EnglishClub
Home Learn English Teach English MyEnglishClub Home Learn English Teach English MyEnglishClub

Please note that these ESL Forums are NOT part of MyEnglishClub. To post at these ESL Forums please register ↑ first.

CAROL AND CAMILLA - MARRIAGE IN APRIL!!!

Let others know the latest news, or discuss it with them.

Moderators: Vega, EC

Postby Guest » Sun Apr 10, 2005 12:55 am

Wasn't her marriage with Charles arranged? They decided that she was the best suitable maiden for him or something like that. Or it was some kinda tabloid again?
Guest
 

another hmmm,

Postby real_lord » Sun Apr 10, 2005 11:48 am

probably her marriage has been arranged though I don't know.
They say she had a job and loved kids - somehow I have doubts today. Interesting, why? :roll:
Yes - she was young while marrying - about 20 or less. Couldn't she the more wait? What for such a hurry?
And family - I know, I know, I know. But all in all I have my own common sense and brain and my mistakes will always be MY MISTAKES (not my family's mistakes) and I can blame myself for my own stupidity. I think it's more sincere than blaming my parents or whomever, don't you think? :roll:
Never better,
real_lord
PS. They say it's tradition that EACH Prince of Wales has always had a lover. So surely Diana Spencer must have known about such a great tradition or really dumb woman was she!
And looking at the polls - Brits don't want Charles for the next king, they prefer William. ~ story, don't you think?
In Poland noone cares about any polls but in Britain who knows what end of royal family there when Charles and Camilla will start their disliked reign? Maybe revolution or what? :roll:
Nice day though, :)
r_l
real_lord
 

Postby Guest » Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:41 pm

Thanks for your answer :D . I think I read about that "arranged" marriage of theirs in People Magazine long time ago. I was a bit shocked about her decision. I remember Diana said in the article that it was love at first sight for her. And she chose to be in the royalty family because she thought Charles was a lonely man without love. My memory about this is not vivid right now; therefore, the information I'm giving could be wrong. I'll try to find that article again, so I could share with you all here. ;)
One thing I wanted to point out from this whole thing is that I feel sorry for both of them. I mean, if they were not people from upper-class or related to the royalty in any way, their love could be acceptable to anyone. Let's remember, he's not the only widow man who gets married again. There are so many widow men out there are re-married after their wives have passed away. That's life! One's gotta move on with his/her life; that person can't just stay in the same state forever if he/she could find love again. That's unfair. It's because he/she was not the one who died first, he/she couldn't move on????? But for Charles's case, it's unacceptable because Diana is their goddess and she was or still is a bigger people person than Cammy. Also, to them it is Charles's fault that Deedee has passed away. Sad sad sad to me that love can't be accepted.
Another point is about William and Harry (is it Henry or Harry?!?!?!). I haven't read about them much on the news so I don't know what their reaction about this is, but based on Laura's post I think they've accepted the wedding. Is there anyone with me who thinks their acknowledgment is mature and thoughtful. They've opened their arms to welcome the woman who is the love of their father's life. That's what family is about. Be there and be happy and be supportive for each other. I think they've done a good job. High-five for them. 8)
Guest
 

High-five?!? hahaha:(((

Postby real_lord » Sun Apr 10, 2005 11:03 pm

I don't think life is so simple. Really. High-five but when no children. With children high-five?!? Maybe your point of view - not mine. But people must differ somehow.
Personally I think Camilla is HOPELESS. She is HOPELESS - I repeat. Maybe I sound boring but she became a reason of divorce, she neglected her two kids because of Charles and he forgot about his wife and became commited with Camilla.
This all seems to be quite an awful hell and I know that some situations in life have only one solultion-WAIT and OBSERVE.
And solution will come, you will see.
Probably Camilla will be fed up with her sweetheart after honeymoon. Quite different thing is have a sex with four lovers and quite different slip over their dirty socks close to bed or this kind of daily mess, you know. They say this guy is unable to put a toothpaste on his toothbrush without servants - are you really sure Camilla thinks about anything but her title of queen etc. when she ruined her family - specially kids?!?
Hahaha - from my point of view to you, then.
BUT if Diana was wiser - some royal mothers are - instead of looking for another and another lover she would have rather commited the more to charity etc. and the more should have taken care of her two kids. Now no chances old, stupid Charles would have as a next monarch and she could love him out!
And people would always be on her side.
What more?
love - what is love simplyblessedwithlove?!?
I ve always tried to guess WHERE THE TRUTH IS?!?
Love is blind - that is what I know about love.
Good luck in your life nice girl - and many other nice persons whom I got known thanks to EC:)))
real_lord
real_lord
 

Postby Shazzam » Tue Apr 12, 2005 12:32 am

Here here! Couldn't agree more. The kids are really the issue here. Not who arranged what or who died first. Sounds like no member of the Royal Family has learnt anything along the way (in connection with parenting). It is unfortunate that the the word 'affair' ;) is used to describe Charles and Camilla's relationship. It is obvious that it was always more than that. I think if it had just been sex, Diana probably would have accepted it. There is more to their relationship than just sex by the looks of things. I must admit though I have found some of the discussion on this issue really interesting. It has been a horrendous fortnight. We have lost a GREAT Pope a man who was loved and respected throughout the World. Then we have the issue of should Charles be King. What a week. :(

Time will tell. No matter what anyone thinks.
User avatar
Shazzam
Rough Diamond Member
 
Posts: 1826
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 4:40 am
Location: Australia

Re: High-five?!? hahaha:(((

Postby Guest » Tue Apr 12, 2005 12:34 am

real_lord wrote: I don't think life is so simple. Really. High-five but when no children. With children high-five?!? Maybe your point of view - not mine.

