|You are in: Programmes: Panorama|
This fourm is now closed.
Camilla is not a "fit person" to be consort to the British Head of State. Charles can have her or the role of Head of State, not both.
Why on earth would we want to see more of Camilla?
Charles duped Diana into marrying him so she could provide the monarchy with an heir, he used her so why should he have any happiness now? Diana can't.
I feel Charles and Camilla should be married if they are to have credibility at home and abroad. In the spirit of equality, Camilla should be given the title of 'Princess', as Prince Albert and Prince Phillip are known.
I think many people would not be comfortable with Camilla having the title of Queen.
It is long past time that the racist and sexist laws governing royal marriages and inheritance were wiped off the record books. Such laws have no place in 21st century England.
I very much object to Camilla Parker-Bowles ever becoming Queen of UK, she can never become a real royal and be as dedicated as they are.
Queen Camilla - Definitely NO. Wife of Charles - his choice. Keep the monarchy? Absolutely. A resounding YES. A republic? What a horrifying thought!
So what if Prince Charles has harboured a love for Camilla all these years? It was adulterous the moment he married Lady Diana Spencer.
Therefore it is unconstitutional for them, as an adulterous couple - each in their own turn, to share the throne.
The powers that be, including Her Majesty, are bound by that higher standard, beyond the constitutional hurdles mentioned in Panorama.
If they insist on marrying, then it couldn't be in church and they couldn't stay in their lofty positions.
As Prince Charles has known Camilla for so long, they should be married quietly (not in Westminster Abbey) and she should be known as the Duchess of Cornwall.
There is no way the public could accept her as Princess of Wales as Diana had that title.
We have at present a consort who is a Duke so why can't we have a consort who is a Duchess?
I have no argument with this. However from what I have learnt from the media he was continuing to carry-on with Camilla during his engagement and also during his marriage to Diana.
To me Charles is the morally guilty party. Camilla should have known better than to have supported this continuing relationship.
To have a person in the position of head of the Church of England who had been chronically unfaithful to his wife is an unacceptably immoral situation.
If Charles wishes to become King, he should not include Camilla in his plans.
How can a Roman Catholic Prime Minister dictate to a Protestant Queen of England the future of the British Monarchy?
Let us all move into the 21st century and let them get on with a very happy life together.
The day that Camilla becomes Queen is the day I become a republican!
I would never be able to accept CPB as queen and if Charles wants to marry her he is welcome to do so but should give up any rights to the throne.
It is high time that our leaders had the courage to put the future position of the increasingly anachronistic monarchy to the public in the form of a referendum.
If Charles' first wife was anyone other than Diana nobody would mind very much.
She has been wrongly elevated to sainthood whereas she was someone who used her position and high profile and personality to help others with excellent PR and media interest.
If we want Charles to do a good job when he becomes king surely he would do a better job if he was happy in his private life - so they should be allowed to marry.
Mrs Simpson was detested by all and sundry as a schemer but Camilla is far from that and appears liked by a great number of people.
No this woman will not be queen. Charles could not marry her 30 years ago but she came between husband and wife.
Diana loved him very much but he went back to her whom he had not been allowed to wed.
Considering its origins, it was the height of hypocrisy to subsequently rule that divorcees may not remarry in the Church.
It would take hypocrisy to new levels unheard of even in the Church if it were now to reverse that same rule just to accommodate Charles and Camilla!
If the constitution permits it, then I believe Camilla and Charles should be allowed to marry, but not in the Church of England, and by no means should Camilla be Queen.
The constitution governing Royal marriages was written in another time, and to cover different problems and eventualities.
We are a multi cultural, multi religious nation, with many views on morals and marriage.
The constitution has to be brought up to date to match today's lifestyle.
Two people, who clearly love each other, have the right to marry and be happy.
How many of us would tolerate our private lives being discussed in the media in this way, with the nation voting on how we should conduct ourselves, now and in the future?
It may sound harsh, but Prince Charles is paid extremely well, and has many privileges that ordinary folk do not, in order to fulfil a royal function.
With those privileges come responsibilities. He should live up to those responsibilities. And he should not be allowed to rewrite the constitution.
If he cannot live up to that which is expected of him, then he should step down and lose the privileges.
