Skip to main content

What do you think of Prince Charles and Camilla? Would you have gone their route, or made a choice like that of Japan's Princess Sakayo? Express your views in a poll about royal infidelity.

It could happen to you, if you were royal. Cupid shoots you in the butt--or wherever those arrows fall to make a person thoroughly love struck--and you fall in love with the wrong person. By now, it's known even by us commoners. Prince Charles may have married Diana but Camilla was his love. Would he displease the royal Mum by arranging a true love match? No, he chose the sneak-around route. And the consequences showed right in his aura. Compare his relative clarity when marrying Diana to the gradual mucking up of his aura, forehead chakra and all. By 1999, the fellow was rich, was still in line to the throne. Only problem was the poor fellow's aura. If you use an aura-reading technique, at any chakra save the one appropriately known as "crown," the man was half-dead. (Basically, the crown chakra is located at the top of the head and shows if a person is, technically, still living.) Now Charles is married, at last, to his one-time mistress Camilla. The royal couple met an enthusiastic response during their recent trip to D.C. Am I the only one to be struck by the lack of collective memory? How many mentions were there in the press? No, we preferred to sing media choruses of "Isn't it wonderful?"; and "How happy they look." Personally, I'm not a fan of the "Go for it, Honey" school of marital ethics. Did Charles ever apologize publicly, even once, about lying to his wife (and the public) for more than a decade about his double-adultery of convenience? Matters of the heart and loins are complicated, to be sure. Agonies are suffered about love affairs, done and undone, and people grow as a result. Apart from some public scandal, Charles got away free with his peccadillo... except in his aura. There, for years, he lived like a frozen man, his own experiment in cryogenics. Since marriage to Camilla, and bolstered by an apparently universal public forgive-and-forget mentality, the prince's aura has thawed nicely. In every way, he looks great. Yesterday was his birthday. Charles turned a sprightly 57. He and Camilla are both in great shape, especially aurically, and it's a delight to read them now. Gone is his crooked smile of yesteryear, a delight for face readers, too. Yet if you want to see a far more glorious aura, take a peek at Japan's Princess Sakayo. Actually, the correct term now, I suppose is "ex-Princess." The only daughter of Emperor Akihito and Empress Michiko has surrendered her title, preferring to marry a commoner and keep her aura intact. She refused to pull a Charles. Why not seek out someone from a proper family, make sure he is a virgin (sooo important to Charles, once upon a time) and celebrate a lavish wedding? Why not please the royals, keep your status and money, then sneak around in the time-hallowed way of monarchs? Of course, Sakayo might not have gotten away with it. Take my poll and give your opinion why. Lucky Sakayo! She succumbed to ethics as well as love, and married her honey, whether pleasing to royalty or not. In return, the glowey young thing received a settlement of $1.3 mil. By your standards and mine, that's not bad. For Prince Charles, what a trifling amount--perhaps the cost of one of his polo ponies?

Originally posted to Rose Rosetree on Tue Nov 15, 2005 at 07:20 AM PST.

Poll

Should Japan's Princess Sakayo have pulled a Charles?

0%0 votes
0%0 votes
0%0 votes
100%4 votes

| 4 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Cool (none)
    I cant wait for the new "Daily Kos, Gossip Issue" to come out.

    Now my wife can stop buying all those magazines, and just read here.

    And all the monkeys aren't in the zoo, everyday you see quite a few

    by Ageredon on Tue Nov 15, 2005 at 07:25:46 AM PST

    •  Wow ... (none)
      ... way to keep an open mind!  Those of us who can and DO get information by reading the energy fields surrounding someone would disagree with your little linky there.  :)  

      To each his/her own ... and just because YOU don't believe it, doesn't mean it's not true.  

      •  Actually, that would pretty much be (none)
        the basic definition of 'not true' in a case like this. I don't believe it because I see no evidence to support it and a lot to refute it. Therefore, it is not true.

        Maybe if you had read the article you would have not accused someone else of not having an open mind.

        •  I have actually read the article (none)
          ... some time ago.  I can show you quite a bit of information showing auras do, in fact, exist.  Actually, Rose has written several books on the matter and I'm sure she could point you in the direction of research that supports the claim.  

          As someone who can read auras (albeit not nearly as well as Rose can), my experience has been different than yours so I believe they do exist because I have seen them.  

          Again, to each his/her own. Just because it's real to me doesn't mean it's real to you and vice versa.

          Peace

          •  Well I don't know what you're waiting for. (none)
            James Randi has $1,000,000 ready and waiting for you.

            Even if you don't want it yourself, a lot of charities could use a million bucks. I think it's pretty selfish of you to keep it from them so I think it's time you proved your powers were real.

          •  Those who don't believe in auras win THAT (none)
            Thanks so much for writing, Bexley. When people are skeptics about aura reading or face reading, I have no interest in engaging with a dialogue.
            It's not as though I'm a missionary who needs others to believe along with me.

            The plain fact is this. Someone who doesn't do aura reading or face reading loses out, compared to someone who can do it well.

            Anyone could do it, at least with the techniques I teach. Anyone who DOES do it winds up having an practical advantage in terms of getting accurate inside information about people.

            Anyone who scoffs has, at a minimum, benefits like certainty and, perhaps, much needed self-righteousness.

            Everyone gets something, and I like that.

            BTW, Barbara Brennan is the most famous apologist for aura reading to the American masses, notably her bestseller "Hands of Light."

            --Rose

             

  •  question I haven't seen answered anywhere (none)
    If the aristocracy of Japan has been abolished (as I learned when reading that the groom is a member of a formerly aristocratic family), is there anyone Sayako could have married who is not a commoner or a member of her family?  I'm very confused as to what the options are supposed to be.

    The president is Lucy, and he's holding a football. We're Charlie Brown. - Bob Herbert

    by djinniya on Tue Nov 15, 2005 at 09:18:15 AM PST

    •  Last century, anyway (none)
      And might that precedent have suggested a way Charles could have connected with Camilla with integrity? Sure two divorces, one for each, might have disqualified him from sitting on the throne, but how likely is that.

      Still, if hindsight is 20/20, around-sight on a completely different person's problems is both great and not relevant.

      Thanks for writing!

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site