Presse


AT least three objections have been lodged against the wedding between Prince Charles and longtime mistress Camilla Parker-Bowles in the latest hiccup to their plans, a newspaper has reported.

The legal complaints, or caveats, were delivered to the head of the registrar office in Cirencester, Gloucestershire, south-west England, which covers the Prince's countryside retreat of Highgrove, the Daily Mail reported.

Any of the documents, if they provide a convincing argument,could prevent the divorcees from holding a civil marriage ceremony in Windsor, just outside London, on April 8, the paper said.

"I can confirm that at least three objections have been received by the Cirencester office and I have been copied the one lodged by (outspoken Church of England reverend Paul) Williamson," Diane Waddington, registrar for Chippenham in Wiltshire, told the daily.

Mrs Parker Bowles, 57, has informed Chippenham of her plans to wed.

Under British law, each objection must be considered on its own merit and, if necessary, advice can be taken from the Registrar General of England and Wales, Len Cook, and his legal team.

It will be up to the local office, however, to inform the Prince, 56, and his fiancee whether their wedding can go ahead as planned.

Questions over the legality of the marriage between Britain's heir to the throne, currently on a trip to Australia, and Mrs Parker Bowles have been swirling in Britain since their sudden engagement announcement in February.

Lord Chancellor Charles Falconer, the country's top legal authority, last week issued a statement explaining why he believed the union to be legal.

The Daily Mail, however, reported that six senior lawyers – all staunchly traditional in their views – were said to be planning to lodge their opposition and even might be prepared to go to court over the issue. The Government of Prime Minister Tony Blair was apparently drawing up emergency legislation to erase any doubt over the matter, the newspaper reported, adding that it was doubtful an attempt to rush through such a law would be made so close to a general election.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,12408959-38200,00.html


***********************************************
Why am I not surprised? Maybe it's a sign?

 

[tiaraprin]

wow, i have never seen so many post on one subject before. with that said does no one care that they both cheated on their mates, ruin two families and now they want to get married? i know for me, i 'm not watching the wedding.

Thank you Semisquare. All of us who are not fond of Charles and Camilla are bashed on this site. That there is another one who will stand up and say they are guilty of much is a refreshing sight to my sore eyes!

I liked what Moonlightrhapsody posted--3 objections?? Gee, why am I not surprised???

Unlike others, I do plan to watch the wedding. I have to see it to believe it and be able to discuss it here. Besides, who can turn up a good laugh seeing this one?? Seeing the Windsors put on false, smiling faces?? This should be funny!

 

[Regina]

who can turn up a good laugh seeing this one?? Seeing the Windsors put on false, smiling faces?? This should be funny! [/QUOTE]


I'm going to see the wedding too!

 

[Mandy]

Thank you Semisquare. All of us who are not fond of Charles and Camilla are bashed on this site. That there is another one who will stand up and say they are guilty of much is a refreshing sight to my sore eyes!

I liked what Moonlightrhapsody posted--3 objections?? Gee, why am I not surprised???

Unlike others, I do plan to watch the wedding. I have to see it to believe it and be able to discuss it here. Besides, who can turn up a good laugh seeing this one?? Seeing the Windsors put on false, smiling faces?? This should be funny!

This thread has been and is constantly monitored to ensure that there is no bashing of royalty or members. So, I find your comments unwarranted, unacceptable and insulting to TRF members and particulary to the TRF moderating team who has devoted a large amount of their own time to keep this thread free of squabbles, quarrels and bashing. Remember, no one has to agree with your opinions and we are all allowed to disagree with your comments without it being termed "bashing."

Mandy
TRF Administrator

 

[wymanda]

All of us who are not fond of Charles and Camilla are bashed on this site.

tiaraprin,
Those of us who support Charles & Camilla cop plenty of flack from Dianarites too. We at least accept that there were faults on all sides and that Diana wasn't an innocent martyr in all this.

 

[MoonlightRhapsody]

I'm undecided whether I'd go through the extra mile to see part of the wedding (I live in the US, so I don't know if they'll cover it.) I do wonder if the wedding will even happen, seeing the uproar it's causing. I doubt that the monarchy will ever be the same again after this.

 

[Genevieve]

I'm undecided whether I'd go through the extra mile to see part of the wedding (I live in the US, so I don't know if they'll cover it.)

I'm sure it will be covered in the U.S. The wedding will be covered everywhere. It will just be to what degree is the wedding covered. You could always find it live online if you were really curious or interested.

I do wonder if the wedding will even happen, seeing the uproar it's causing. I doubt that the monarchy will ever be the same again after this.

