Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

William & Kate’s Baby Heartbreak: Royal Couple May Not Be Able To Conceive!
Hollywood Life ^ | May 18th, 2011 | N/A

Posted on 05/21/2011 8:10:19 PM PDT by TheDingoAteMyBaby

Kate’s new mother-in-law Camilla has been telling friends the royal bride has fertility problems which may prevent her from getting pregnant — according to sources. If the claims are true, the newlyweds are facing up to the fact that they may never produce an heir to the British throne!

“Health complications from Kate‘s adolescence raised red flags that may have an impact on her ability to conceive,” sources close to Camilla have told In In Touch Magazine.

The consequences would be devastating for the British monarchy. Both William, 28, and his father Prince Charles were born soon after their parents married, and the royal couple are under intense pressure to produce an heir soon.

Royal biographer Andrew Morton tells In Touch, “If Kate is not pregnant within the next nine months, she’ll be defying 200 years of British tradition.”

The last reining monarch to die without producing a legitimate heir was Will’s great-great-great-great-great uncle King William IV, more than 170 years ago!

If William does indeed die heir-less, the throne would defer to the eldest male child of his younger brother Harry.

Unlike most couples, adoption isn’t an option for William and Kate, 29 — only a biological child can be heir to the throne.

But sources tell In Touch the Duke and Duchess chose to ignore Kate’s medical problems for a marriage “based on love."


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: blog; blogpimping; infertile; infertility; royalfamily; williamandkate
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-105 next last
To: buccaneer81
No chance. Elizabeth will push herself to 105 before she'll let Charles sit on the throne.

Yes, because when you're Queen of the United Kingdom you control when you are going to die, unlike mere mortals. God has control over the latter’s lifespans.

Also she can make lightning bolts fly from her eyes. So don't piss her off.

81 posted on 05/22/2011 1:23:10 AM PDT by Cheburashka (Democratic Underground: The Hogwarts of stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: I still care
‘Harry might not have any kids either.’

In that case the succession goes to Andrew and his heirs, and if he has no heirs it goes to Edward and his heirs. After that comes Charles sister and her heirs, then some folks you haven't heard of. Then the family of the Duke of Gloucester, and the family of the Duke of Kent, plus a dozen or so other families. if they remove the bar to Catholic succession, some dozens of European descendants of Queen Victoria get in line

If you are not in the above list, you are not going to be King or Queen of England by right (you still could be a King or Queen Consort of course.

82 posted on 05/22/2011 1:53:03 AM PDT by Lucius Cornelius Sulla (Liberty and Union, Now and Forever, One and Inseparable -- Daniel Webster)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: TheDingoAteMyBaby

fertility problems which may prevent her from getting pregnant

If I was William I would be trying a couple times a day to prove her wrong.


83 posted on 05/22/2011 4:14:24 AM PDT by bikerman (Where Has My America Gone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheDingoAteMyBaby
If [28 year old] William does indeed die heir-less, the throne would defer to the eldest male child of his younger brother Harry.

No pressure, Will!

84 posted on 05/22/2011 4:40:50 AM PDT by hattend (Obama is better than OJ... He found a killer while on the golf course.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: annieokie

They are painting Camilla in the worst possible light and she deserves it after what she did; however; I would think she knows enough not to do something like this.


85 posted on 05/22/2011 4:59:39 AM PDT by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote; then find me a real conservative to vote for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Lucius Cornelius Sulla
In that case the succession goes to Andrew and his heirs, and if he has no heirs it goes to Edward and his heirs. After that comes Charles sister and her heirs, then some folks you haven't heard of. Then the family of the Duke of Gloucester, and the family of the Duke of Kent, plus a dozen or so other families. if they remove the bar to Catholic succession, some dozens of European descendants of Queen Victoria get in line

And at some point you get to John Goodman:


86 posted on 05/22/2011 5:07:16 AM PDT by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Emmett McCarthy

Would you care if I told you that the House of Windsor aided and abetted the Lockerbie bomber deal...?


87 posted on 05/22/2011 5:09:40 AM PDT by mewzilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Lazlo in PA

Firstly, is a Royal Wedding any worse than the OTT hoopla of a Presidential Inauguration?.

I find it hilarious that Americans berate the spectacle of us Limeys and our silly Royal Weddings every 30 years when you have a ridiculous spectacle every four years...

In Britain, when a Prime Minister leaves/enters, the leaving PM packs up overnight, the incumbent moves in the next day. The most a British PM does is visit the Queen, and give a press conference in front of Downing St.

Secondly, that ‘nitwit’ has spent the last few years serving in the British military, and is currently saving lives in the RAF search and rescue. And has a degree from one of Britain and Europe’s oldest universities. And whose brother has also served in the military, inc serving in Afghanistan!.

Compare that to the children of the Bushes, Clintons, Gores, Cheneys et al. NOT one, Rep or Dem, has served their country as William and Harry have.


88 posted on 05/22/2011 6:32:09 AM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: TheDingoAteMyBaby
The last reining monarch to die without producing a legitimate heir was Will’s great-great-great-great-great uncle King William IV, more than 170 years ago!

