Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: vyper on February 10, 2005, 04:05:09 pm
-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4252931.stm
Yes, for all you non-brits: Prince Charles, Diana's ex-husband, has announced he's going to get married to a woman, the house of which he visited the night before his first wedding.
Not only that, she's Catholic. I believe that sort of thing started a civil war once.
Not only that, he wants to change the crown title once he's king from "Defender of The Faith" to "Defender of All Faiths". Now, you all know I'm not religious in any way, but how exactly can a man who's meant to be the head of the Church of England be so once that happens?
Skip a generation and give it to William - he'll fill the palace with hot celebrity chicks... perhaps. Either way at least we wouldn't have to stare at that tool and his bit on the side.
-
Horse face marries horses arse.
-
Originally posted by vyper
Skip a generation and give it to William - he'll fill the palace with hot celebrity chicks
Queen Paris Hilton!
:p
-
[MI5 telephone tap - Jan 2006]
Charles: How are you william?
Willy: I'm great dad - I just inherited the throne before you, and got engaged to Paris Hilton.
Charles: Right that's it, screw the peasants I'm blowing the state money on a garden for me and all my plants. Beat that.
Willy: Sorry Dad I've got to go... Paris has her mouth full.
-
Why do you people even care?
Everyone knows that the crown thing is totally bull**** anyway. I'd understand if they had some official power, but these days they don't have jack.
Why give a damn?
-
OMGOMGOMGOMGOMG!
This will have absolutely no impact on my life whatsoever!
-
We care because you're right in one regard BD - the Crown has no real power over the state, but it exists as a figurehead for both the commonwealth, the Church of England, and the UK abroad.
-
Originally posted by BD
Why do you people even care?
Everyone knows that the crown thing is totally bull**** anyway. I'd understand if they had some official power, but these days they don't have jack.
Why give a damn?
We don't really. The only thing is that a) they get approx £12m a year from the state (IIRC that's Charles' whack, he voluntarily pays about £4m in income tax to be fair) and b) that arsehole could be a symbolic representative of our nation.
-
Originally posted by aldo_14
Horse face marries horses arse.
:lol:
The only british royal that i have/had respect for is princess Diana.
-
Originally posted by BD
Why do you people even care?
Everyone knows that the crown thing is totally bull**** anyway. I'd understand if they had some official power, but these days they don't have jack.
Why give a damn?
The posistion has very little actual power, true. But it has a lot of prestige, which makes an effective multiplier for the power. When the monarch talks, people listen, you know?
-
Really? What kind of ignorant people do that?
Probably the same kind of people that actually listen to so-called Hollywood "stars."
-
I don't listen to any monarch talk. And I live in a Monarchy :wtf:
They can all bite me.
Who cares if they're gay, queer, nazi's or whatever? Everyone has to be something. Even if they have to be an idiot.
-
Hmmmm. Lots of fuss over the fact that Charles is divorced and wants to marry someone who is divorced and that the Church of England's rules won't let him do that.
I watched this on the news and wondered why no one at all brought up the fact that only bloody reason the C of E exists in the first place was so that a king could get a divorce in order to marry his mistress! :rolleyes:
How can they be so f**king stupid as to not realise that Charles is mearly asking them to do the same f**king thing that stopped them being catholics in the first place! :rolleyes: :lol:
-
I think it's all more to do with the fact we all know he's a cock and she's a slapper.
-
Peasant, how dare you talk down to the Prince like that?!
A representative of the Crown is already on his way to have your hut burned for such insolent comments.
-
If he's a British civil servant I'm safe for the next 50 years.
-
This is why we don't have monarchs in America. We just have retards with real power.
-
Originally posted by Petrarch of the VBB
OMGOMGOMGOMGOMG!
This will have absolutely no impact on my life whatsoever!
-
Originally posted by Windrunner
The only british royal that i have/had respect for is princess Diana.
The Queen Mum wasn't too bad.