Then he will be able to do what he pleases. He should not be allowed to place the royal family in a constitutional crisis.
Let Charles marry whomever he wishes.
Also let him and the rest of his family and hangers-on continue with their lives, preferably in private and not at the expense of the taxpayer.
There should be no possibility of Charles becoming King and Head of the Church of England, if he wants to marry Mrs Bowles.
We have not seen any regret or repentance for the adulterous affair which it would appear continued after both their marriages or the hurt caused to their respective partners.
Allow William to prepare to be King in his place, at least he appears to genuinely care for those less fortunate.
Such a burden should not be placed on William at his age, he needs time to grow and learn, and have his freedom so to speak.
As for marrying Camilla, maybe so, but quietly as did Anne, then maybe a blessing if needed.. I would not be happy with Queen Camilla, Consort would be more appropriate under the circumstances.
Should Charles marry Camilla? I don't see why not. If they did not hold the positions they do, it would have been acceptable.
But as a future king, Charles cannot, however much he would like to, act in the same manner as ordinary people. The Monarchy surely should set an example and be above reproach.
Should they marry, then they should fade into obscurity and not insult us by even suggesting they be King and Queen.
I find the whole affair of Charles and Camilla offensive.
They appear not to have a voice in this issue and yet, they, rather than anyone else, should be heard.
The public may or may not want Camilla and Charles to wed, personally, if they are that much in love - let them.
Henry VIII was granted the title Defender of the Faith by the Pope in recognition of his paper written in defence of the Catholic Church. He and every head of the Church of England since have held that title under false pretences.
Prince Charles to his credit wishes to put that right.
I do not regard the private lives of either Charles or Camilla as being any of my business but I would be happy to see Camilla marry Charles.
I will be far happier seeing Camilla become Queen that I ever would have Diana.
I am not in favour of Prince Charles marrying Camilla Parker Bowles.
If Charles goes ahead and marries his mistress, who also betrayed her own husband, then he should abdicate.
No way should she ever be married to our king and if this ever happens I, for one, will cease to be a royalist.
Charles should do us all a favour and step down in favour of Prince William.
This would be a great tribute to Diana. How could we ever trust Charles after the way he treated Diana?
I feel very sorry for the couple. The people who are against their relationship should look around and see the numbers of people living together and also divorced.
I find the thought of Camilla becoming Queen very upsetting. If Charles loves her he will give up the throne for her and let Prince William become king.
I must say that whoever becomes king he will be the king of Great Britain not England as was so strongly put in your programme which I find degrading to not only the Scottish population by the Welsh and Irish - also part of Great Britain.
Marry her, yes, get on with it and get out of the Royal Family.
We have a wonderful and devoted Queen, who has given up much for her country. What a pity the heir could not emulate her.
I consider myself a royalist but I cannot even contemplate 'queen' Camilla.
It has been said that Charles would prefer to reign as George VII; if Camilla were Princess Consort, she could similarly be known by a different name, which she would take as a sign of her accepting a new role in the affairs of state.
Regarding the religious dimension it wouldn't be unreasonable for the title 'Defender of the faith' to be changed to signify the defence of the right to total freedom of conscience in matters of religious belief.
This whole affair does bring into question the Royal Marriage Act of 1772 and the position of the Church of England as Established by law. It is time to ask what sort of a constitutional monarchy do we want.
It is better that Charles and Camilla marry. They are clearly committed to each other anyway, and a marriage ceremony - perhaps a civil one - would signify to others that commitment still means something.
There does seem to be rather a lot, in all this, of the establishment serving its own ends instead of larger and wider issues sometimes.
I personally believe King Charles supported by his first significant love and companion through many trials should accede in due course.
I don't really care what we call Camilla, she is his wife.
Camilla is a woman who has stood by Charles but can never be a real "Royal".
Charles should be allowed to marry her because his marriage to Diana was disastrous.
If a woman succeeds to the throne, her husband does not become King, why does it not work the opposite way round, why should a woman automatically become Queen if she is not of royal birth.
Forget Diana she did no one any good, remember Camilla as she has stood by Charles through thick and thin.
"Do we need a king?"
Camilla has dignitity and maturity. I think Diana would have had both when she reached Camilla's age. I think Charles and she should be allowed to marry, but Camilla should have the title of Consort to the King (if he ever became one, but our present Queen is a hard one to beat!!)