What are you mumbling about? :?

real_lord wrote:But people must differ somehow.
Personally I think Camilla is HOPELESS. She is HOPELESS - I repeat. Maybe I sound boring but she became a reason of divorce, she neglected her two kids because of Charles and he forgot about his wife and became commited with Camilla.

When Diana was still alive, you mean? :?

real_lord wrote: love - what is love simplyblessedwithlove?!?
I ve always tried to guess WHERE THE TRUTH IS?!?
Love is blind - that is what I know about love.
Good luck in your life nice girl - and many other nice persons whom I got known thanks to EC:)))
real_lord

You've said it yourself, love is blind! Or it's blind when you can blind the other person into loving you. Whatever. It's hard to explain love because there are so many meanings for love. There are so many ways to express love, to be in love, to be loved, to love, et cetera. I remember some sentences about love that I've read from Scott Peck's book.
"Love is not simply giving; it is judicious giving and judicious withholding as well. It is judicious praising and judicious criticizing. It is judicious arguing, struggling, confronting, urging, pushing and pulling in addition to comforting. It is leadership. The word "judicious" means requiring judgment, and judgment requires more than instinct; it requires thoughtful and often painful decisionmaking."
To be loved, in love, to love require more than just "I love you" words and everything will be solved. The feelings of sacrificing, the risk of loss, independence as well as dependence, commitment, confrontation, and so on make love love. Thus, was there love between Charles and Diana? Was it real that it could fade so fast with time? Was it true that they finally decided to go on in their separated ways? Which love is real, his love for Diana or his love for Camilla? Is it wrong that she can't pull her heart out of the loving feelings she has had for the man she loves for the rest of her life? Is it wrong that parents get divorced although their kids don't mind about it, but in others' eyes they have abandoned theirs????? More and more questions I'd like people who think their thoughts are just to answer. :roll:
Guest
 

Re: High-five?!? hahaha:(((

Postby Shazzam » Mon Apr 18, 2005 12:22 pm

Personally I think Camilla is HOPELESS. She is HOPELESS - I repeat. Maybe I sound boring but she became a reason of divorce, she neglected her two kids because of Charles and he forgot about his wife and became commited with Camilla.
This all seems to be quite an awful hell and I know that some situations in life have only one solultion-WAIT and OBSERVE.
And solution will come, you will see.
Hahaha - from my point of view to you, then.



BUT if Diana was wiser - some royal mothers are - instead of looking for another and another lover she would have rather commited the more to charity etc.



I have taken these sections from your conversation as they seem to link up. What is so disappointing about this debate is that we have forgotten that Diana didn't want a divorce she fought against it. She didn't want her children to come from a broken family; as she had come from one herself.

Yes she made mistakes; they both did. But I believe that she thought that maybe one day there could possibly be a reconcilliation between them. In addition I don't know of any other person from the Royal Family (or private person for that matter) that supported as many charities as Diana did. Her foundation today still supports the charities that she championed. She was tireless. She worked with lepers; aids victims, landmine victims, etc (basically the untouchables of society).

I also don't believe that it was an arranged marriage. If you read some of the material available ie. A Princess in Love; A Royal Duty (Paul Burrell) or even the Morton Book; Diana. You will see (as the public in Australia saw when they came here not long after there marriage) that she really loved Charles and I believe that in his own way he was in love with her too. There are different types of love and obviously theirs wasn't the everlasting type. However they did produce two beautiful boys. I hope for their sake that the World does remember that their parents did love each other; and unfortunate as it is, one feel out of love with the other. Also I would like to raise the point about her running off and leaving the boys; the boys were at college she was away whilst they were at school (as they were in boarding school). She was heading back to be with them for the school holidays when the accident happened.

There is no doubt that Charles was in love with Camilla his whole life (just about). Typical he procrastinated; and she married another.

The Royal Family, I think is trying to bring its traditions in line with the new milleniuim; however there are some traditions they can't escape.

One of which is that the reigning Monarch is the head of the Church of England. Having this title means you have to abide by the stipulations placed by the Church.

Comes with the job! :lol:

Now that Charles has found true happiness with his new bride the focus should be "is he fit to be King; and indeed the head of the Church of England?"

There lies the question!

[/quote]
Last edited by Shazzam on Wed Apr 20, 2005 3:54 am, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
Shazzam
Rough Diamond Member
 
Posts: 1826
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 4:40 am
Location: Australia

Postby Guest » Mon Apr 18, 2005 9:06 pm

Image hmmmmm.... one interesting post, shazzam1452. I'm gonna check out her books in the library. I have never read her books or books about her; I've read articles about her here and there only. Maybe there are some missing links that I need to chain them together?!?!!? :?
Guest
 

simply blessed

Postby Shazzam » Wed Apr 20, 2005 3:50 am

Sorry about the first part of my post (i tried to copy what real lord had put in) unfortunately it did't come up as a quote. I hope you can determine what my message was from real lord's.

I definately recommend the Paul Burrell Book (A Royal Duty) it is a really good read. [/quote]
User avatar
Shazzam
Rough Diamond Member
 
Posts: 1826
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 4:40 am
Location: Australia

Previous

Return to Current News

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests