Reply
Highlighted
Honored Contributor
Posts: 9,730
Registered: ‎05-01-2010

@manny2 wrote:

@proudlyfromNJ wrote:

@occasionalrain wrote:

The Royal family represents the UK. They receive and host foreign dignitaries. Prime Ministers come and go, while the Monarchy. remains.

Prince Harry had a duty to represent the Queen and he abandoned that duty, abandoned the Queen while continuing to accept payment from Prince Charles. He showed himself to be without honor, a deserter plain and simple.


@occasionalrain  Actually just your opinion. There are no such thing as deserters in the Monarchy. Actually they stand for nothing but Pomp and Circumstance. 


@proudlyfromNJ The British people love and respect the Monarchy. It is the American people that see it as all pomp and circumstance. Harry was born into that life, and I do not believe he will be able to walk away. He has no idea what normal is, so when he finds out he will have a hard time adjusting.


@manny2  Well, I also like the Monarchy but I don’t consider him to be a deserter or a traitor. 

I had to adjust to many things in life that weren’t easy and I knew nothing about. But I did it.

Whether they make it or not which is a chance every couple takes. 

Highlighted
Honored Contributor
Posts: 53,486
Registered: ‎03-10-2010

@bathina wrote:

@grandma r wrote:

@lily of the   Her Majesty needs to be strong.  In Andrew's case, that is a possible criminal charge.  He's been moved out of the palace.  The Queen is probably waiting to see if charges are filed.

 

As for Harry, well, I certainly understand his desire to keep his family safe, especially from the press!!!  However, he was born into this life;  he's always known his duties.  I think he must have been very torn in the decision.  However, the press will hound them no matter where they go.

 

As for Meghan, she knew who he was and what that meant to his family and country.  She chose to marry him anyway.

 

My guess is that the Queen had no other choice than to make the difficult decision.  I don't think a person can be a part time royal.  There are duties and obligations that go along with the title.

 

I think it's a sad situation.  Hopefully Harry won't regret his decision.


Beatrice, Eugenie, Zara Tindall and Peter Phillips (the Queen's other grandchildren) are all part time royals.


None of them are the child of the heir to the throne and none of them are getting an allowance from him for ostensibly performing royal duties.


In my pantry with my cupcakes...
Highlighted
Respected Contributor
Posts: 2,916
Registered: ‎03-14-2010

@stevieb wrote:

@bathina wrote:

@grandma r wrote:

@lily of the   Her Majesty needs to be strong.  In Andrew's case, that is a possible criminal charge.  He's been moved out of the palace.  The Queen is probably waiting to see if charges are filed.

 

As for Harry, well, I certainly understand his desire to keep his family safe, especially from the press!!!  However, he was born into this life;  he's always known his duties.  I think he must have been very torn in the decision.  However, the press will hound them no matter where they go.

 

As for Meghan, she knew who he was and what that meant to his family and country.  She chose to marry him anyway.

 

My guess is that the Queen had no other choice than to make the difficult decision.  I don't think a person can be a part time royal.  There are duties and obligations that go along with the title.

 

I think it's a sad situation.  Hopefully Harry won't regret his decision.


Beatrice, Eugenie, Zara Tindall and Peter Phillips (the Queen's other grandchildren) are all part time royals.


None of them are the child of the heir to the throne and none of them are getting an allowance from him for ostensibly performing royal duties.


Lol.

Highlighted
Valued Contributor
Posts: 967
Registered: ‎04-22-2010

Re: Queen's toughness

[ Edited ]

The way I interpret the decisions made by the queen that concern Harry and Meghan has more to do with how the royal "Firm" is officially represented. The official appointed royal positions like Youth Ambassador and Harry's honorary military appointments, where he and/or Meghan appear as official royal representatives of the queen are what was taken away. Harry and Meghan are still free to keep their own personal patronages that do not represent the queen or crown. 

I really think the bottom line was the concern about Harry and Meghan's desire for financial independence and just how they intend to market themselves outside the confines of the royal family. I think the queen did what she had to do to preserve the integrity of the Crown and to distance the "Firm" from those potential "conflicts of interest". In a sense, the queen is the CEO of one of the world's most famous and respected "brands" and I'm sure the Firm does not want their brand to be cheapened or the Crown tarnished by potentially unsavory marketing schemes that the Sussex "brand" may undertake. 


It's a sad situation all around, heartbreaking really. On the one hand, I feel sad for the queen and Prince Charles being placed in the unfortunate position of having to make those decisions to cut Prince Harry loose. On the other hand, I really feel for Prince Harry having to live with the results of his decisions that forced his grandmother's hand. I really think that he has many unresolved psychological issues  surrounding his mother's untimely death when he  was a child and that as a now husband and father facing that same insane British tabloid papparazzi culture, those same, deep seated issues have been triggered.