If Charles wants to be with her he should not become King. History cannot be changed, his Uncle was not allowed to marry a divorcee and was forced to abdicate, Charles should be made to do the same.
The reason people dislike Camilla so much is because of her insidious presence during those early years of the Wales' marriage. They didn't stand a chance with her forever in the shadows.
OK to Charles being king but NO NO NO to Camilla being queen.
If he had any real understanding of what we all feel he would have bade her farewell and forged ahead on his own. His people would have adored him for that. Does he not realise that? She is a handicap to him.
The usual anti-monarchist stuff from the BBC. Why even if they married does anyone think Camilla would be Queen? Did Philip get to be King?
I always doubted Diana would be a Queen either.
Why you bother talking to republicans about the monarchy is beyond me, no case for any form of elected head of state stands up to examination.
Prince Charles should abdicate and do what he wants, but if he is to be our King he has responsibilities...he knows this. Bring on William!!
Has anyone thought why it has to be Queen Camilla? Why not King Charles and Lady Camilla or some other title? After all it's not Queen Elizabeth and King Philip!
I think Charles and Camilla will do us all a great service if they don't get married but continue living as many couples do in Britain and around the world, without benefit of clergy.
As to Camilla being queen - I don't want anyone to be my queen, I want to live in a grownup country that does without a monarchy steeped in mediaeval values.
He is under the impression that he can have his cake and eat it.
I think a lot of people still remember the way Princess Diana was treated.
I would hate to see Camilla become Queen of England. The Monarchy for me stands for tradition and family values.
The fact that Charles and Camilla had an affair throughout his marriage to Diana disgusts me.
As a future King of our country he should be setting an example to the younger generation not breaking marriage vows and then expecting us to accept it.
I have no problem with him marrying Camilla but he should then abdicate and leave the throne to William. I hope the British people will be given their voice on this matter because I am sure many more feel the way I do!!
If Prince Charles is permitted to marry Camilla, and she is granted the title of Queen, then she will also become step-mother to the children of the very lady who's life and happiness she played an integral part in destroying.
To quote one lady interviewed on the programme; 'This relationship is being conducted over the grave of Diana,' but it is also being conducted over the grave of Elizabeth, the Queen Mother.
If allowed to continue it should not only be considered intolerably insensitive, it should also carry the same penalty imposed upon Edward XIII so that he could marry the woman he loved; namely abdication.
Why should the wife of the King be accorded the title "Queen"? Men who marry Queens are not called "Kings". Prince Philip was simply "Duke of Edinburgh" until his princedom was conferred in 1957.
So surely protocol could be changed, and the wife of a King given the rank of a Duchess, just as the husband of a Queen was made a Duke?
The issue does not seem to be should they marry, but should Camilla be called a Queen. If the title is a problem, perhaps this is a chance to alter the rules - and it would be a gesture of equality between the sexes, as well.
The Royal Marriages Act is clearly in need of some reform, and it might be wise to change the succession so that, in future, the eldest child of the monarch, regardless of their gender, should succeed.
This is an opportunity to end some of the aspects of Monarchy which people generally find objectionable, and thereby to strengthen a great and still popular institution.
No to marriage - No to being Queen.
What importance do Charles and/or Camilla have for us, the ordinary people in UK? None, I would have said, nor do I know anyone to whom it matters a toss how they live, whether he becomes king or she becomes queen.
Let them do what they like, so long as it's legal.
If Charles has to make a choice between Camilla and becoming king, let him choose. The rest of us have to make choices in our lives that are far harder and more important than this essentially trivial problem.
Every British person in the Netherlands does not want Camilla as Queen. I think the media is trying to let us think that it is alright.
They took Diana's title away - how dare they give it to this home wrecker?
She was the cause of the problems in the marriage of Diana and Charles. If she hadn't been there maybe they could have worked things out like other couples.
Prince Charles will never be King if he marries this woman.
If Prince Charles wants to marry Camilla then he should do what his Uncle did and choose her over the throne.
Y Patton, Scotland
What a revelation - Camilla can make a speech rather than reading as the Queen does. She might even be able to say thank you off the cuff. I believe the position of Queen Consort is a JOB. Last night we saw a woman who is really capable of doing that job. I really hope that they do marry and eventually reign as King and Queen Consort. All that rubbish about Diana - blah.
