Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Maybe Prince William will soon be king

kenny

kenny

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
34,376
73 yr old Prince Charles has tested positive again for COVID 19, and this time has exposed the 95 yr old Queen to the virus.

www.nytimes.com

Prince Charles tests positive, and had recent contact with the queen.

The heir to the British throne, 73, now in isolation, is infected for a second time; he first tested positive in March 2020 and had mild symptoms.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com

I think the British like Willam way more than his dad.
 
I would not object to the throne passing to William and skip a generation.

DK :))
 
But wasn’t Camilla just recognized as Queen Consort by the Queen? Seemed to me as an eventual passing of the throne to Charles. Unless he is of ill health…
 
It would be heartbreaking if the Queen caught covid from Charles and succumbed to it. After all she's done in her life, imo, she deserves a gentle death, passing in her sleep, not dying from the horrid symptoms of covid.

There were things allegedly said and done by William during the Harry/Megan affair that, if true, leave me feeling uneasy about him as far as his ability to be a progressive king.
 
Charlie will bounce back
His time will come
I do hope HM hasn't caught it though

Im worried about Queen Margrethe of Denmark who is older than Prince Charles and has covid too

Also King Felipe of Spain has it also but he is younger
 
Slick1 said:
But wasn’t Camilla just recognized as Queen Consort by the Queen? …
Click to expand...
"But wasn’t Camilla just recognized as Queen Consort by the Queen?"

Yes, and that probably did improve Price Charles' dismal approval rating, a bit.
But the virus itself is not influenced by what the Queen says.

While it's true that Omnicron is less likely, than Delta is, to kill or send one to the hospital, the Prince of Wales is 73 and the version of Covid he has is most likely Omnicron.
 
Last edited:
Daisys and Diamonds said:
Charlie will bounce back
His time will come
I do hope HM hasn't caught it though
...
Click to expand...

They have already announced that 'Charlie' has Covid, and has exposed the Queen to it.

I certainly do not wish for the demise any person, royal or scum of the earth who don't eat with solid gold cutlery.
I'm just discussing the elephant in the palace.

Both the monarch and the next in line are elderly with an illness that is particularly deadly to the elderly.
That's is a tenuous situation that increases the odds of seeing William ascend sooner than expected.
I suspect right now math weenies are calculating the odds and they're making bets in the pubs.

This potential for a surprise take-over calls to mind:
1. The surprise abdication when William's uncle, King Edward VIII, to "marry the divorcee that he loved" (which BTW is okay to do now :rolleyes:)
2. The surprise death of the Queen's father, King George VI, flinging her onto the throne at the tender age of 25.
Keep in mind that at 39 Price William is now 14 years older that the Queen was when she got the top job.

So, royal surprises shouldn't be that surprising.
 
Last edited:
Matata said:
It would be heartbreaking if the Queen caught covid from Charles and succumbed to it. After all she's done in her life, imo, she deserves a gentle death, passing in her sleep, not dying from the horrid symptoms of covid.
...
Click to expand...

+1
Overall she's done an astonishing job IMO at perpetuating the monarchy.
 
kenny said:
They have already announced that 'Charlie' has Covid, and has exposed the Queen to it.

I certainly do not wish for the demise any person, royal or scum of the earth who don't eat with solid gold cutlery.
I'm just discussing the elephant in the palace.

Both the monarch and the next in line are elderly with an illness that is particularly deadly to the elderly.
That's is a tenuous situation that increases the odds of seeing William ascend sooner than expected.
I suspect right now math weenies are calculating the odds and they're making bets in the pubs.

This potential for a surprise take-over calls to mind:
1. The surprise abdication when William's uncle, King Edward VIII, to "marry the divorcee that he loved" (which BTW is okay to do now :rolleyes:)
2. The surprise death of the Queen's father, King George VI, flinging her onto the throne at the tender age of 25.
Keep in mind that at 39 Price William is now 14 years older that the Queen was when she got the top job.

So, royal surprises shouldn't be that surprising.
Click to expand...

You think in this day and age 73 is elderly Kenny ....
 
Daisys and Diamonds said:
You think in this day and age 73 is elderly Kenny ....
Click to expand...

The CDC and WHO publish data about how COVID affects people of various ages.
They use these data to advise policy regarding who should get the life-savings vaccines before the rest of society.
There is lot of data of COVID hospitalizations and deaths that prove this.
It is they who have determined that 65 is the cutoff age for higher risk.

