Harry & Meghan - to hope the Royals answer back?

[DontReallyCareBut]

I think the allegations in the Oprah interview are serious enough that protocol should be breached and the Royals should have a voice to give their side too.

Is this a lie or did they marry. I think it needs clarifying

For all the reasons PPs have given it seems safe to assume this one was a lie, but don't expect any comment from the Archbishop - after all he's "establishment" too and would probably rather avoid the entire mess

@longwayoff

I wish my mother, a Mediterranean, long legged, raven haired beauty had done a bit more speculating about inherited characteristics before she married a short, fat, fair Welshman. Then I might have looked more like Sophia Loren and less like Harry Secombe.

Best comment on thread award

longwayoff’s comment was lol funny

Is this a lie or did they marry. I think it needs clarifying.

Their marriage certificate doesn't lie.........

It was a lie and to me a massive 2 fingers up to the Uk .

@GoLightlyontheEarth

I heard hydrate too! I think either is a bit far fetched to be honest!

The "spectacle for the people" comment is insulting.

But tbh I think that some Royals think that that is how loved/revered they are.

Such a high opinion of themselves!

I heard “hydrate” first, but then it was drive safe. “Crocodile” comes from his interview with James Corden when asked what Archie’s first word was - H said “crocodile”, which Corden related back to him and H said something like “yep, 3 syllables”.

Well, William answered back today.
I can imagine the Queen wasn't that impressed with him really as she has been holding out olive branches and he looked mutinous.
Trouble is, there have been too many examples of some of his family being racist or making racist remarks in the past and this will just fuel the fire really!

I think a lot of people will like that he stood up for his family. Best to say nothing more, though. Actions should speak louder than words.

I don't get why everyone is saying they're lying about getting married. I took it that they said their vows to each other three days before the wedding and that's when they consider their marriage to have started - that's when they pledged themselves to each other. The legal ceremony then took place three days later.

@Maybe83

I would love them to put out a statement.

I live in a Republic so no undivided loyalty to the monarchy but I think H & M are vile. I think they are come across incredibly entitled, very damaged, manipulative people.

I don't have any sympathy for them and think they should now give up their titles and have absolutely nothing to do with a family and institution they despise so much. You know so they can't make money of the back of said institution they hate and should now focus on their energy on coming up with more meaningful rubbish to spout out publicly for the rest of human kind to learn from.

I think their need to be heard and their living in a prison narrative is completely insulting to your know the billions of people around the world with actual problems.

They are completely and utterly tone deaf to their privilege and if he was my brother or son I would want fuck all to do with him.

💯 this 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

No one says they got married at the rehearsal though. And surely everyone knows you need witnesses (it’s the same in the states too isn’t it).

@Stratfordplace

PinkTonic I’m not sure how many times this needs to be said ..... Yes we are aware of the rules but PH and MM stated they had their own marriage ceremony and “got married” just for them, with the AofC. Did they or didn’t they. Is this a lie or did they marry. I think it needs clarifying.

Someone also needs to see if their were banns. With details of when, where "marriage" was to be, etc.

@CaffeineAndCrochet

I don't get why everyone is saying they're lying about getting married. I took it that they said their vows to each other three days before the wedding and that's when they consider their marriage to have started - that's when they pledged themselves to each other. The legal ceremony then took place three days later.

vows only is not marriage.

Vows only is not a legal marriage. It can still be the date they pledged themselves to each other.

I see marriage as two things. A legal contract and a commitment to each other. For them, the commitment seems to have taken place before the legal contract and that's what they value more.

@CaffeineAndCrochet

Vows only is not a legal marriage. It can still be the date they pledged themselves to each other.

I see marriage as two things. A legal contract and a commitment to each other. For them, the commitment seems to have taken place before the legal contract and that's what they value more.

boak

@CaffeineAndCrochet

Vows only is not a legal marriage. It can still be the date they pledged themselves to each other.

I see marriage as two things. A legal contract and a commitment to each other. For them, the commitment seems to have taken place before the legal contract and that's what they value more.

Doesn't make them married from that point though however nauseatingly it's worded!

@IrmaFayLear

I agree that today you’re nothing if you’re not a victim. Any reality show contestant, eg on X Factor, has to have a back story and a journey.

I was just reading that palace aides are livid. The lady assigned to Meghan to help her (an Australian woman with three children) is apparently very upset as she did assist her with protocol etc etc. The Queen’s Equerry was Ghanaian so certainly not an old grey white man and he was placed at her disposal.

So true

Agree with @diddl. Vows alone are not a marriage. I said my vows 3 days before our wedding, I didn't go around saying "we got married 3 days before"

They could have actually said "it was important to us to say our own personal vows so we had a little private ceremony a few days before" or similar. But the whole story starts with "we got married" which is not true.

They would have needed two witnesses[not be alone with the Archbishop only] and a Registrar.

Though thinking about it, the Archbishop of Canterbury may be qualified as a Registrar. Some vicars are. I went to a wedding where the vicar was a Registrar, so he did that part himself as well.

@CaffeineAndCrochet

Vows only is not a legal marriage. It can still be the date they pledged themselves to each other.

I see marriage as two things. A legal contract and a commitment to each other. For them, the commitment seems to have taken place before the legal contract and that's what they value more.

So essentially they weren't legally married then which is what they are implying. Regardless of which is more special to the couple, a legal marriage takes place once. You don't have it again and again. They implied they were married for real before with the wording which isn't possible with the Church of England.

@CaffeineAndCrochet

Vows only is not a legal marriage. It can still be the date they pledged themselves to each other.

I see marriage as two things. A legal contract and a commitment to each other. For them, the commitment seems to have taken place before the legal contract and that's what they value more.

Then have a big, showy public wedding with the taxpayer footing the bill if the bloody vows and commitment were what meant the most of them. NO ONE forced them to have that huge wedding or expected it of a spare.

“You know, three days before our wedding, we got married. No one knows that. “But we called the Archbishop and we just said look, this thing is the spectacle for the world" its an obvious lie. Like the AoC just popped over on a whim and made a quickie Vegas job of it. LMAO.

The vows bit is just the wedding. Marriage is what's left after the fanfare has faded and from everything they say I don't think theirs is particularly strong or happy. It was a whirlwind courtship, they don't seem to have very much in common if you look at them before they met. Living authentically - if your first couple of years of marriage feel inauthentic it really doesn't get any better, you always take yourself with you.