I think they look happy together good for them.
Since I wouldn't want thousands of outsiders looking at my personal relationship with my mate I'll give them the same respect I'd expect.
Having said that...... did you see what she was wearing?!? OMG....
LOL , just kidding.
I'm not one to get into celebrity gossip but,
by heatherg 46 Replies latest jw friends
-
EvilForce
-
LittleToe
Life is life, and life goes on.
I don't know why folks are getting on their high moral horses - what's the issue?Diana had her good and bad points, as have we all, but ultimately wasn't suited to life at court. She could certainly pull a crowd, though, and put that to some use. I'd rather remember her for her work with AIDS victims and highlighting the plight of amputees in Angola. In the grand scale of things maybe she didn't earn all that she aquired, but who of us in the West does?
There are few that would deny that she was beautiful, too. At least she had the good sense to consult on issues of fashion, etc. She had the means and she used them. A cherry blossom, falling in it's prime. Sad yet beautiful. I can't help but think of the adage "better to burn out than to fade away".
Charles and Camilla seem eminently suited.
The wedding was a far cry from the pageantry of the fairytale wedding in the 80's, where Charles didn't look especially comfortable and was completely upstaged by Diana.I have to say that Charles and Camilla appear to have conducted their relationship in a very low-key manner (barring the intrusion of the media) - very British.
Harry favours the Spencer looks, as you'll see if you look at Diane's brother . I'm thus inclined to take Hewitt's denial at face value.
Do we need the Royals? Who gives a flying fig? We have them, like a bunch of other national monuments, and whilst they cost the earth they certainly pull the crowds and add something to what it means to be British. I can't say I'm a Royalist, but neither am I anti-Royal. I just have a taste for the eclectic and enjoy the rich tapestry of life. I think they bring something of that to our nation. Would we be as viciferous about the need of fine art in our lives? It's not a basic requirement for life, but can add to the enjoyment.
Ya know, even Royals deserve a life. Shouldn't basic human rights even be afforded to them?
Do they need to be judged excessively, just because they're in the limelight?
For gawdsakes, they bleed like any one of us! -
morty
And also why knock Charles - he knows like the rest of the nation that William is as related to him as I am and yet he has raised that boy as his own son.
NO WAY!!! Don't tell me this is true......Who's da babies daddy???
-
Doubtfully Yours
Charles and Camilla, the poster couple of the amoral times we live in.
DY
-
Balsam
Charles felt forced to marry a woman who would produce children for the Monarchy. He wasn't required to love her. Diane obviously fell in love with him, but his heart was never in it. He loved Camilla and could see no way to be with her. The whole thing was just bought about because humans following the rules which were bad for them. Better to follow your heart.
Charles should have been able to marry Camilla since he loved her and she loved him. Having children should not have been an issue ever. Poor Diana was a pawn in the whole royal game. Very very sad what it did to her.
-
LittleToe
Balsam:I'm not singling you out, but just the concept generally.
Do any of us truly just "follow our heart"?Don't we usually give some level of credance to the social mores of the community in which we live?
In the case of celebrities (in general) and specifically Royalty, aren't they normally more bound than Joe Bloggs?
I'm not saying it's right, just that it "is". -
Fe2O3Girl
Charles and Camilla, the poster couple of the amoral times we live in.
DY
I am very happily remarried after having a deeply unhappy first marriage. In my opinion, Charles and Camilla have done the right thing, I wish them all the best, and I am delighted to have them as a poster couple.