Mort:

Mousetrap: Yeah the tourism is very big business regarding the royals, palaces, etc. Even Harry is playing the 'I'm a poor royal' game for all it's worth.

Mort: Exactly. I don't blame him getting out though.

Mousetrap: Ditto, don't blame him milking it a bit either.

Tuesday: I think his wife has a great deal of Hollywood in her blood. She's certainly acting up the part as a 'princess' who's no longer part of the establishment. I think she learnt that from Diana, and possibly Wallis Simpson. Edward VIII's frowned upon missus.

Tuesday: I would place a bet that there has NEVER been a King who hasn't had a "dalliance". He isn't going to be Pope for crying out loud.

Tuesday: Apparently the Queen disagrees. Though could she even change that? I definitely don't know.

rod03801: Don't believe Queen Elizabeth can choose who the crown goes too. the line of succession is regulated by parliament.

While William seems more popular than Charles, citing dalliance on a politics discussion board seems a dubious reason to be worthy compared to several Politicians including presidents, prime ministers, ministers and rank and file politicians.

The UK royal family are the head of the Church of England ( Protestant Anglican church) since the 16th or 17th century)

Tuesday:

Not sure that is correct ...l ie hindu buddist etc etc ol

but the irony regarding Charles is possibly the origin of the church of England broke from the catholic chuch when the pope refused to give Henry the 8th a divorce .... Henry wanted the Pope to grant him an annulment, on the grounds his first marriage was illegal and incestuous because Catherine of Arogan was the widow of his dead brother Arthur.

After several failed attempts to persuade him, Henry split from Rome and made himself the head of a new church.

Border C Rule: That sounds correct to me. (About Parliament).
Regardless, it would seem to be a silly reason, to not keep to the normal order of ascension. As I said, I doubt there is any King who didn't have a "dalliance" before or during his reign.

And as you said, of course the Catholic Church has zero say. (especially knowing the History)

yep the ruling monarch has no authority to choose their successor .... for William to become king, Charles would have to abdicate or die.

I don't know how the catholic church got involved in this discussion as they have as much to do with the royal uk family succession as the tooth fairy. and the easter bunny lol ....A Roman Catholic is specifically excluded from succession to the UK throne.. but in 2015 they are allowed to marry a catholic.

Interestingly the Monarch holds a title of "Defender of the Faith and Supreme Governor of the Church of England' ....Charles has said he will shorten it to "Defender or Faith" to insure all religions are respected equally.

Tuesday:

Not sure what you are saying.... I don't and haven't said anything about your opinion questions or arguments.

what I said is Charles will succeed the Queen unless Charles abdicates and that the Cat holic church have nothing to do with the UK royal family.

Early in the discussion a request for a British player to clarify didnt happen,so I did. British history had a huge influence in Commonwealth countries especially until the 1970s. For example in Australia we have public and private schools. For years "religion" was taught in public schools which was for decades church of england only. Many private schools are run or influenced by the catholic church where that faith was taught.

the two faiths while both Christian were like chalk and cheese in so many ways and for some, still are

Tuesday: You're a very strong person. I'm sure you'll be ok. But anyway, please stay on the topic. I hope you had a great weekend.
It wasn't intended to insult you personally, and I'm sorry if it did.

Tuesday: Not as much as in London I think

I was voter 35 today

zambanek:

For what it is worth whenever i see posts that may be scam or possible advertising ...before clicking on any link .. clicking on the persons name shows whether they have logged onto this site the same time as the post ...If so i will never click on any links they offer.

For the curious this may assist in not finding themselves on dubious sites

obviously whoever they are are aware of the site to log on then within minutes make a post on a discussion board.

personally i find there lowlife actions annoying

2024

33 today ... No straight party option