Parker Bowles in Line to Become Queen

#1
Parker Bowles in Line to Become Queen


Camilla Parker Bowles arrives at Westminster Abbey in London, in this March 2, 2005 file photo to attend a service of thanksgiving for the life and work of Sir Angus Ogilvy, husband of Britain's Princess Alexandra. KIRSTY WIGGLESWORTH


March 21, 2005 4:25 PM EST

LONDON - In the latest twist in a royal wedding saga that has been full of flip-flops, the British government revealed Monday that like it or not, Britons will have to get used to Queen Camilla.

That's because Camilla Parker Bowles will, by law, automatically become queen when Charles is crowned.

While the public has come around to supporting the marriage, opinion polls still show strong opposition to Parker Bowles taking the title of queen.

But any attempt to change the rules to bow to popular sentiment would be exceedingly difficult: It would require not only a new law in Britain, but also legislative changes in 15 nations of the Commonwealth.

Ever since Prince Charles' office announced the wedding in February, preparations have been riddled with reversals that have prompted many observers to liken the nuptials to a farce.

Charles and Parker Bowles were initially to get married at Windsor Castle, but were forced to choose a decidedly more downscale venue - town hall.

Then Queen Elizabeth dropped her plans to attend her son's wedding, immediately prompting speculation of a royal snub.

On Monday, Constitutional Affairs Minister Christopher Leslie said in a written statement responding to a lawmaker's question that the royal marriage would not be "morganatic" - in which the spouse of inferior status has no claim to the status of the other.

"This is absolutely unequivocal that she automatically becomes queen when he becomes king," said Andrew Mackinlay, the lawmaker who raised the question.

The Department for Constitutional Affairs confirmed that interpretation, saying legislation would be required to deny Parker Bowles the title of queen.

"I'm perfectly happy for the Prince of Wales to marry whoever he likes, but altering the constitution is parliament's business and this does require an alteration to the constitution," Mackinlay said.

"It shouldn't be done for one man and one man alone," he added.

Prime Minister Tony Blair was in no hurry to deal with the issue.

"The position at the moment is limited to what the title would be on her marriage. In terms of any future events, let's wait until future events arise," Blair's official spokesman said.

Announcing his wedding plans last month, Charles said his future wife would be known by the lesser title of Princess Consort when and if he becomes king.

Immediately after their April 8 wedding she will become Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Cornwall, and will not be called Princess of Wales - the title used by the late Princess Diana.

In making the wedding announcement, the prince subtly left the door open for changing his mind about Parker Bowles' future status, saying "it is intended" that she would use the title HRH the Princess Consort.

Some commentators believed that Charles was seeking to buy time to win over public acceptance of his wife as queen. After all, for years he had been saying he had "no plans" to marry Parker Bowles.
Copyright 2005 Associated Press. All rights reserved.
 
#3
"This is absolutely unequivocal that she automatically becomes queen when he becomes king," said Andrew Mackinlay, the lawmaker who raised the question.
So Edward VIII abdicated because?
 
#4
If Charles did not intend to try and destroy the Monarchy, he is doing a danm good job at it :roll:

I for one would find it hard to accept him as King, let alone her as Queen.

As for these Royalists, it is we, the people who decide if the Monarchy remains, not a frigging jumped up arrsehole or two :evil:

Before the Monarchists jump up and down, I too am a great believer in the Monarchy and wish to see it remain......without Charles taking the crown
 
#5
Don't worry dui-lai, Liz has many more good years left.
 
#6
Lets face it most people couldn't care less. Another case of the press making news.....
 
#7
dui lia wrote
"If Charles did not intend to try and destroy the Monarchy, he is doing a danm good job at it"

True.
I would not deney any man the right to marry the women he choses, but in Choles case get wed and Wedge it. Give young Will a chance.
My thai friends are splitting their sides, John you get most butiful Queen.
And this is from folks where les majasty will still put you in nick.
john
 
#9
I personally reckon , charles should be king for a dya then turn the throne over to William, or Harry, as they are the ones more in touch with the generations of today, and popular too.

But saying that imagine if Harry became king, lol

Just have to make sure Harry doesnt get p!ssed when he is about to get the throne, or for the kings speach at xmas!!

'I address you my loyal (Hic) Barstewards, i luvs ya all, ya me bestist mates' etc....
 

Similar threads

Top