2007-07-18 04:55:52 · 16 answers · asked by laura b 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Royalty
I think he's more suited to becoming a King Charles Spaniel (no offence to our canine friends).
2007-07-19 00:44:31 · answer #1 · answered by Namlevram 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why not? Goodness knows, being king or queen isn't some guarantee of perfect behavior. Even after Victoria, look at Edward VII -- the queen let his mistress come to his deathbed to say goodbye. Look at Edward VIII -- he was so p***y-whipped by Wallis Simpson that he didn't even bother trying to be king.
He'll be king, certainly. But we'll probably be hard-pressed to celebrate his silver jubilee. He's 58, now, and the women in his family live a looooong time. If the Queen Mother was an example, he might not take the throne until he is in his 70s!
2007-07-20 13:03:40 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If Henry VIII who married 5 times, having beheaded 2 wives can be king, why not Charles. It has only been since Queen Victoria that the monarchs have acted "proper". Before that they had mistresses and were never criticized for fear of losing favor.
2007-07-18 17:35:36 · answer #3 · answered by Crystal H 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely. There have been kings in the past who did a lot worse in marital or love relationships than him, so just because he was unfaithful from day one of his marriage, should not be a factor. People would like him a lot better if he had done things differently, but who of us can look back on our lives without saying "I should have done that differently?" His mom is healthy as far as I know, so who knows how long it will be before he is crowned...could be a ripe old age for him, meaning a relatively short reign (in comparison with the monarchs who were crowned in their 20's or so.) So...he should not be deprived of this priviledge....William's day will come soon enough. Patience, my friends, patience.
2007-07-18 16:48:45 · answer #4 · answered by Cat Woman 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I guess he should get a shot at it ...fact being he's been preparing the part for his whole life. LOL
...but, to me at least - "King William" just has a nicer ring to it than "King Charles" ;p
2007-07-18 18:26:53 · answer #5 · answered by shayde 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well of course he will be but I think William just seems to be a more suitable person, although I think Harry would be better than both of them as the bridge between the seemingly out-dated concept of royalty and the younger generation at least he acts like a normal, 20-something year old.
2007-07-18 12:36:36 · answer #6 · answered by Megan 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Considering Henry VII beheaded two wives, divorced another two, had one die in childbirth, and then one survive him, I'd say Charles won't be a bad king.
As long as they don't crown Camilla Queen. That would be an insult to Princess Diana's memory.
2007-07-19 06:59:49 · answer #7 · answered by Alana 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It doesn't matter if Prince Charles 'should' be King or not, he will be.
2007-07-18 17:58:31 · answer #8 · answered by AdamKadmon 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why not? He's a doting father, he's trained for the role his entire life. He's highly unlikely to give up his right to the throne though.
2007-07-18 07:25:40 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
O.o well he's spent his entire life in preparation for the role hasn't he? I doubt he would succumb to teenage girl pressure for him to abdicate in favour of either of his sons.
2007-07-18 07:07:29 · answer #10 · answered by afterbirth07 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