After all this time I think the years are taking their toll, And we dont want any more nasty little accidents do we.And im sure that Charles is ready to take on the burden.
2007-05-21 14:12:59 · 45 answers · asked by duchessofcornwall2000 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Royalty
Nah, she should just keep him on his short little leash like a good puppy dog.
2007-05-21 14:16:17 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 2⤋
Does anyone understand the institution of the Monarchy? The Queen is Monarch until She departs this life - even if She became insane, She would still be Queen. (In that rare event Prince Charles would become Prince Regent).
The Queen will never abdicate. Prince Charles may never be King, but be sure, there will always be someone else. If you look at the Table of succession, you will see a list of over 1000 names, including at 800 and something, Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands.
In the meantime - Vivat Regina Elizabetha, Long live Queen Elizabeth.
2007-05-22 08:28:01 · answer #2 · answered by Raymo 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
My dear Duchess of Cornball: The Queen is not about to have another Abdication written up in history books. She would have to abdicate, I think that she may have her Mother's genes and make it to 100 years of age. She would rather be an old senile woman( which she is not) than see a Queen Camilla as the Royal Potted Plant. Charles should not be King. I think if anything would push the Monarchy over the cliff it would be having a King who can't talk with people He is however fluent in talking to plants and they answer him and he doesn't (to the best of mu knowledge) use any of the white stuff up his royal nose. So now ducky, Stuff It !!!!
2007-05-22 11:03:45 · answer #3 · answered by Alfie333 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No. A woman in charge is better even if she is old. But, hey! She can still walk and talk! The Pope couldn't do that and he was a spiritual leader for all the Catholics of the world. I'm sure she can handle it. I don't like Charles either. I'd rather see the oldest son take over than the father.
2007-05-22 01:45:06 · answer #4 · answered by Pandora 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
You are not the Duchess of Cornwall. The real Duchess of Cornwall knows that she must wait until the Queen dies for Charles to ascend the throne. Charles knows that he must wait,and his wife knows that,too.
And,the real Duchess of Cornwall has staff that know how important it is for their boss's postings to be grammatically correct;they'd make sure that apostrophes are placed in their rightful places.After all, an apostrophe's job is to take place of a letter they replace in a contraction!
2007-05-22 07:49:01 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Good question. However, Prince Charles and his wife are not suitable to take over the throne of England. Cause Charley as well as Camilla are divorcee's. The Angelican' church of England of which the Queen is the head forbids divorcee's to become the head state.
So that's why the Queen can't step down. She can't give it to Prince Andrew either cause he is divorced too. She could give it to Prince Edward but did he not marry some one under his league ? So she will have to wait for Prince William to grow up and be a little bit older and wiser. Hell, I did not want Prince Charles to rule. There would be more screw ups! The queen keeps every one in check!
2007-05-21 16:16:31 · answer #6 · answered by angelikabertrand64 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Our queen should stay on till she passes on.
She has done a great job for everyone under the British rule and continues to be level headed on every subject matter. If she ended up like Boris Yeltsen, then I would be posing some questions.
Charles will make a fine ruler and both sons will have their turn one day.
I wouldn't exactly say it is burden to be the head of the world's greatest continuing empire, but more of an honour.
Rule Britannia and God save the Queen I say!
2007-05-21 14:44:46 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 1⤋
She'll give up the throne when she's dead.
She took a vow. Apparently the "DUCHESS OF CORNWALL" thinks a vow can be easily broken.
She came to the throne so young and honestly if it were up to her I think she would give it up. Doing the same job for 50+ years...yikes!
You really have to give the woman credit. She's gone through so much all you think about is her abdicating? Have some pride in you ruler, Americans have to suck it up.
2007-05-21 15:48:37 · answer #8 · answered by Corrin L 2 · 5⤊ 0⤋
I think the Queen should retire when she is ready. And she will. When illness strikes and she's pretty sure she is dying. Otherwise Charles will become King. She has the right to hand the title to her grandson, passing over her son Charles. I think she knows Charles would not be popular and should prevent his embarrassment to Britain. Charles' actions with Camilla Parker-Bowles, during his marriage to Lady Diana, Princess of Wales, was inexcusable. Lady Diana was nothing more than a breeding mare for the royal family. He should lose his right to be King, and if he has half a brain he will follow in his great-uncle King Edward the VIII's footsteps and graciously withdraw.
But heck, what do I know? I'm only Canadian!
2007-05-21 15:51:59 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 4⤋
absolutely not. Charles (or George VIII as he may be known as king but that's a different thing) for all his years is still stuck in the past. The queen has always maintained she takes her responsibility very seriously and will never abdecate.
2007-05-21 14:26:22 · answer #10 · answered by Quizard 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Charles take the throne ? Where ?
2007-05-24 07:31:04 · answer #11 · answered by Social Science Lady 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