-
Originally posted by karajorma
I watched this on the news and wondered why no one at all brought up the fact that only bloody reason the C of E exists in the first place was so that a king could get a divorce in order to marry his mistress! :rolleyes:
Thanks god ( haha ) there was much more than that ;). The fact that the Crown didn't want to pay taxes to the Pope, for exemple, which probably a much more important factor. But yeah, it sounds much less romantic :p
-
They make a good couple together. They are both ugly as sin. And Charles has a plus going for him. If he tried hard enough, i bet he could fly. He has Dumbo´s ears.
In the immortal words of Confucious, "Who gives a shiit"? Leave them be, to make some ugly babies.
-
Charles has a duty to the british public to behave in a decent manner. Derived from the fact that the public here are forced to donate huge amounts of money to him and his family, which they accept. In my book, two timing your wife and then having her killed so you can marry your mutant mistress is not behaving in a decent manner.
-
I couldn't care less, to be honest. No, wait. Actually I do care, 'cos this means that all the Daily Mail-reading idiots will have to shut up about her because they're officially a couple.
I can't see why there's such a fuss over this. They've been in love for thirty ****ing years, what's the problem with them getting married?
I think it has more to do with Princess Diana fanboyism than it has to do with religion and protocol etc. The fact that it wasn't a perfect marriage (after all the fuss over the wedding etc) and the fact that she died in unusual circumstances means that she's now idolised by lots of people, and they think that CPB is somehow "taking over" from her. Or something. I dunno - leave 'em be to be happy.
-
Originally posted by Nico
Thanks god ( haha ) there was much more than that ;). The fact that the Crown didn't want to pay taxes to the Pope, for exemple, which probably a much more important factor. But yeah, it sounds much less romantic :p
Actually I don't think that it was. Every single history book I've read puts the main reason down as being the refusal of the Pope to allow Henry VIII to divorce Catherine of Aragorn. The fact that it gave Henry access to Church money was a welcome benift and might have pushed him forwards when it appeared that he wasn't going to be able to reconcsile with the catholic church but it wasn't the main reason.
You're welcome to find me a link that proves me wrong of course :)
-
:lol:
-
Diana was a publicity seeking media whore.
It would seem that dying was the best thing she ever did for her career.........
-
Originally posted by karajorma
Actually I don't think that it was. Every single history book I've read puts the main reason down as being the refusal of the Pope to allow Henry VIII to divorce Catherine of Aragorn. The fact that it gave Henry access to Church money was a welcome benift and might have pushed him forwards when it appeared that he wasn't going to be able to reconcsile with the catholic church but it wasn't the main reason.
You're welcome to find me a link that proves me wrong of course :)
It was because Henry wanted to get a boy, and he couldn't with Catherine. (Unfortunately for his wives, no one knew that it was the man that determined the sex of the child :D). Anyway, he tried to divorce Catherine, but the Church wouldn't let him--as in the Catholic church, well, back then at least, divorce was not allowed. So Henry used the excuse that the Church was dictating the succession of England, and over stepping it's boundaries. Using this "reason", he started his own Church of England, and, using fradulant evidence of adultry, divorced Catherine and married Anne.
-
OK, a couple of thoughts:
1. I don't care about constitutional precedent or any of that stuff but, I dislike Charles for being a dickhead and not marrying Camilla in the first place. It would have saved two lives and a lot of grief...
2. Diana was not a 'media whore' as you so quaintly put it - the media hounded her constantly and persistantly up to and including the moment she and Dodi were killed by that drunk chauffeur.
3. You may think the government has the power, but the armed forces swear allegiance the monarch, and after each election the new Prime Minister has to ask permission to form the new government....
So I offer this scenario: The Queen refuses to allow formation of parliament and on a public broadcast calls all her people and armed forces to join her in making a new form of democracy - how many people would be on her side? (bearing in mind she is pretty much guaranteed the army, navy, and air force)
Or put another way: Your country? or a bunch of politicians?
