Whose Head Will Roll? (for Fire&Ice)
Click to view full-size image.
Related topics
- and the little one said roll over, roll over..but there was no more room
- Drum roll please....
- Drum roll please ..............
- Drum roll, please...
- LIW Roll Call
- for WF, are there 3 in-house options; which come w/ egg-roll?
- Cartier Roll Ring HELP!
- Too childish? (Can you tell I''m on a roll today?)
- Roll Calls Ladies!!!!
- Barry''s been on a spinel roll
|
|
|
|
by Emeraldgirl » February 28th, 2005, 2:10 pm
I really wish they''d just get it over and done with and get married already. Every new drama ends up on the front page of all the mags and newspapers over here (Australia) buit you know what they can always do their usual when all else fails.......................................Blame Diana!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 And just out of curiousity does anyone know if it is still treason to marry someone of royal blood without the queen''s permission? |
|
|
|
|
I'm not going to get into a discussion on Iraq, but I am certain Camilla and Charles will be legally married eventually. (Heck, the Queen is issuing a stamp to commemorate the event!) That poor couple! What a row to hoe. And just because of the stupid monarchy. Everyone else gets to divorce and remarry in the free world!
Is Camilla's father still alive? I hope so. Years ago he accused Prince Charles of ruining her life and it was reported that when he did Charles cried. I would like to think that he lived to see Charles marry her. |
|
|
|
|
I did a little research. Major Bruce Shand, a war hero, is, indeed, alive and at 88 is reportedly very glad that Prince Charles and his daughter are going to make their relationship legal. Meanwhile the rest of the world-rock stars, movie stars, and the people next door-are having children without marrying at all. And that is accepted. Talk about double standards! |
|
|
|
|
Henry VIII was raised as a Roman Catholic and married Catherine of Aragon, daughter of the King of Spain, in the Roman Catholic Church. When he tired of her, he asked the Pope for a divorce. (Henry had had a child, Mary Tudor, with Queen Catherine.) Leery of angering Catherine's brother, who was now the King of Spain, the Pope refused Henry a divorce. Henry promptly declared that the Pope had no authority over whom he would marry. He declared himself divorced from Queen Catherine, who still lived, and "married" Anne Boleyn who was believed to have been his mistress. (Is this following the rules? It seems to me that he was making them...but perhaps I am biased against the good man!) It is this conduct (and remember, this head of the Church of England would behead two more of his six wives, divorcing one other [Anne of Cleves], and leaving another Catherine Parr, as his widow)! Some example! Deb ;-) |
2:39 AM|
|
|
|
ironic isn''t it?! the only reason the church of england exists is because king henry viii didn''t like the rules so he not only broke them, he recreated the system in his image [meaning to serve his own self interests...divorce, after divorce, after divorce]. now people want to hold, honor, cherish, obey, and not change a thing about that very same system in the name of respect. the whole church was founded on disrespect in the first place.
nothing is above change and anything that isn''t willing to change over time becomes either irrelevant or stagnant. the monarchy is smart and knows this; hence, it changes with the times and continues to not only continue but to be respected. i, too, am glad that camilla''s father is alive to see charles do the honorable thing. i find it admireable that given the time and pressures that this couple has persevered. had charles had the backbone to marry her in the first place, we''d never be having this conversation. peace, movie zombie |
|
|
|
|
"The New York Times" which, like other newspapers, reported that the wedding of the Prince of Wales would be postponed due to the pope's funeral, points out the historical irony of the move. "That a British royal wedding would be postponed by a papal funeral presents a historical irony, considering the British monarchy broke with the papacy in the early 16th century to permit King Henry VIII to end one marriage and begin a succession of others in his quest for a male heir. With today's announcement of a postponement, a royal marriage involving two people who are or had been divorced gave way to the dictates of the papacy." article |
|
|
|
|
AGBF, I thought of you this morning as I watched part of the Royal Wedding. The pagentry, as always, was beautiful.
Even the British tabloids have been kind to them - for their special day at least! I left England for the US in my early twenties and I have to say most of my friends were not yet married so in essence I have saved a fortune in hats!! I still love looking at all the ladies wearing them as they try and out-do or out-hat each other! |
|
|
|
|
I knew it was televised in Great Britain, but I didn't know if it was on television here today. I would have loved to have seen it. I just wish Charles and Camilla happy. As the wedding approached, there were more and more articles on them published so I stopped posting a link to every one...but one compared the "jinxed" wedding of Camilla and Charles to some *truly* jinxed weddings! If I can find that link, I will post it. The wedding of Jane Seymour to Henry VIII took place 11 days after he beheaded his second wife, Anne Boleyn! Deb |
|
|
|
|
Here is the link: article And here is an excerpt from the (long and witty) article, the part that describes the *TRULY* jinxed weddings!!! "None of these count as wedding disasters. Now if you want a wedding disaster, consider: The 1906 nuptials of King Alphonso XIII of Spain and Princess Ena of Battenberg, a granddaughter of Britain's Queen Victoria. As the newlyweds traveled from the cathedral to the palace after the ceremony, someone threw a bomb at their carriage, causing massive carnage. The 18-year-old bride was not injured, but she wandered around the reception with blood on her gown, repeating dazedly, 'I saw a man without any legs.' And what about the engagement of Henry VIII to his third queen, Jane Seymour? It was announced on May 20, 1536. Henry was a newly single man, since just the day before he had had his second wife, Anne Boleyn, relieved of her head. And yes, it was a bad omen. Henry and Jane were married May 30. Less than a year and half later, Jane died after giving birth to a son. And here's a sad wedding story that's a little closer to home: In 1937, Prince Louis of Hesse and Margaret Geddes were married in heavy mourning, because the groom's entire family — his widowed mother, brother, sister-in-law and two small nephews — were killed in a plane crash while en route to the wedding. (The sister-in-law, Princess Cecile, was a sister of the very same Prince Philip who's about to become your father-in-law, Camilla.). Prince Louis and his new wife adopted the sole survivor of the family, a baby daughter named Johanna who had been left at home, but the child died of meningitis two years later." Deborah |
|
|
|
|
Queen Mary (Henry VIII daughter) ended up marrying Phillip II of Spain. Now, Queen Mary''s mother was Catherine of Aragon - daughter of the King of Spain. So what blood relation was Queen Mary to Phillip II???? I know it was very common for royalty to marry within but it''s still yucky to me  |