So this is not about what Kenny thinks.
How society perception determines what category people belong in doesn't apply here.
It's about what the experts in science and medicine have established based on proof from millions of deaths and hospitalizations worldwide.
 
Last edited:
Hope Her Maj is well immunized and will live to perhaps her mother's age - 103. As time goes on Charles, William, their wives will take on more of the Queen's official duties but she will remain the reigning monarch in accord with the promises she made that her whole life will be dedicated to your service .... Abdication, according to QEII is apparently only for wimps.

It's also not a popularity contest. Strict rules of succession apply. If people prefer William over Charles too bad, so sad. Charles seems to be an old hand at fighting off Covid as he's had it before. Charles looks likely to inherit the throne late but it won't skip a generation. The younger royals would just step up more to help with the required duties.

The Queen did inherit the throne early but really it would probably have been better for her and her marriage if she hadn't needed to. Phillip could have enjoyed his naval career and she could have had more time enjoying a more carefree life until duty called. Likewise it would be better for William and Catherine to enjoy their young children for longer before taking on more responsibility.
 
Polished said:
Hope Her Maj is well immunized and will live to perhaps her mother's age - 103. As time goes on Charles, William, their wives will take on more of the Queen's official duties but she will remain the reigning monarch in accord with the promises she made that her whole life will be dedicated to your service .... Abdication, according to QEII is apparently only for wimps.

It's also not a popularity contest. Strict rules of succession apply. If people prefer William over Charles too bad, so sad. Charles seems to be an old hand at fighting off Covid as he's had it before. Charles looks likely to inherit the throne late but it won't skip a generation. The younger royals would just step up more to help with the required duties.

The Queen did inherit the throne early but really it would probably have been better for her and her marriage if she hadn't needed to. Phillip could have enjoyed his naval career and she could have had more time enjoying a more carefree life until duty called. Likewise it would be better for William and Catherine to enjoy their young children for longer before taking on more responsibility.
Click to expand...

I agree with much of what you posted.

But this thread is about medical data and how it may play out in who's on the thrown next.
It's a fact that people over 65 are more likely to die from COVID (including Omicron) than those under 65.
The virus itself pays no attention to the royalty.
To the virus they are just two more human bodies that it wants to ravage, though being billionaires they'll certainly have access to the best and latest high-end health care and medicines.
 
Of course you're right kenny and the virus might take them out as per the stats. In which case the Throne will be thrown wide open.

But it works the other way round too. Monarchy is a system of government. It doesn't matter who is on the throne as long as that person hasn't died of Covid or whatever other virus that might be lurking.
 
Last edited:
Polished said:
Of course you're right kenny and the virus might take them out as per the stats. In which case the Throne will be thrown wide open.
Click to expand...

Yes, the stats determine not what will happen, just the odds of what will happen.

But, "the throne will be thrown wide open"?
Not wide open, the rules dictate that Prince William would be next in line to ascend to the throne.
If we lose him then little Prince George will be king, hopefully with competent and virtuous adults advising him/telling the child what to do.

Actually that brings up a question.
If we loose today's top 3, and the 4th is a young child, would an adult spouse of a monarch like Camilla or Kate become the fully-reigning Queen?
 
Last edited:
I couldn't resist picking up your spelling of "Throne" with a "thrown" quip. I know the rules of succession apply. One of the reasons William was upset his brother Harry vamoosed off to California was that if Elizabeth, Charles, William were to die he would have wanted his brother to take on the responsibility until his son George was of an age to take on the responsibility himself. I think that it is how it works. There is a long line of Succession. The Throne would definitely not be passed down to a spouse of the Monarch - Camilla or Kate.
 
Without the vaccine the risk of death for a woman at the Queen‘s age is still “only” about 11%, although of course, we don’t know of any underlying conditions she may have to make that higher. I expect she’ll be fully vaccinated now so that risk will be lower.

If wee George is left to be king then a Regent would be appointed. As mentioned, this should probably have been Harry, or Andrew (yikes) but there’s still Anne or Edward. Maybe there would be a discussion about whether to continue the monarchy at all.
 
So, let's see if I go this.
The reigning king or queen will always get the job by having genes of the monarch, and never by marriage.
IOW Kate and Camilla may become Queen consort, but never the actual monarch.
Right?