I don't know of anyone who wants to see Camilla as Queen and wouldn't be surprised if your polls were yet another example of media manipulation on the subject. Charles did not have the strength of character to choose his own wife and continued his affair with Camilla from day one of his marriage. They have both made many people very unhappy and have only themselves to blame for the current situation. If they want to be together, Charles should have the backbone to abdicate before he damages the monarchy further.
The kind of people who watch Panorama will have long been aware of the brilliance of the PR campaign being carried out to "rehabilitate" Camilla. I only wish the gullible masses could be made to see how cleverly it is being conducted. The distasteful affair between Prince Charles and Camilla is history and has been public knowledge almost from the start. Some respect for them could have been earned had they, and Camilla in particular, at any time expressed contrition for the hurt they caused Diana, something she took to her grave. No such statement was forthcoming, instead the great PR machine with its exquisite timing was set in motion. The facts of the matter will not change one iota.
Princess Diana knew the value of PR and used it to good advantage. At the height of her popularity she capitalised on fame to bring attention to many charities. We remember childrens' causes and the campaign against land mines in particular. Camilla Parker-Bowles, at the nadir of her popularity, suddenly appears at the head of an osteoporosis appeal when during all the years she has been in the public eye her only interest seems to have been fox hunting.
Such is the nature of spin that we can be forgiven for wondering if this is not more a means of bringing attention to herself than to a good cause.
Charles should be setting an example not only to his sons, but to the rest of the country and Commonwealth, what example is he setting by living in sin with the immoral woman Camilla. Between them they destroyed two marriages
In my humble opnion i do not want a Queen Camilla, he cannot have his cake and eat it too. If he wants to be King, he must NOT marry, or if he does marry the mistress I as a British Subject do not want her to be the Queen, yes in his bedroom but not on the throne. The Princess Royal would make a better consult Queen
I think this relationshop is being forced on the British people. Charles cant have everything he wants, either one or the other.
I am not a royalist, never having bought a tea towel nor attended a visit. I strongly feel that we have moved on from the judgemental views that were held last century and that valuing the work that the monarch as our head of state does we would wish them to be as supported and happy as they could be. If asked to describe myself I would say happily married averagfe family aged 40. I consider my self to be representative of the public rather than the republicans in Soho.
I am a believer in the Royal Family and feel that Prince Charles should remain unmarried if he chooses to be King. The consistution says that he is unable to marry a divorcee. But what about his children? What are their feelings. No matter of who did what to whom, Diana & Charles had two sons one of whom will one day be King. It is his destiny. If the marriage of Charles and his beloved goes ahead he will deny his son his right.
God Save the Queen and her family.
Hartley, Great Britain
I would be very happy for the relationship between prince charles and camilla to continue. If they decide to marry that`s fine too. They are as entitled to happiness as anyone else. If the young princes accept the situation-and it seems they do, then the rest of us should have the decency to accept it too. I`m not so sure about camilla becoming Queen. perhaps consort. Good luck to them.
I think it is absolutely appalling that even the question has arisen: Should she be Queen Camilla... NO WAY!! Prince Charles should give up the thrown if he wants her in any way... also do not believe he should be King and have Camilla as a mistress!! Stand down and pass it onto William who rightly deserves it! Remember England's Rose!!!
Prince Charles is a spoilt brat who does not want to be separated from his favorite toy because she panders to his every whim. The Queen should give him a severe talking to about commitment and loyalty before its too late. I think it would be inappropriate given the circumstances of the relationship for Crown, Church or State to condone this relationship, bearing in mind the trouble it has caused between their individual marriages.
I watched your programme with interest last night and I have one question which everyone including the Church are refusing to acknowledge. It is, How - when Charles becomes King can he still co-habit with Camilla and be the Head of the Church of England?
The Bible tells us that this relationship is sinful, and the only way forward for him to become King of England is for him to relinquish his relationship with Camilla, ask forgiveness of God and live a life in which he attempts, at the very least to follow the teachings of the Bible and the Church of which he will now be in charge. Any other scenario is unthinkable and if a compromise is met where Charles is allowed to marry Camilla in Church, when this relationship was undoubtly the cause of the failure of both their marriages, then my faith and the faith of may others in the Christian world will be undermined and devalued.
