At last C&C in the RHP forums:
The Queen will not attend the civil marriage ceremony of her son Prince Charles to Camilla Parker Bowles, Buckingham Palace has said.
A palace spokeswoman insisted this was not a "snub" - rather it was because the royal couple wanted to keep the wedding "low key".
Some lawyers have argued that a 19th Century law bans members of the Royal Family from marrying in civil ceremonies, but the Lord Chancellor insists the ceremony would be legal.
Should the Queen stay away from her son's wedding ceremony?
Do you think her decision will be interpreted as disapproval of the marriage?
Or is she acting in the best interests of the couple?
I really cannot see why this makes a blind bit of difference to anyone. The royal family are an outdated and overpayed bunch, whose wealth is inversly corrolated to their function and their position in modern society. If Charles wants to go and marry horse-face, good luck to him, but please, do I have to hear about it for the next six months?
Originally posted by Starrmanhere, here!
I really cannot see why this makes a blind bit of difference to anyone. The royal family are an outdated and overpayed bunch, whose wealth is inversly corrolated to their function and their position in modern society. If Charles wants to go and marry horse-face, good luck to him, but please, do I have to hear about it for the next six months?
Originally posted by StarrmanNOTE: A WEE BIT OFF TOPIC
Pulling my testicles off with a vice sounds more exciting
Just so you know...
I've never heard the word vice used in this context before!
I've heard of vice as in "Secondary" as in Vice-chairman.
I've heard of vice as in the use of drugs and sex.
But vice as in torture?
So, I looked it up, and lo and behold: Vice: n. tool with a screw mechanism for holding an object while working on it.
Well....shove a stick up my bum and call me a kebab...
But NOTHING sounds quite as exciting as doing what you're suggesting!
I do, however, interpret the excitement being solely on the part of the person outside of the grip of the vice. The Vicer, if you will...
So, if you feel so inclined to make my life more exciting than a royal wedding, I suppose we meet up somewhere. I'll bring the vice and you bring the testicles!
Originally posted by shavixmirI guess, if you have a vice which you use for 'sexual purposes', it would be a vice-vice.
NOTE: A WEE BIT OFF TOPIC
Just so you know...
I've never heard the word vice used in this context before!
I've heard of vice as in "Secondary" as in Vice-chairman.
I've heard of vice as in the use of drugs and sex.
But vice as in torture?
So, I looked it up, and lo and behold: [b]Vice: n. tool with a screw mechanism for holding an objec ...[text shortened]... l wedding, I suppose we meet up somewhere. I'll bring the vice and you bring the testicles!
And if you had 2, the 2nd one would be the vice-vice-vice?
Apologies - long day.