I think the wedding will happen. From all of Charles's comments lately about his private life being his own and wanting to make his own decisions about his private life, I think Charles is pretty determined to go ahead with this wedding regardless of what the public thinks. If he really cared about how the public perceived him or was really worried about it, the notion of marrying Camilla wouldn't have even crossed his mind. I think now too too much has happened for Charles to backpedal or wrangle his way out of this marriage. He's put too much on the line, asked the rest of his family to put too much on the line to say now "Camilla and I aren't going to get married after all. Even though we love each other, we're not going to make it formal."

 

[Reina]

Me to. The monarchy won't be the same for a while. At least not until William b/c king.

 

[gaggleofcrazypeople]

Charles really will have a hard time being king considering the amount of privacy he wants.

 

[Genevieve]

Charles really will have a hard time being king considering the amount of privacy he wants.

I think he likes the media when it suits him. When they invade his privacy he doesn't like them very much. But when he wants to tell his side of the story, like in this tell all interview with David Frost around the time Diana made her interview, he didn't have a problem with the media asking questions about his private life. He was more than happy to talk about his private life then.

Don't get me wrong. It would be very hard to have people talking about your private relationships like the media does about Charles and Camilla. But Charles can't have it both ways and be nice to the media when it helps him but shut them out when they offend him or get too close for comfort.

 

[Iain]

I'll state for the record again, They should not have done what they did, but we are to forgive and try to forget (which in this case is impossible). Many feel that if he hadn't cheated on Diana, they would had still been married, and she would not had died in the car crash. I am one also. I don't feel that they will have as long a married life as they would want. You reap what you sow. But I wish them whatever happiness they can have.

I don't for one minute condone what Charles and Camilla have done because adultery is always wrong but it should be remembered that Diana was no innocent party in this mess. I don't know about Charles spending the night with Camilla before his marraige but I have heard on more than one occassion that after the wedding he didn't see her again until after his marraige had broken down, by which time Diana was having an affair with James Hewitt. There are many who believe that he, and not Charles is Harry's father and they do look alike, but that's another matter. The point is, whether the Di-maniacs like it or not, after the marraige it was Diana and not Charles who was the first to commit adultery.

 

[MoonlightRhapsody]

I don't for one minute condone what Charles and Camilla have done because adultery is always wrong but it should be remembered that Diana was no innocent party in this mess. I don't know about Charles spending the night with Camilla before his marraige but I have heard on more than one occassion that after the wedding he didn't see her again until after his marraige had broken down, by which time Diana was having an affair with James Hewitt. There are many who believe that he, and not Charles is Harry's father and they do look alike, but that's another matter. The point is, whether the Di-maniacs like it or not, after the marraige it was Diana and not Charles who was the first to commit adultery.

Like I said, I don't believe that Diana was bathed in sunshine and purity, HOWEVER, she never stood a chance of Charles ever making her happy because Camilla had been in the picture long before she ever did.

Just because a marriage has "broken down" or that spouses are separated, Camilla should have turned Charles right around his butt and back to Diana. Married is married. No ifs ands or buts. If you are legally and/or spiritually married, you are still married!

Let's disregard Charles and Diana's marriage for a bit. What about Camilla's marriage to Andrew Parker Bowles? I don't believe I heard anything about that marriage being on the rocks and that Andrew Parker Bowles ever cheated on Camilla from that time. On top of that, they had two children of their own! What kind of mother and wife is she to betray not only her husband, but her children as well? Can anyone imagine the magnitude of shame and humiliation that they felt knowing that the whole world knew that their mother cheated on their father?

Throughout the years and through all the pain these two have caused others, I have not heard one word of remorse for their actions. Not one, "I'm sorry", or anything to that effect. The impression I got from them, especially Camilla is the "Look at where I am now." feeling.

Again, let me say this. My main point of contention is not just the Diana issue. It's a part of it, but not whole. The bulk comes from the fact that these two adulterers are being rewarded for causing their former spouses and children so much pain for so many years. Maybe I'm alone is doing this, but I put myself in the betrayed party's shoes. How would you like it if you had a spouse who cheated on you and was now marrying the "other person"? I'm so sick and tired of others using love to excuse even the most hurtful actions! Just because someone is in-love, it doesn't give them carte blanche to trample over everyone else to get what they want. That, my friends, is my main point of contention.

 

[tiaraprin]

This thread has been and is constantly monitored to ensure that there is no bashing of royalty or members. So, I find your comments unwarranted, unacceptable and insulting to TRF members and particulary to the TRF moderating team who has devoted a large amount of their own time to keep this thread free of squabbles, quarrels and bashing. Remember, no one has to agree with your opinions and we are all allowed to disagree with your comments without it being termed "bashing."