I feel that this is an unforgivable example to set the young people of our country who already lack any firm directives as to how they should live. If Camilla loves him then she should make his life easier by leaving him to get on with the job he was born to, or do the other thing and Charles would have to give up the throne. Loving someone means you put their needs first even if it means you suffer yourself.
I cannot believe what I have seen on TV tonight. Myself and most of the people I know will never accept Camilla as Queen. If Charles wants to be with her then he should do us all a favour and disappear. However, I do worry about the future of the monarchy if Charles does abdicate. William appears to have readily accepted the woman who made his mother so unhappy - she would be devastated by this.
Those who accept Camilla now should cast their minds back to 1997 and their feelings then rather than being misled by the PR machine. A couple who can readily commit adultery without a thought to their spouses or children should never be head of the Church of England.
David & Ina Macintosh, Nederland
Of course Prince Charles and Mrs Parker Bowles should be allowed to marry, surely a morganatic marriage would be preferable. Although "Queen Camilla" does not seem appropriate - to my mind it makes more sense than President Blair or other contenders for the position.
I wish them nothing but good luck in seeking their happiness
I've just been watching tonight's Panorama programme on Charles and Camilla. Apart from a brief nod in the direction of the Commonwealth and 'multi cultualism', in religious terms this British issue was seen entirely from a Church of England point of view. Charles would also be King of Scots, distinctly different from his kingdom of England and Wales.
There would be no problem with the Church of Scotland if divorcee Camilla were to marry widower Charles. Indeed, Charles' divorced sister was married in the Church of Scotland. I wonder, too, if your interviewers would please correct ignorant interviewees when they talk about the 'Queen of England'. I think that English viewers would become extremely irritated if they kept hearing the Queen referred to as 'Queen of Scots' rather than Queen of Britain.
I have read every comment on this page thus far, the amount of ignorance some of them show is breath-taking. If Charles were to re-marry (which in law he is now perfectly entitled to do as Diana is dead) then whoever he should chose to marry (subject to the Queen's apporval) would become Queen at his accession. That is the law.
The second issue is then if he is free to marry who then should he choose? I personally see no objection to him marrying Camilla. She has acted impeccably throughout the whole affair, never once speaking out publicly amid all the vile comments made about her. She has maintained grace and dignity throughout. She would make a worthy Queen Consort, just what we need.
People seem to be obsessed with Diana still. In my opinion Camilla will be a far better Queen then Diana ever would have been. Granted Diana had many qualities but she also had many faults, her attention-seeking behaviour after her divorce is evidence of this. Do you see Camilla trying to bring attention to herself? Diana knew full well what life she was getting into when she married the Prince of Wales, she was not so naive!
I think Camilla WILL be a fantastic Queen Consort (although may that day be long postponed) and I can see no reason why the Prince of Wales should not marry the woman who obviously makes him so very happy. What would you prefer, a miserable King and no Consort or a happy King and Queen?
I can't believe how inconsistent people are - apparently they think it's ok for Charles to marry Camilla, ok for him to become king, better for her not to be queen, but they don't want a law specifically to prevent her becoming queen! Completely illogical. I don't care if they marry, I don't mind Charles being king, but I don't EVER want to see her as queen. Of course morganatic marriage is the solution.
I am truly surprised that a respectable programme such as Panorama should be used as propaganda for the ridiculous Camilla bandwagon! I am shocked, as I am sure the majority of the population of Britain are. To even suggest Camilla being Queen! How dare you, the producers, use the programme to promote an twice over adulteress such as Camilla Parker-Bowles! She not only betrayed her own husband and family but also broke up the marriage of Prince Charles and Diana.
I like Prince Charles and I think he is really a good man and would make a good, caring ruler, but as long as Camilla has power over him and can pull his strings, then he cannot be trusted to rule the way he should.
She is too dangerously devious and if she succeeds in making him marry her, then he should give up the rights to the throne as the people of Britain will never accept her as his queen. It has always been and always will be Camilla who is a threat to the royal family and to the throne.
Why did I end up feeling that the Panorama programme was another episode of the PR campaign?
