Also people keep bringing up her CV where she said she was Caucasian. Well, if she had to pretend to he white to get jobs, that's racism.
Defender of the Faith is a title The Pope originally gave to Henry VIII when he wrote a book in support of Catholicism and against Martin Luther. Of course, that all went to pot 20 or so years later when all the divorce wrangling was taking place and The Pope took it back. When things had settled down, it was Parliament that restored it to Henry, not The Pope.
Yet the vast majority of the Commonwealth have their own heads of state anyway. They were not going to make Charles King again because of Meghan.See @TYL159 98% is most. 48% is a little under half.
Sorry I'm gonna move it forward now as that was the most bizarre couple of posts I've ever read
I've watched the last episodes now. I actually don't think it's been that bad certainly not damaging to the family. I'm felt a bit sad when David olusoga () was talking about the common wealth and what an asset Meghan would have been to the royal family because it was true. Her and Harry could have really modernised it in a way that William and Kate can't. All in all I think it's all very sad.
The Free Church of Scotland certainly cares they are fervently anti gay and even anti shopping on Sunday.
No as that effectively means Roman Catholicism returns as the main Church in the UK and the Monarch is once again subordinate to the Pope and the Vatican.
I'm glad you brought this up. Do you want to know what 'CV' the absolutely deranged banshees are screaming about? It's the one below...which came from a RANDOM site which creates celebrity profiles.
I've seen that cited as 'evidence' so often. As if she created that !
I think he was regularly posting celebrities as monkeys so I don't think he meant it the way it was taken either. He shouldn't have gone there when a baby though particularly one with a mixed race mother. In the documentary they seemed to reference it as the child being a performing monkey for the RF and the press rather than as an example of racism.
He does apparently do it every time there is a Royal birth to signify the Royals as performing monkeys, but he is a seasoned broadcaster, and knew that there had been racist undertones to the previous coverage. He was smug and used lazy humour to make a point. He didn't use any of his journalistic skills to gauge how it would look, or how it could be perceived in this particular case.
Yes, he's done it many times before. He has zero history of racism, far from it he has always been a champion of black artists. He said he had no idea MM was mixed race as he barely pays attention to the royals. As soon as it was pointed out he took it down and apologised. That should have been an end to it.
Again, as a journalist, he has a duty to pay attention to the news if he is going to comment on it. Meghans Black mother turned up to her wedding with her! I'm not saying he deserved the backlash, he didn't, but he should have been doing his job properly.
He's not a journalist though.
Yes he's done it before and says he didn't know Meghan was mixed race. I find the latter hard to believe but suspect he just didn't think but as somebody who has spend years working in the public eye he should have thought before posting. It could however be argued that not posting would be treating this birth differently too, maybe if he wanted to post it then actually say he was posting it again as another performing royal baby had come into the world. I was unaware it was something he did and seeing the pic in isolation definitely looked racist regardless of intent. Basically think how things look if there is no context.
I thought he ws. In any case, he is a seasoned broadcaster of many years standing g. He k iwshow the media works. As a public broadcaster in the public eye, blindly and lazily putting out something without context especially if you are not interested enough in the subject matter to look I to it has got him in hot water. There are plenty of other 'circus' like pictures he could have used to say the same thing.
but humans as chimps was his thing. He's very anti establishment and anti monarchy, so I get that he wouldn't really have paid too much attention to Harry and Meghan or their wedding. He doesn't do current affairs. If he was presenting the Today programme then, yes, he should have known better
I imagine it's because her parents always called her Meghan?
Why give her the first name Rachel then?! Seems a bit redundant
I know but it's more common than you think for people to be called by their second name. Usually it's because the first name is a family tradition or something like that.
Sometimes stuff just happens - my cousin couldn’t say her first name so has always been called by her middle name. My friend hated her name from the minute she twigged it was her name, so called herself a different name a week at school until she found one she liked … so acquired a nickname because we couldn’t remember The Name Of The Week that she is still called
I know a surprising number of people who have been known by different names than the first one listed on their birth certificate, some since they were small children and some through their own choice. A lot more common than you’d expect.
