Can someone clarify for me that if Charles were to abdicate, doesn’t that remove his line of succession? So William and George would be out of the running.
No. You can't remove someone else's right to the throne by standing aside - the line of succession is extremely clear, and you can abdicate your own, but not your child's. Those aren't your rights to hand off.
What you can do is abdicate your own and any potential future children's rights, because those people and their rights don't presently exist - that would be necessary, in order to avoid two competing lines of succession. But lots of European monarchies have parents abdicating in old age in favour of their eldest child. Quite conventional, in fact: the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain. If the Queen ever abdicates on the grounds of extreme old age, it would be in favour of Charles, too.
Re. Camilla, what she and Charles did to a naive, not very bright, atrociously educated teenager was hideous.Diana's mental health was destroyed by it, and I have huge admiration and respect for the way in which she fought back, refused to go quietly, and made them pay. They were hated, at the turn of the millenium. The public despised them, and they knew it. Diana was absolutely the mouse that roared. But she's been gone almost a quarter of a century, Camilla seems a nice woman who works very hard for women's charities (unglamorous ones, like rape aftermath care and domestic abuse), I don't think it's right to judge people by their worst choices and most unforgiveable actions short of eg murder, and so in the final analysis... it's really none of our business, anyway.
Personally I would like an end to monarchy. I think it's a crazy system for selecting a head of state and they are monstrously indulged on the tax payer's money - the claim that the Crown Estates makes us a fortune and we only give them a little back of their own money is hugely dishonest, because the Crown Estates were originally how the monarch funded all branches of the state - courts, civil service, Parliament - and wasn't personal spending money, so that money is still being used for exactly it's original purpose today, but as the monarch is a figurehead, Parliament control expenditure. They cost us far more than any other monarchy in Europe does their state. That's separate, though, from the good work most senior members of the family undoubtedly do.
I'm a republican because monarchy is just silly, as an idea. I don't have to dislike the people involved - either the idea is stupid, or it isn't. And I think Camilla seems like a very nice woman who was involved in doing something horrible a generation ago. It's time to let it go. And the concept of monarchy with it, for that matter. When the Queen goes, so should the hereditary principle.