If William does indeed die heir-less, the throne would defer to the eldest male child of his younger brother Harry.

Oy.

1. *reigning

2. Yeah, that really sucked, they got stuck with a teenage girl who was like his niece or something. That was a really horrible time in British history, wasn't it?

3. I don't think they'd skip Harry. After all, they didn't skip Albert in 1936 in favor of his 10-year-old daughter, did they?

89 posted on 05/22/2011 8:43:01 AM PDT by ExGeeEye (Freedom is saying "No!" to the Feds, and getting away with it. "Speak 'NO' to Power!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rogue yam
This reeks of TABLOID and PAPARAZZI.

Sheesh. Let the two young ones so much in love enjoy their little paradise and island for a little while at least. I mean, they are still on honeymoon I think.

What do they want to do? Drive her crazy and onto anti-depressants like Crown Princess Masako here in Japan? Shameless and cruel and violating every element of the Golden Rule.

90 posted on 05/22/2011 8:46:31 AM PDT by AmericanInTokyo (22 May in Japan, and still here!!! ;-) Oops, Harold. Maybe next time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk

By the time that Henry VIII married his third wife Jane Seymour and begat his son Edward, his two previous wives were deceased, therefore his marriage to JS was legitimate and so was his heir.
Catholics may not recognize the Protestant church or divorce, but according to the law in England at that time, Henry’s divorce from Catherine and and marriage to Anne Boleyn was legitimate; Henry and Catherine’s daughter Mary recognized her half-sister Elizabeth as her heir.
You are dealing wirh pure conjecture when you say that Edw II was not the father of Edw III. Many homosexuals marry women and father children. An outstanding example closer to our own time is the writer Oscar Wilde.


91 posted on 05/22/2011 8:49:09 AM PDT by kabumpo (Kabumpo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: FrdmLvr

Hey you and my hubby are cousins. He is related to Francis Drake as well!


92 posted on 05/22/2011 9:15:52 AM PDT by sheana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: bgill
The fact that any person would believe this is beyond comprehension.

Of course, how many believed the world would end yesterday is unbelievable too.

PS, re: world ending.... You’re still there, right?
:)

93 posted on 05/22/2011 10:26:06 AM PDT by MindBender26 (While the MSM slept.... we have become relevant media in America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: bgill
The fact that any person would believe this is beyond comprehension.

Of course, how many of the great unwashed believed the world would end yesterday is unbelievable too.

PS, re: world ending.... You’re still there, right?
:)

94 posted on 05/22/2011 10:26:35 AM PDT by MindBender26 (While the MSM slept.... we have become relevant media in America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: kabumpo; Dr. Sivana
If a person such as Henry was married legitimately to another such as Catherine of Aragon, no new marriage could be contracted while both spouses survived. If the marriage was NOT legitimate (as Henry claimed since Catherine had been merely betrothed to his elder brother Arthur which he petitioned the Vatican to disregard since Arthur had died before Henry's marriage), then Henry was eligible to marry Ann Boleyn. Unfortunately for Henry, however, he claimed that Ann Boleyn had committed adultery against him and so he ordered her beheaded and so she was. That amounts to murdering one's spouse (if their marriage was legitimate at all) and would violate Canon Law (no exceptions for philandering monarchs claiming that adultery against them is "treason") which says that the murdering spouse can NEVER again marry legitimately. AND, let us not forget that Nicholas Sandler, a contemporary biographer of Henry the nonstop Lustful and serial spouse, claimed that Ann Boleyn was also the illegitimate daughter of Henry the patron monarch of STDs. That means that Lizzie I (who solemnly promised Mary that Lizzie I would reign as a Catholic but was an enemy of Holy Mother the Church which put a price on her head for it) was also never the legitimate monarch.

God had an answer to all this. Neither Edward nor Lizzie I left any offspring and the Tudor Dynasty died in 1603.

BTW, my wife is a relatively penniless descendant of Edward III through his last son, John of Gaunt.

95 posted on 05/22/2011 1:29:30 PM PDT by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline, Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club: Burn 'em Bright!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: the scotsman

I must say I have to agree, we treat our Presidential Inaugurations like bleedin’ coronations, I am tired of that myself.

Just hand over the keys to the White House and get on with it.


96 posted on 05/22/2011 1:32:07 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: sheana

Wow! Small world! Well, tell him I said “Hi”. It’s been simply ages! lol


97 posted on 05/22/2011 2:54:24 PM PDT by FrdmLvr (Death to tyrants)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: mewzilla

Except they didnt.

The Crown has no power in that regard, so any ‘story’ about supposed Queeny interference is bunkum, I can assure you.


98 posted on 05/22/2011 2:58:07 PM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: mewzilla

Except they didnt.

The Crown has no power in that regard, so any ‘story’ about supposed Queeny interference is bunkum, I can assure you.


99 posted on 05/22/2011 2:58:15 PM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk

You seem to have been reading a cult pamphlet version of English history, and you have gone way off topic.


100 posted on 05/22/2011 2:58:49 PM PDT by kabumpo (Kabumpo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-105 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson