All those in favour of an Abdication Crisis.........

The present Prince of Wales should abdicate in favour of William.

  • Agree

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Disagree

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • He should run for Pope

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
#2
.............and Ladies - don't forget us

I wouldn't wish the reponsibility on Wills at such a young age. I hope HM will live a long time yet
 
#3
To start with Queensman HRH is not in a position to abdicate unless the Queen (God bless her) decides to retire, an unlikely scenario at the moment.

Secondly, and I'm quite prepared to accept that I will be at odds with the rest of the ARRSE members but I think your assessment of Charles (save his choice of women) is totally wrong. I think he is a decent bloke who deserves a fair go. Still if you want to believe everything you read in the Scum then crack on.
 
#4
Birdie_Numnums said:
To start with Queensman HRH is not in a position to abdicate unless the Queen (God bless her) decides to retire, an unlikely scenario at the moment.

Secondly, and I'm quite prepared to accept that I will be at odds with the rest of the ARRSE members but I think your assessment of Charles (save his choice of women) is totally wrong. I think he is a decent bloke who deserves a fair go. Still if you want to believe everything you read in the Scum then crack on.
Here, here! I'm with you Birdie. Hurrah for HRH.
(And might I add Sir, if you need someone to take care of the dissenters, I'm just down the road! :wink: )
 
#5
Im firmly nehind him. I think he is a solidly honest bloke who stands up for what he believes in (not veryone agrees with him though).

Long live the queen, and should we lose her, long live king charles.

William is too young and needs to serve his country before he becomes king.

A_S
 
#6
so what happens if like many middle aged, upper middle class, economically secure and childless couples C&C decide to adopt!!!!!!!!

Could we have a future King?Queen from one of the colonies. Quick man the ramparts
 
#7
Charles should take up his post as and when - and I believe it is his firm intention to do so.

What I could see happening is The Queen lasting another 10-15 years, at which point Charles would be a pensioner (unless TCB has changed the rules). William is likely to be happily married by the, and skipping a generation would have more merit than now.

viz :
Charles would still have 'baggage' (this not aimed at Camilla by the way)
Young King William & family would increase popularity of Monarchy
Charles would be a good advisor to his son
Charles could carry on his other good works

Imaging The Queen lasting as long as her mum (or longer) !! Here's hoping.
 
#8
Queensman,

A cutting assessment of Prince Charles but don't forget that he was not the only one to stray from the path of matrimonial bliss. Princess Diana was no saint.

Prince Charles is next in line and we, a generally monarchist group, should support him because there will be enough people ready to hammer the man for marrying a woman he loves. Let him be King.

A greater fear than Prince Charles becoming King is that he is missed out and an awful accident befalls Prince William. Look at who's 3rd in line.

The House of Hewitt?
 
#9
Idle Adjt (funny, I was one of those once too!)

What a dreadful thought - The House of Hewitt, gorblimey. But I suppose, at least they'd be English, rather than a strange deluded collection Germans with Jock pretensions. I was taken very firmly to task in an earlier thread for suggesting that the Nazi Prince was the spawn of our former donkey whalloping comrade-in-arms!

I still can't reconcile myself to the notion of their nuptials and see it as only fitting that it'll happen in a registry office in some High Street. Just about sums the whole thing up.
 
#10
Queensman said:
...But I suppose, at least they'd be English, rather than a strange deluded collection Germans with Jock pretensions...
'Nice' to see racism, based wholly on elements of a British family's ancestry, reappearing in Current Affairs.
 
#11
8O

was it only me that swore an oath of allegiance to the Queen, her heirs and succesors?

Prince Charles = Heir

Oath of allegiance = loyalty to heir implied

Sun journalist = no loyalty to heir

trained soldier = loyalty quite important

are you getting this yet?

If you have mastered this simple puzzle, perhaps you could explain exactly what he has done wrong?

1. he has served in the armed forces and supported various forces charities and welfare throughout his adult life (nothing wrong here)

2. he has raised two sons, who it appears will follow him into the forces (they look quite promising too - again this seems ok)

3. his marriage split up (wow, big deal - I am sure this does not happen to many people at all!)

4. he has been happy with a partner for many years, he wishes to get married to her (good for you sir, I hope you are happy)

5. unlike you, after 22 years he will to the day he dies, be on duty. He will have to conduct himself accordingly. The odd slip (e.g. Prince Harry, Swastika) will be held against him, often unfairly (e.g. Prince Harry, Swastika).

anyone, got a point? Queensman, this suggests you are a royalist? If so a bit of support for her heir apparent would be nice...
 
#12
If we start messing about with the line of succession in any way. We are playing directly into the Republicans arms, and would lead to the Absolution of the Monarchy, when the Queen dies.

Do you you really want someone like President Blair and First Lady Cherie flying the world in BlairForce One hiring out the British Army to the highest bidder (Thats holidays for them by the way - Not a pay rise for you)

I believe a Republic will cost us far more than the Royal Family do now....

So for me - Long live the Queen, and Charles in his turn.
 
#13
As an Oz we have to look at:

The Crown protects us against the politicians
The policltians protect us against the Crown

Fine with Betty but at Referendum after may be different
 
#14
Mike_2817 said:
If we start messing about with the line of succession in any way. We are playing directly into the Republicans arms, and would lead to the Absolution of the Monarchy, when the Queen dies.

Do you you really want someone like President Blair and First Lady Cherie flying the world in BlairForce One hiring out the British Army to the highest bidder (Thats holidays for them by the way - Not a pay rise for you)

I believe a Republic will cost us far more than the Royal Family do now....

So for me - Long live the Queen, and Charles in his turn.
I quite agree.
 
#15
So choosing the head of state because he was born to it
fact he was already commiting adultery before he married di
plus he was quoted as saying I'll sod off to swizterland to ski if you ban foxhunting so hardly that loyal(':evil:')
though at least president blair can be sacked
 
#16
IdleAdjt said:
Queensman,

A cutting assessment of Prince Charles but don't forget that he was not the only one to stray from the path of matrimonial bliss. Princess Diana was no saint.

Prince Charles is next in line and we, a generally monarchist group, should support him because there will be enough people ready to hammer the man for marrying a woman he loves. Let him be King.
Support him now - but - I think my opinion will change if HM EIIR lasts another 10/15 years. Chas would be a bit of a dead hand taking the job on then.
Chas is entitled to a bit of matrimonial bliss - it has always been my opinion that he was put to stud with Di to ensure continuation of the line and it was shown to be his duty. When one things back to those in the running - Susan George anyone? - it seems odd he chose such a wimpy tart
 
#17
Camilla's Greaty Granny was shagging Charles Great Grandpapa behind people's backs...Camilla's Ex once dated Chuckie's sister...Charles, bless him, married a trophy blonde years younger than himself so he could pop a sprog or two to keep the ' firm' in good hands whilst still boinking his lovey dove..

Hell if they were Americans they'd be on Jerry Springer!!

The Queen Mum must be rolling in her grave or downing copious amounts of celestial gin..[ God Bless Her ]... my great respect and sympathies to HM Queen Elizabeth who has to soldier on through all this public washing of the family's dirty linen in the dumpser press...

Long Live The Queen!!!
 
#18
Ih HRH had bee allowed to marry the then Miss Shand in the first place, the rest of the fiasco would not have followed.
The pompous toadies and politicians who insisted on a "suitable" marriage are responsible. HRH has been as much a victim as anyone.
As for those who judge his behaviour, pluck first the beam from thine own eye...cnut.
Even the frogs have recognised that we have a good system.. I quote:
"The English are the only people upon earth who have been able to prescribe limits to the power of kings by resisting them; and who, by a series of struggles, have at last established that wise Government where the Prince is all-powerful to do good, and, at the same time, is restrained from committing evil; where the nobles are great without insolence, though there are no vassals; and where the people share in the government without confusion."
Voltaire, Letters on England, 1731
 
#19
Surely as serving soldiers in this day and age would anyone, hand on heart, lay down their lives for 'Queen' (also read future king), country is a fair one as it is also home but for some person born into that position?

Not this call sign.............!

All bad press for the future royal family is excellent as it makes us republicans smile...

Point to note......... " Why should I as a citizen of this country have to pay (like visiting Buckingham Palace) to see the gifts other countries have given us as a country through our [non-elected] figure head...?"
Discuss...
 

Latest Threads