Prince of Wales to Marry Camilla Parker-Bowles

Should He ?

  • Yes, it's a great idea

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No, he should remain single

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Doesn't matter one way or the other

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Rather him than me

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
#1
The BBC have just announced that HRH Prince Charles is to marry Camilla Parker-Bowles.

It's their decision and he probably hasn't asked the Arrse readership, but what do you think ?
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
#2
It would appear I have my head up my arrse.
Perhaps I should learn how to use a bloody keyboard !
Please ignore the other polls.

:oops:
 
#3
Just another hanger-on for us taxpayers to support, though no doubt we've already been supporting her lifestyle for some years. Personally, I wish they would simply disappear, never to be heard of again.
 
#4
eve1962 said:
Just another hanger-on for us taxpayers to support, though no doubt we've already been supporting her lifestyle for some years. Personally, I wish they would simply disappear, never to be heard of again.
8O 8O 8O 8O
 
#5
Good luck to the pair of them.

All Charles needs now is to get Harry into the Factory and have his life sorted out for him and he's a happy man.
 
#6
If you checked what the Public Account Committee established recently He takes no money from the civil list and pay tax at 40% on income from his land and investments. Plenty of non-royals earn more and pay less tax.

If he wants to marry her that is fine by me it is his life.
 
#9
I cannot believe people are backing this ludicrous endeavour. Must i remind you that Charles is to be the next King of England and if he is King then She will be queen, do you want to be governed by that fish faced old tramp? I know i dont. Has everyone forgotton Diana you cant replace her with any one especially parker-bowels, and what about William and Harry is she gunna take over as their Mum?
No, if Charles Weds Camilla i think he should abdicate and give the throne to William!

onslaught over :twisted: 8O
 
#10
All in favour of the chap having the freedom to choose who he marries and if its to someone he loves then lucky him.

However, the real crux of the issue is will the PWRR now have to change their Col in Chief?
 
#11
Isn't this just another Royal 'Aunt Sally' story put up by C*ntbell. Anything to do with P-B is guaranteed to get a bite from all sections of the monarchist/republican venn diagram; just about the only thing remarkable about this story is it's timing. What else is being covered up?
 
#12
Nazi tendencies aside, was the ostensible reason for the abdication of Edward not that Wallace Simpson was Mrs Simpson, and that as she was a divorcee marrying her would have made him ineligible for the throne?

If it was constitutional then, what has changed?

Mind you, the PM is a left footer, and I'm not sure that's allowed either...
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
#13
eve1962 said:
Just another hanger-on for us taxpayers to support, though no doubt we've already been supporting her lifestyle for some years. Personally, I wish they would simply disappear, never to be heard of again.
Jailorinummqasr said:
If you checked what the Public Account Committee established recently He takes no money from the civil list and pay tax at 40% on income from his land and investments. Plenty of non-royals earn more and pay less tax.

If he wants to marry her that is fine by me it is his life.
Jailor, I think you missed something here,

'Eve1962' - 'checking facts' - 'posting drivel'

Spot the odd one out ?
 
#14
Hmmm....sounds like a good day to bury bad news...

Several people have already passed their opinions to the BBC - here are some of the more coherent:

I'm delighted with this news. She is obviously the woman for him. Let's hope they can find happiness. I suspect a lot of the criticism is coming from those who have an anti-Royal agenda. No shit!! :D
A. Howlett, Manchester, England

Excellent news - there is no reason at all why he can't marry her just like hundreds do in the rest of the country. Congratulations to them both!
Benjamin Raine, Oxford, UK Is she that much of a slapper?

Marry who he wants - but never be King - he is unworthy and Camilla is never going to be my Queen - I would rather have a President if the said couple came to the throne... I suspect that many would say we already have! :D
Barbara Reynolds, Bexleyehath, Kent
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
#15
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4252795.stm

The BBC said:
The prince and Mrs Parker Bowles first met at a polo match in 1970
Prince Charles is set to marry his long-term partner Camilla Parker Bowles, Clarence House says.

No wedding date has been confirmed at this stage, but reports have suggested 6 April is one possible date.

The move will end years of speculation on their relationship which has spanned decades after they first met in 1970.

The Prince of Wales, who is the heir to the throne, was previously married to Princess Diana, who died in a car crash in Paris in 1997.

The princess famously referred to Mrs Parker Bowles as one of the contributing factors to the breakdown of her marriage to Charles.

The couple, who had two sons - princes William and Harry - were divorced when Diana died.

Conservative leader Michael Howard said he was "delighted" at the news, but Downing Street has refused to comment until a full statement from Clarence House.

Mrs Parker Bowles' current position has meant that her status was dogged with problems, including her seating at social functions away from her partner.

Last June, Mrs Parker Bowles was mentioned in the Prince's accounts, which marked a new realm of acceptance.

The marriage is likely to be a sensitive issue because Mrs Parker Bowles is divorced and her former husband is still alive.

If he became king, Charles would be the supreme governor of the Church of England and some Anglicans remain opposed to the remarriage of divorcees.

The church is officially neutral on the issue, but former Archbishop of Canterbury George Carey recently urged the couple to marry.

Last year, a poll indicated that more Britons support Prince Charles marrying Camilla Parker Bowles than oppose it.

Of those who responded to a Populus poll, 32% said they would support Charles if he remarried, while 29 percent were opposed.

However, most people - 38% - said they did not care, while 2% had no opinion.
 
#16
As far as I'm aware, the constitution hasn't changed although I would find it strange if the CS haven't been busying themselves, finding a way out. Concur - general election in Apr to bury the mess! :)
 
#17
in_the_cheapseats said:
As far as I'm aware, the constitution hasn't changed although I would find it strange if the CS haven't been busying themselves, finding a way out.
With respect to divorcee royal consorts or Papist politicians?
 
#18
Fine with me as long as she sorts her teeth out, it looks like she is running them in for Arkle, mind you if he is happy.
 
#19
fas_et_gloria said:
Nazi tendencies aside, was the ostensible reason for the abdication of Edward not that Wallace Simpson was Mrs Simpson, and that as she was a divorcee marrying her would have made him ineligible for the throne?

If it was constitutional then, what has changed?
If my memory of my history lessons serves me (I wasn't around at the time!) Wallace Simpson was not only a divorcee but a Catholic. Also, bearing in mind what else has been done to our consitution by New Labour without anyone batting an eyelid why should anyone be up in arms about this...?
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
#20
fas_et_gloria said:
in_the_cheapseats said:
As far as I'm aware, the constitution hasn't changed although I would find it strange if the CS haven't been busying themselves, finding a way out.
With respect to divorcee royal consorts or Papist politicians?
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
 

Similar threads

Top