Oh dear! Some people are getting rather hysterical. Let Charles be happy and marry Camilla is he wants to - that is his private affair. Whether or not she becomes Queen is a public matter. My view is that they should marry, but that upon Charles' accession to the throne, Camilla should assume a dignified but non-regal title - the Duchess of Something or Lady Whatnot. I know it has arisen in very different circumstances, but do we not presently have a Duke as consort to the Sovereign? What is all the fuss? Pretty straightforward I think!
Diana was chosen to produce heirs to the throne. This she did - it was her only duty. From then on she was surplus to Charles' requirements and was systematically dumped. No amount of PR will earn my respect for either Charles or Camilla.
Prince Charles should be allowed to marry Camilla. this is the 21st Century and time to scrap out dated rules. I would say however that a more suitable name should be found for Camilla if she becomes Queen.
Perhaps if there is too much opposition to them marrying and Camilla being Queen, she should be awarded a title which recognises her special position as "common law Consort" - Duchess of Cornwall, or Duchess of Edinburgh, or even Duchess of Windsor. After all, these titles are within the gift of the monarchy to whomever they want. Anyway, Charles has indicated he would want to be King George VII, not Charles III
I would like to see Prince Charles and Camilla marry. As a practising member of the Church of England, I can see the problem of his remarriage in church and of her becoming Queen. I think the disestablishment of the Church of England would be the answer to the problem, and would at the same time be good for the church. Charles would make a good king and Camilla would make a good queen.
Camilla's main problem for the future is not going to be the labyrinthine implications of the British Constitution, it's the fact that she's easily confused with Christine Hamilton.
Of course Prince Charles should marry Camilla and eventually make her his Queen. As of now I am starting a campaign in this regard. I think she is already an excellent support for him, and will ultimately be the best Queen he could have. Long may they reign!
Surely it's time to modernise royalty. No-one should be expected to bow or courtsey to Charles let alone Camilla. Abolish such old fashioned titles as 'your royal highness' and the maybe no-one would care if they married.It's about time they entered the 21st century and dropped some of the enormous priveleges they enjoy.
Surely if Prince Charles is to be the head of the Church of England, then his relationship with Camilla should be one which is in keeping with the doctrine of Christianity of which he will be a leader. Should Charles wish to not marry Camilla yet carry on the relationship he has with her, then the nature of the title 'Defender of the Faith' should be called into question.
It is totally hypocritical to oppose their marriage in the present day, and the King's wife should be Queen. Public attitudes to divorcees are very different from 1936 and the same rules should apply to the heir to the throne. She has shown herself to be an excellent support to Prince Charles and I am sure she would become an excellent queen if the public would allow her the chance. Prince Charles clearly intends to update the monarchy and she is an ideal consort for the purpose.
I feel very strongly that Camilla Parker-Bowles should never be Queen. The whole time that Charles was married to Diana, he seemed to be continuing an affair with Camilla. How can this woman be a Queen when she caused so much upset and damage to the happiness of both her own family and also the lives of Diana, William and Harry. If he wants to marry her then he should do the same as his uncle and abdicate. He should be made to choose the Crown or Camilla. I watched your programme with great interest and it is true; they have tried to eradicate Diana from history. All those who mourned the death of Diana are silent at the moment.
Your programme seems to have failed to ask the real question 'Do the British and Commonwealth people want Charles as King?' This one would get more to the real point. I see Charles as more of the 'millstone' around the neck of the royal family - why should it be assumed we want him around the neck of this country - no standards, no morals, no taste in his choice of partner, nothing to indicate that he would be any different as King! Let's call it a day Charles, I for one do not want you as King.
I am bemused that all the comments, I've read on this issue, seem to assume that, if Prince Charles & Ms Parker-Bowles were to marry, she would, automatically, receive the title Queen, on HRH's accession to the throne. As, in the cases of both Prince Albert & Prince Philip, no title of King was conferred, despite their being married to reigning monarchs, namely Queen Victoria & Queen Elizabeth II respectively, why is this assumption commonly made and, seemingly never challenged, even by the BBC? Is this a patriarchy thing ?
I strongly believe that Prince Charles should take the same action that his uncle took It was obvious from your programme that the Democrats are in favour of anything that would down the Monarchy.