 

Hopefully, he's not being taken advantage of and manipulated by "outside forces" who claim to love him and claim to know what's best for his well being to "thrive". And now I'm just going to leave that last loaded comment right there. 😬

Highlighted
Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 6,875
Registered: ‎03-23-2010

@Labluver wrote:

The way I interpret the decisions made by the queen that concern Harry and Meghan has more to do with how the royal "Firm" is officially represented. The official appointed royal positions like Youth Ambassador and Harry's honorary military appointments, where he and/or Meghan appear as official royal representatives of the queen are what was taken away. Harry and Meghan are still free to keep their own personal patronages that do not represent the queen or crown. 

I really think the bottom line was the concern about Harry and Meghan's desire for financial independence and just how they intend to market themselves outside the confines of the royal family. I think the queen did what she had to do to preserve the integrity of the Crown and to distance the "Firm" from those potential "conflicts of interest". In a sense, the queen is the CEO of one of the world's most famous and respected "brands" and I'm sure the Firm does not want their brand to be cheapened or the Crown tarnished by potentially unsavory marketing schemes that the Sussex "brand" may undertake. 


It's a sad situation all around, heartbreaking really. On the one hand, I feel sad for the queen and Prince Charles being placed in the unfortunate position of having to make those decisions to cut Prince Harry loose. On the other hand, I really feel for Prince Harry having to live with the results of his decisions that forced his grandmother's hand. I really think that he has many unresolved physiological issues  surrounding his mother's untimely death and that as a now husband and father facing that same insane British tabloid papparazzi culture, those same, deep seated issues have been triggered.

 

Hopefully, he's not being taken advantage of and manipulated by "outside forces" who claim to love him and claim to know what's best for his well being to "thrive". And now I'm just going to leave that last loaded comment right there. 😬


Respected brand?  I just don't see that.  😂 

Highlighted
Respected Contributor
Posts: 3,345
Registered: ‎05-09-2010
Well he is not going to be “financially independent” if he is still accepting money from “daddy”, which I guess is his birth right. So for him to say he wants to make it on his own is a joke.
Always remember that you are absolutely unique. Just like everyone else. Margaret Mead
Highlighted
Valued Contributor
Posts: 883
Registered: ‎08-19-2018

Re: Queen's toughness

[ Edited ]

 

 

"Really?  Walk away from your born duties?  To the country and to the family?"

 

And the above, is a good example of my problem, with the royal family!

Harry didn't choose any of this, he was born to it. What if he's always been a  square peg, in a round hole, as one of last nights programs suggested? 

He didn't choose to enter a Royals in training program, take up many valuable years, of their traning expertise, then bail, when it was time to go to work. 

Should duty to your country, mean sacrificing your own dreams and happiness? None of it your choice.  

Yes,they're surrounded by great wealth and privilege, but, what if that isn't what makes you happy? 

And on a different note, what if you can't truly fulfill the role you're born to?  What if future King George, were to be gay? Seriously, it could happen. 

Yes this is coming from an American perspective, yes, the monarchy is a British tradition of hundreds of years, and no, I can't appreciate, fully, what it means, to the British. 

Highlighted
Honored Contributor
Posts: 10,558
Registered: ‎03-10-2010

@occasionalrain wrote:

@goldensrbest  How else can you see it? The Queen has plenty of concern, her ailing husband, Andrew, and she's 92 needing her family to take on some of her duties. Instead of helping her, Harry and Meghan bailed aka deserted her and created one more issue that she needed to address.

Selfish, disrespectful, unkind.

They're all talk about their concern for those less fortunate and wanting to help but Harry wouldn't even stay on to help his own grandmother.


The queen has plenty of help , i don't think  of it that way as you said ,let Charles do more, he is future king,  i think the  world,and British people will survive.

When you lose some one you L~O~V~E, that Memory of them, becomes a TREASURE.
Highlighted
Respected Contributor
Posts: 2,765
Registered: ‎06-07-2010

I think there will be more from the Queen about Andrew down the road.  What Andrew did is not just a family matter.  She has already stripped him of his duties and I hope she throws the book at him.

Highlighted
Honored Contributor
Posts: 11,617
Registered: ‎10-25-2010

@sharke wrote:

tax rate might be cheaper in canada, also.

 

Here in America, more you make, more they take. LOL


Meghan is still an American citizen.  She will have to pay federal taxes on her income no matter where she lives.