-
Yep. That's pretty much the way I heard it UT. :)
I know that Henry did disolve the monastries soon after he became the head of the C of E but that wasn't his main goal.
-
Originally posted by Clave
1. I don't care about constitutional precedent or any of that stuff but, I dislike Charles for being a dickhead and not marrying Camilla in the first place. It would have saved two lives and a lot of grief...
The way I hear it Camilla got sick of waiting for Charles to get out of the navy and went off and married someone else. Pretty stupid of her but hardly something you can blame Charles for.
Originally posted by Clave
2. Diana was not a 'media whore' as you so quaintly put it - the media hounded her constantly and persistantly up to and including the moment she and Dodi were killed by that drunk chauffeur.
I will agree that she was hounded by the press but she didn't really do much to stop them and in fact encouraged them several times by seeking out publicity. I doubt that Diana could have successfully disappeared from the public eye no matter how hard she tried but she could have stopped getting her freinds to leak stories as "Sources close to the princess." All the time.
She might not have liked Charles but by publishing her biography, doing that "Queen of Hearts" interview and a whole host of other things she never failed to try to grab the media attention whenever she could if she thought she could use it to have a go at him.
-
Originally posted by Clave
2. Diana was not a 'media whore' as you so quaintly put it - the media hounded her constantly and persistantly up to and including the moment she and Dodi were killed by that drunk chauffeur.
There are still people who believe that?
Hahahaha.
Like anyone is going to let a princess walk away with her lover.
-
I'm not saying she was blameless, far from it, but they started it and she did a lot of stuff in self defence. One of my bosses was a friend of hers, but I am reluctant to quiz him about her life - not that he would probably tell me anyway...
I don't think she was killed, it's too convenient - it was just a stupid accident...
-
Originally posted by Clave
So I offer this scenario: The Queen refuses to allow formation of parliament and on a public broadcast calls all her people and armed forces to join her in making a new form of democracy - how many people would be on her side? (bearing in mind she is pretty much guaranteed the army, navy, and air force)
Or put another way: Your country? or a bunch of politicians?
Don't you mean The Queens' country or the politicians?
-
Originally posted by Clave
So I offer this scenario: The Queen refuses to allow formation of parliament and on a public broadcast calls all her people and armed forces to join her in making a new form of democracy - how many people would be on her side? (bearing in mind she is pretty much guaranteed the army, navy, and air force)
She is guaranteed them - in fact if she thought about it this nation would be a republic before you could blink.
-
Originally posted by Clave
I'm not saying she was blameless, far from it, but they started it and she did a lot of stuff in self defence. One of my bosses was a friend of hers, but I am reluctant to quiz him about her life - not that he would probably tell me anyway...
I don't think she was killed, it's too convenient - it was just a stupid accident...
Clave. Rich people don't have stupid accidents.
It is much more likely that the driver was screaming "FOR KING AND COUNTRY" and drove the thing off a cliff, than have an accident happen (that's the insane scenario).
-
Originally posted by BD
Clave. Rich people don't have stupid accidents.
The Chaffeur probably wasn't rich.
-
I think you get my point without the dubious comments. Hopefuly.
-
Originally posted by BD
Clave. Rich people don't have stupid accidents.
It is much more likely that the driver was screaming "FOR KING AND COUNTRY" and drove the thing off a cliff, than have an accident happen (that's the insane scenario).
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Wow. You're one of those.
I suppose you figure that Bush flew military jets into the WTC as well?
-
How hard is it to believe that a woman that acts on emotion (or whatever the hell she acted on) solely is a threat to the standing of the crown?
Newsflash: When you marry into the royal family, you need to ****ing know what you're getting yourself into. There's no way "out". You don't get divorces or get to disgrace the Queen Mother with your petulant behaviour by fornicating with AN OUTSIDER.
You step out of line, you're gone.
Real simple.
Oh, and yeah, I don't prefer the "AL QUADIA DROVE TEH PLANES" story. Sorry, I just can't buy something that stupid. Not that I think Bush did it though.