Jean Dean, england
I will never except the Parker-Bowles woman as my Queen. Charlie Boy can do whatever he like but he should never be allowed to become King. Both are adulterers and they are totally out of touch with popular opinion. The only King for me would be Prince William. Charlie should get out of the way and let his son take over.
Why shouldn't Prince Charles be entitled to marry Camilla, after all if Diana had lived she would certainly be remarried by now. Lets stop this simpering nonsense about 'poor Diana'. She lived her life as she wanted to, now its Charles turn.
I found the programme typical of the current wave of crude journalism, anything to get some sort of provocative soundbite. Why don't you just leave the poor chap alone and let him have some happiness in his life. The question of Camilla becoming Queen is totally irrelevent at this time and is likely to be so for the next 25 years. Tony Blaire and all the current political establishment will have long gone and been forgotten. The sooner that Prince Charles marries Camilla the sooner hopefully the press will move on to another sensational story and the appalling legacy of the manipulative Diana will also be sent to the pages of history.
If Charles wants to marry Camilla, resulting in her becoming Queen at his succession to the Throne, the Prime Minister should ask the people in a referendum to truly understand what the Public of this country want. Not what the Media tells us we want.
Great Programme. But would it not be constitutionally possible to allow Camilla to marry Prince Charles, be given a suitable title, and then on his accession to be appointed Princess Consort. vide Prince Albert, Queen Victoria's Prince Consort.
Andy Fletcher, UK
I find it totally illogical that the Church of England should find it unacceptable that Prince Charles, as its Head, a divorced man, should marry Camilla, a divorced woman, in church.
The reason we HAVE a Church of England is entirely due to Henry VIII taking over the Catholic Church in England, so that he could make his own rules and thus obtain a divorce, in order to marry someone else.
I would be perfectly happy to see Prince Charles re-marry, to Camilla.
I think he was pushed into marrying Diana as his "duty" and it was hardly surprising that it eventually did not work: I have a great sympathy with his situation.
And this is 2002, not 1936. (I was born 1938)
I don't believe that Mrs Parker-Bowles should become Queen in the event of her marrying Charles Windsor. However, it is important that there is a public debate such as the one you are conducting; such issues are too important to be left to the likes of Norman St John Stevas and other self-appointed 'constitutional experts' who are in fact courtiers playing a long-game to get Charles what he wants.
The other point is that the real villain of the piece is not Mrs Parker-Bowles, but Charles himself: Had had he stood up for himself in the early 1970s and married Camilla at that time, none of the Diana tragedy would have happened; instead, he along with other members of the Windsor family were party to a deception of which Diana and the British public were the victims. His involvement in this deception suggests that his poor judgement makes him unfit to be king. He should marry Mrs Parker-Bowles and maybe then will find true happiness.
Does it not occurr to everyone that we already have a Queen? If she lives as long as the queen Mother did and does not abdicate (and I don't see why she will) then Charles may never be King.He should be allowed to marry Camilla and be happy as long as his boys are happy too.
Ref Salter's comments - I agree - who do the media survey? Not me or anybody I know that's for certain. Because I, along with many of my friends and acquaintances, do not consider Diana to be one of the top ten Greatest Britons, neither do we have any objection to Charles marrying Camilla. As for your comment "If Charles and she need to be together..." - you patronising and condescending person - if their relationship has survived all these years then I think they ought to be congratulated. Get a life.
Eric Rohloff, UK
The public constantly criticise the Royal Family for being behind the times etc. Why on earth are the same people against a marriage between 2 divorced people? Surely this is a sign of modern times and people should accept this. If the public want a modern Royal family then they should accept that this is part of modern life.
I cannot believe and am appalled that a high proportion of people in this country accept that they could be married in church. The church of England would be taking a perilous step if it allowed this.
The British are being brainwashed into believing that Charles should be allowed to marry Camilla and for her to become Queen. If this wasn't allowed in 1936 for Edward VIII then Charles must do the honourable thing and either go into exile if he wants to marry or, if and when he becomes King, remain a widower. Charles was unfaithful to Diana who should have lived to be Queen. If Camilla is allowed to be Queen then he is betraying his subjects and his great uncle.
In 1936 the British Public, the Church & British Government got it wrong. I feel the same is happening again. Charles Loves Camilla. Whether he loved Diana is another question but the public loved her not him. Ever since he was born he has been put upon by his family, the public and of course the MEDIA.