... and why wasn't the Queen's husband, Prince Pillip, just a prince and not a King consort?
If there can be a queen consort but not a king consort is this yet another sexist thing that may be discarded one day, like royals can never divorce or marry a divorcee?
 
Last edited:
kenny said:
... and why wasn't the Queen's husband, Prince Pillip, just a prince and not a King consort?
Click to expand...

Good, old-fashioned historical sexism :roll:. Men out-ranked women by default, so a woman could be named queen without outranking her husband. In the case where the woman was monarch, calling her husband king would confuse where the power lay. Men married to the ruling monarch are therefore princes to highlight where the power lies, by virtue of historical prejudices.

It’s a little clunky in the modern world but serves its purpose and doesn’t offend me as a woman. I take anachronisms as such and move on. I’d hope people are judged by what they do, not what they’re called while they do it.
 
Last edited:
I think there was a change made when William and Kate were expecting their first. The change was that the first born child regardless of gender would be next in line. Previously the rule had been the first boy child.
 
Polished said:
I think there was a change made when William and Kate were expecting their first. The change was that the first born child regardless of gender would be next in line. Previously the rule had been the first boy child.
Click to expand...

Kudos for that.
Equality is a good and powerful force. :clap:

I wonder, in this day and age, what will they do if when an heir is non-binary, or gay/lesbian?
Might that undermine the assumptions that the entire royal system is based on, the heterosexuality which produces offspring sexually?

This darn equality thing can be such a bother to these systems based on superiority. :???:
 
Last edited:
Very interesting thought there kenny. Theoretically, it ought to be possible. There is no reason why an heir who is non-binery, gay/lesbian couldn't fulfil the role. The line of Succession might alter - say it applied to Prince George; he becomes King, if he has no children upon his death his sister Princess Charlotte would become Queen.
 
Polished said:
Very interesting thought there kenny. Theoretically, it ought to be possible. There is no reason why an heir who is non-binery, gay/lesbian couldn't fulfil the role. The line of Succession might alter - say it applied to Prince George; he becomes King, if he has no children upon his death his sister Princess Charlotte would become Queen.
Click to expand...

What if the monarch and her or his same-sex partner adopt a child/heir?
Isn't an adopted child to be considered equal to a biological child?
 
No statement has been released to say that the Queen has covid, just that Charles has & he was with the Queen when technically he was shedding virus. If the Queen does test positive, a statement will be made to that effect.
 
kenny said:
What if the monarch and her or his same-sex partner adopt a child/heir?
Isn't an adopted child to be considered equal to a biological child?
Click to expand...

The point in a monarchy is that it’s a biological lineage. Like it or not, those are the rules. No one has argued that a married couple should share the throne, so I’m not sure why you think adoption, in this instance, should follow a different set of rules to other non-biological relationships. But please, carry on bashing a system that has no effect on your daily life if that’s what makes you happy :roll:
 
Last edited:
kenny said:
What if the monarch and her or his same-sex partner adopt a child/heir?
Isn't an adopted child to be considered equal to a biological child?
Click to expand...

Royal biological children aren't even considered equal within the royal institution. People vary.

It will be interesting to watch what they do should your scenario re: non biological children occur.
 
kenny said:
The CDC and WHO publish data about how COVID affects people of various ages.
They use these data to advise policy regarding who should get the life-savings vaccines before the rest of society.
There is lot of data of COVID hospitalizations and deaths that prove this.
It is they who have determined that 65 is the cutoff age for higher risk.

So this is not about what Kenny thinks.
How society perception determines what category people belong in doesn't apply here.
It's about what the experts in science and medicine have established based on proof from millions of deaths and hospitalizations worldwide.
Click to expand...

I know Kenny
Gary is 69 and im scared sh*tless im going to catch it from work from a customer and brings it home
 
Last edited:
kenny said:
The palace has announced that Queen Elizabeth has tested positive for COVID. :(sad

www.nytimes.com

Queen Elizabeth Tests Positive for the Coronavirus: Queen Elizabeth Tests Positive for the Coronavirus (Published 2022)

The 95-year-old British monarch was “experiencing mild, coldlike symptoms,” Buckingham Palace said. She recently met with her son Prince Charles, who had tested positive this month.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com
Click to expand...

Oh no. So scary. Hopefully she recovers quickly and has a mild case.
 
I woke up in the middle of the night and saw this news
i hope its just a mild case

Queen Margrethe of Denmark is now recovered (and that HM is a smoker)

i guess sooner or latter we are all going to get it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top