Virginia Tadrzynski wrote:
> I just read an article the other day that
> if Charles had been half the man he touted himself to be, he would
have
> stood up to his parents, the Parliment and the other naysayers and
married
> Camilla when he first 'fell in love', even if it meant doing what
good ol'
> great uncle Eddie did and renounce the crown. Diana may have
actually then
> been able to marry for love and not have been the sacrificial virgin
the
> crown demanded and she may still be alive today, Diana, Charles and
ol
> Rottie happy.
>
> He lacked the ******** to do what was right. Why celebrate now.
Maybe for
> a present we can send him an order of mountain oysters....it appears
he
> might just need a good set of balls.
> -Ginny

Consider the circumstances. It's easy to criticize and judge him by
Ameican middle classed standards. We can say "Stand up and be a man",
but life as a royal man is slightly different from how the rest of the
us conduct our lives. Charles didn't stand up to his mother because he
wanted to be King (not too many people would turn that opportunity
down). His Aunt Margaret, Elizabeth's sister, didn't marry her "true
love" due to royal opposition either - and the only reason why Charles
has a snowball's chance in HELL to be king in the first place is
because his Uncle, Edward VIII, gave up his throne to marry a divorcee.


I have bad things to say about ole Ed, but giving up the throne isn't
one of them.