Why is Prince Charles being criticised?

[HappydaysArehere]

when I studied the British Constitution some years ago, I remembered the monarch was able a) to be consulted b) to encourage and c) to warn. I therefore do not agree that the Queen or Prince Charles should remain tight lipped and incapable of expressing a point of view. Whether the Government chooses to take any notice is another thing. From what I have seen Prince Charles is showing integrity and a caring, dutiful approach to his role as the monarch in waiting. If he did nothing but sit around as an empty head he would then be criticised for being useless.

Hating, insulting or threatening someone because of the group they were born into is fundamentally ignorant, prejudiced and evil.

What about telling people they can't belong to a class or aspire to a job because they are born into the wrong family? Is that like "racism" too?

He expressed opinion and lobbied the ones that were important to him. As someone who has s hard time biting her tongue, I don't see what people want from him? Would we prefer a robot to be the next monarch?

Charis1 - probably because we don't hack heads off any more. It was fairly common back then "in the olden days". It isn't a threat, more a tongue-in-cheek comment. But it appears that you don't seem able to see the humour in it.

that you don't seem able to see the humour in it

No, I don't see any humour in racist death threats, you apparently do.

If you think it was a racist death threat, then perhaps you should report the post for MNHQ to delete as it would definitely have broken the posting guidelines. But really, it wasn't.

He needs to remember what happened to his namesake Charles 1

Charles 1 was beheaded for treason. Why should prince Charles be being asked to remember this exactly. Why is it relevant to him writing a letter about conservation??

Insane.

Charis1 - the monarchy has ended before, it could end again. Not an insane reminder. But go on, give whoever is on lates at MNHQ a laugh and report the "racist death threats".

ended by a brutal execution pico

I'm struggling to respond to you within the talk guidelines because you seem to be taking things a bit too seriously and responding a touch irrationally.

I'm sure Prince Charles has been the subject of real threats in his life - like many famous people. But a post by BlossomTang on MN isn't one of them.

Our head of state does not have power like the royals of old, they are not supposed to be 'running' the country as such, as taken from the royal.gov website

'The Monarch has a less formal role as 'Head of Nation'. The Sovereign acts as a focus for national identity, unity and pride; gives a sense of stability and continuity; officially recognises success and excellence; and supports the ideal of voluntary service.'

It really is rather simple, whether you agree with Charles or his position the facts remain the same, as an unelected representative he is not part of the democratic process and cannot therefore seek to influence it.

If he wants to step down from his role and take up an elected role, he would be very welcome to try and influence laws and legislation.

Totally agree, seafood. It is not unifying to agree with one set of people and promote those ideas, at the expense of others who are in the opposing camp. He can be well informed and promote his charities but he should not seek to influence any government or the planning process because his views are held in higher regard than the average person, who might have poising views, but is largely ignored.

Poor old Charles. One look at this thread and his spidery writing will tremble so much that it will be unreadable. So that problem is solved!