Mandy
TRF Administrator

Well, in response to this, I HAD to leave this website for months because of the bashing I got last year for my views. No one was there to defend me then for my opinions when I got insulted all over the place! Diana got dragged through the mud and there was no one to defend me or any other who was of my opinion. I got a private message recently from a fellow member who felt she was being bashed by the Charles/Camilla faction and was upset. I am not the only one who feels this way.

 

[Alexandria]

Well, in response to this, I HAD to leave this website for months because of the bashing I got last year for my views. No one was there to defend me then for my opinions when I got insulted all over the place! Diana got dragged through the mud and there was no one to defend me or any other who was of my opinion. I got a private message recently from a fellow member who felt she was being bashed by the Charles/Camilla faction and was upset. I am not the only one who feels this way.

Bashing others for their opinons isn't the solution to this matter. If you feel that your opinons are being trampled upon, then it is your responsiblity to contact an Administrator or Super Moderator to help deal with the matter.

And now that we've addressed this and future issues will be taken up privately with Administrators and Super Moderators, let's get back to the topic of Charles and Camilla's impending marriage.

Alexandria
Royal Forums Administrator

 

[Regina]

That's right Tiaraprin. I wrote in this forum my opinion about Charles and Camilla and I felt the same as you. I love this forum, and I respect the moderators very much but I felt that my opinion were not wellcome for the (some)of them.
So, I think that I have to write to Administrators, like Alexandria suggest.

Oh by the way, Moonlightrhapsody, I agree 1000% with you. Love and War aren't excuse for hurting the others. But there is a God above and Justice will me made for all of us.

Thank you.

 

[Warren]

A Couple of Things...

[QUOTE ] I think he likes the media when it suits him. When they invade his privacy he doesn't like them very much. [/QUOTE]

Every single public figure in the world "uses" the media to get their message across or for image management. It's a two-edged sword, as even that darling of the media, Diana, found to her cost. The question is what level of invasion of privacy is acceptable. This is a question being asked by a lot more people than just the Prince of Wales.

To Camilla's credit she has (to use Princess Margaret's expression) never explained, never complained. She hasn't colluded in writing a self-serving book, or cultivated tabloid journalists, or appeared in TV interviews. The fact is we know very little of what Camilla thinks, or what actually went on at the time. We only know Diana's side of the story..

It has always intrigued me how some critics of this relationship choose to take the moral high-ground, waxing righteous in their indignation.

A story...

There was a handsome Prince married to a lovely (blonde) wife with two young sons, the eldest being heir to a serious Royal title and fortune. They lived a charmed life. And there was a female friend of the Prince, name beginning with the letter C, who was photographed with the Prince's wife at social events, and was thought to be her friend. Some time later it became public knowledge that this "friend" was having an affair with the Prince.

Inevitably, there was a divorce. And then the Prince married the woman who, (and here we are taking the high moral ground), was instrumental in breaking up the marriage. And his former spouse was still alive, to boot!

Was there scandal? Were the couple hounded? Did people say "disgraceful! They must not be allowed to marry!". Were there indignant posts on the Forum boards? Were there plaintive cries of "what about the children, what must they think?" Was she publicly labelled an adulteress?

No. She is now one of the world's most admired Princesses.

Step forward Princess Caroline and Prince Ernst August of Hanover.

Moral indignation and self-righteousness are wonderful feel-good emotions, but unless applied consistently, merely reek of hypocrisy.

Perhaps the best attitude to all of this is to live and let live, and don't begrudge other people their chance of happiness.
.

 

[aninhas]

It has always intrigued me how critics of this relationship choose to take the high moral ground, waxing righteous in their indignation.

Moral indignation and self-righteousness are wonderful feel-good emotions, but unless applied consistently, merely reek of hypocrisy.

So... where is the Moderators now?...

 

[Warren]

It has always intrigued me how critics of this relationship choose to take the high moral ground, waxing righteous in their indignation.

Moral indignation and self-righteousness are wonderful feel-good emotions, but unless applied consistently, merely reek of hypocrisy.
QUOTE]


So... where is the Moderators now?...

Apologies. I have amended the posting to "...some critics" to avoid generalisation.

 

[Piewi]

I don´t like that Camilla and Charles get marry because they hurt a lot of people (Camilla´s children, Mr. parker Bowls, Lady Di, William and Harry)and they were married when they were dating. For me this wedding is incredible and unacceptable.
I agree with moonlightrhapsody in all her points
I think that British monarchy is going down with all this mess