Queen Camilla? Perhaps, if we are in the 'politcal correctness age' she would be Princess Consort' like Albert, Prince Cosort. And look how he was vilified and then commended as a great royal after the Great Exhibition.
Perhps the media should promote her separately as a Consort rather than a Queen. Remember, vice versa he would never be KING if she were a Princess.
During the lifetime of Diana, Princess of Wales Prince Charles had one adulterous relationship. Diana had rather more than one. Camilla Parker Bowles has given the Prince of Wales more support and shown more discretion than Diana ever did. Camilla PB has behaved with quiet dignity and maturity and appears to have all the desirable qualities of a consort that the late Princess of Wales sadly lacked.
I believe that Prince Charles has done more damage to the Monarchy than any other eventin modern history. He has been the cause of the Royal Family becomeing a laughing stock around the world. He has shown himself to be untrustworthy and arrogant, believing himself to be above the laws and moral values of our church and society. I truely believe his actions have signalled the eventual downfall of the Royal Family and, as a royalist, I find this utterly appalling.
Camilla should marry Charles. This is the 21st century . they have deserved happiness after all this time. Camilla could be a consort
If Charles and Carmila ever want to marry, then the only way i can see this happening, is for Charles to give up the throne
Queen Camilla? Who really, genuinely cares? Not us. Nor anyone we know.I doubt they even care themselves.
The Church of England and the Methodist church seem to be moving closer together. Would this give an opportunity for Charles to marry Camilla? I feel that although Charles should set a correct moral example it is not his fault Diana, God Bless her, died. I pray that he may make the correct decision and that it will not be subject to the apporval or otherwise of Tony Blair who already has ideas above his station. God Save the Royal Family
Of course they should be allowed to marry. This is the 21st century and life and the constitution must move on. I'm sure Camilla would make an excellent Queen - far better than Diana ever would have.
Why, oh why can't he marry her if he wants to? The sanctimonious behaviour of the church just about takes the cake, the whole Church of England came about because of a divorce case!!! I also noticed that there was no mention of a morganatic marriage either. I see no reason that Prince Charles should be miserable to appease a lot of self-righteous busybodies.
Charles and Camilla are entitled to be happy just as much as anyone else is. Of course they should marry if they want to,and there is no reason why she should not become Queen Consort.
Where does the arguement regarding the Monarch being Head of the Church of England stand when the Church of England was origionally founded so that Henry VIII could divorce Catherine of Aragon and marry Anne Boleyn?
As if it matters at all.
First of all the public dont get a say - thats the nature of a monarchy, so what they think doesnt matter. Secondly the choice of people to open supermarkets really doesnt matter at all - so she'll do as well as anyone. So stop talking about them - they are an irrelevance - let royalty get on with their overpaid jobs and stop pretending that they are of any importance
If Charles wishes to marry Camilla Parker-Bowles, then he must give up any prospect of becoming King.
The facts are very clear. His relationship with Camilla Parker-Bowles was, at first, adulterous and this is incompatible with the position of Head of the Church of England. No amount of spin or PR work can get around this fact.
I know of no-one who thinks that "Queen Camilla" would ever be acceptable.
Margaret L., England
Queen Camilla? I think not! Outdated, archaic and cold - that's the monarchy. Time for them ALL to go.
We are absolutely appalled by any suggestion that Camilla's adulterous behaviour should be publically condoned. When Charles married Diana, she should have backed away for the sake of the country and plain common decency. It is not appropriate that there should even be debate upon whether or not she should be Queen.
If Charles and she need to be together, then he should do the constitutionally correct thing and give up any thought of being King as did his great Uncle. The media seem to be talking up the prospects probably as a means of selling more newspapers, as ever.
We are constantly amazed by surveys suggesting that the majority of the British people are now in favour of Camilla marrying Charles and in some way sitting beside him as Consort or Queen. This does not tie in with Diana being one of the top ten Greatest Britons, nor does it tie in with either our opinion on this matter or the opinion of any of our friends and acquaintances. Who do the media survey?
Top Panorama stories now:
Links to more Panorama stories are at the foot of the page.
|E-mail this story to a friend|
To BBC Sport>> | To BBC Weather>> | To BBC World Service>>
© MMIII | News Sources | Privacy