“I also wonder, if he were to hit the bulls eye twice in one evening, how that might be resolved Constitutionally.”
—Goodness, I’m sure that situation has ummm, “come up” before. Isn’t England almost entirely populated by the illegitimate offspring of one of the Georges? George IV, I think?
You need to be a ‘Royal Watcher’ in order to fully understand the implications of this news.
I know that Queen Elizabeth intends to abdicate shortly after her Golden Jubilee next year. She would go now, but she’s decided to hang on for all the presents which will come her way in the JubileeFest.
Prince Ping-Pong-Paddle-Ears cannot then marry Horse-Face because people (me) who can stomach her as Princess PPPE will not entertain her as Queen PPPE-HF.
King PPPE (The First) will abdicate to marry HF leaving William on The Throne. William, wishing to marry at least two Females With Patagonian Associations because he can’t make up his mind, also abdicates in order to move to Utah.
Of course, three abdications and your out so the Royal Family will be sold at a discount to the US. This will leave the front pages of the British Press free to concentrate on more important matters like me.
Yours sincerely
Tony Blair
(There’s a smile on my face but it’s only there just to fool the public)
Remarriage of divorcees is allowed by the Church of England provided the divorce is complete in the civil sense, any children are properly provided for, the couple’s bishop gives permission, and they can find a priest who’ll perform the ceremony. I wouldn’t imagine Bigears and Horseface would have any problems.
It is a bit of a hot-button issue in the CoE, though, with one side pressing for relaxation of the rules, while the traditionalists scream about Undermining the Sanctity of Marriage… my sister and her husband, both on the ultra-conservative wing of the CoE, had to have a civil ceremony because he was divorced, and it would Violate Their Consciences to get married in church. Didn’t stop them going straight from the registry office to Newcastle Cathedral and getting their union blessed in style (full bells and smells, all the way).
I’d like to start the bidding at $50.00.
When a soon to be leader has to ask his mum for permission to marry someone, it makes me happy to be in the US.
What I find interesting is that the Americans care more about the comings and goings of the various royals then those of us that they nominally have dominion over…Diana was a much bigger star in America then elsewhere…and nobody really cares about Jughead and Ms. Ed in Canada except for a few hold outs in the monarchist league…
Keith
I see. A pre-emptive strike to price possible counter-bidders out of the market.
I think one reason us Yanks enjoy frothing over the British Royals is that it doesn’t effect us in the slightest. We have no reason to care one way or the other, so we can sit back and comfortably watch the soap opera without thinking about taxes or constitutions or anything.
By the by, I don’t think Camilla will ever becaome Queen—it would be a morganic marriage, so she would have no title. And why is everyone making fun of her appearance? She’s a perfectly presentable middle-aged woman, well-dressed and well-groomed (and let’s have no cracks about horse-grooming, please!). I never thought Diana all that pretty, for that matter.
Exactly. This is a side business with me. I purchase outdated monarchies, dismantle them and sell the parts for a profit.
That would explain rather a lot.
It’s actually very kind of you to anoint me with Regal Heritage, I’m leafing through Burke’s Peerage and packing up my bags as we speak. I think a room overlooking Windsor Great Park might suit my tastes.
In fact, I’ve always rather fancied Boudica, warrior Queen of the Icini and I’m now wondering if we’re related – that’s an important consideration to us Royals, don’t you know.
Got to go, I think my Footmen have arrived for the bags…
If this is true we’re all German!
As long as you aren’t uninspiring.
If that’s the case, then why wasn’t poor Princess Margaret allowed to marry Pete Townsend when he divorced his wife? Her family was going to allow it, but the church forbade it.
They should all get together in a big family meeting, the drunks, the racists, the adulterers, the divorcees and bomb the bloody lot of them into oblivion and them rent out rooms in Buck house to single teenage mums and Asylum seekers.
At least the stae handouts would probably be less.
Should give us something to talk about for a few weeks until the next “Big Brother meets East Enders on a remote desert Island with a few Neighbors from hell” to liven the series up a bit.
Oh and they should put Anne Robinson on there too.
They must give Camillia a new title, one not quite ‘queen’ & not quite ‘the other woman’ something inbetween.
I bid $50.05
Wasn’t it founded so that Henry VIII could get married after a divorce, because the Catholic Church basically said “Remarry? Here? Riiiiiiiiiight, Hank. NOT!”
If that’s the case, why would they have any qualms at all regarding second marriages, other than the divorce being final? If that’s not the case, someone please set me straight. 
[sub]and now the tampon thing is going to give me nightmares…again…[/sub]
That’s avoiding the political aspects, and somewhat misstating the situation. Henry wanted an annulment on the grounds that the Pope never should have granted him permission to marry (IIRC) his brother’s widow, and as evidence that God was opposed to it, pointed out that they didn’t have any children. The Pope, I believe, was more concerned with keeping England allied with Spain, among other things, and refused. Also, there was some disagreement between the two as to how much control the Pope had over the Church in England.
Rather an interesting story, but it so often gets reduced to “Henry broke with the Church so he could divorce.”
Guinastasia and Eve, why are you assuming that the marriage would be morganic? Has there been some announcement to that effect?
well, she’s no Mrs. Simpson