Asking all English Canadians

[Ben Kenobi]

You can't be "loyal to the Queen" if you'd specifically ignore her if she exercised any of here authority!

Does this mean that we ignore her entirely? Hardly. She has greater pull here now that we are not required to obey.

[Kuciwalker]

That's not loyalty.

[Ben Kenobi]

How is one loyal, if one has no choice but to obey?

Loyalty implies that one may choose disobedience and rebellion.

[Kuciwalker]

You can choose rebellion. You'll just get shot.

You can be loyal to something that compels your obedience. You can be loyal to something that does not compel your obedience. You cannot be loyal to something that you deliberately disobey.

[Ben Kenobi]

True, but when have Canadians deliberately rejected the Queen? When have they delibertately disobeyed her? When have they rebelled?

We are loyal, because we still accept the authority of the queen, especially when we are not bound to accept such loyalty.

Anyone can be loyal to something they have to do. It is much stronger to be loyal to something that you choose to follow.

[Starchild]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


True we wouldn't let that happen, but political autonomy need not demand severance of loyalty to the Queen.

After all, Canadians are still shaped by their desire to remain within the Empire, rather than forging their own path.

What Empire nowadays? It's long dead. Britain also traded away "a few acres of snow" for closer relations with Europe when we joined the EEC.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
True, but when have Canadians deliberately rejected the Queen? When have they delibertately disobeyed her? When have they rebelled?

I'm sure a number of times (I recall KH mentioning an instance once or twice), but the point is that there is NO WAY you guys would actually pay attention to the Queen if she took control of your government.

Gosh, this reminds me of a chapter in The Little Prince, about the King of everything

[Ben Kenobi]

What Empire nowadays? It's long dead.

True, what empire?

However, I am struck by the similarities to Canada now, and Canada before. Before, many rejected having a navy and an armed forces imposed upon Canada, instead preferring to fight under the banner of the Empire.

Now, we still reject the burden of defence.

So has Canada not retained many of the characteristics held as a Dominion of the Empire?

[Ben Kenobi]

Sky:

I tell you, if Britain ever enshrines a republic, then the Queen will become the Queen of Canada.

She is more popular here than in Britain.

So why, would she need to take control of the government in order to influence Canada?

[Kuciwalker]

The point is that the one actual power she has, it seems, you would ignore if she actually exercised it! You guys aren't loyal to her! You may like her, and even respect her opinion, but by that standard you might as well say you're loyal to an editorial writer.

[Fake Boris]

And we all know how loved the Queen is loved in Quebec... last time she went here in the 60s, there were riots set to lapidate her.

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Wezil


Alright Oncle, let us examine this a bit shall we?

MP's are required to swear an oath of loyalty to the Crown before taking their seat.

"swear" - make a solemn promise (do I need to define 'solemn' or do separatists understand that word?)

"oath" - a solemn promise or statement that something is true


Are you implying the BQ MP's are honestly swearing an oath to the Crown? Their oath is a fraud on the face of it. I don't advocate hanging them (nice try though - any other actions you want to rant about?) but they sure as hell shouldn't be allowed to take their seat.

"traitor" - a person who betrays his country or ruler

Set and match. Oh and look....



I can add smileys too, did it make my argument better?

Give me a break will you? there's a difference between swearing an oath to an abstract heuristic concept and refusing to blindly follow a policy set up by a specific government.

Yeah... by allegiance to the Crown, I shall be entitled to hand a flag to anyone who asks... Since treason is actually a crime defined within the law, perhaps you should contact the Secret Services and ask for an investigation?

[Fake Boris]

And, and if you want to talk about betrayal, why don't we bring up Trudeau's constitutional coup?

That one still amazes me: a new constitution can't be enacted without PEI, but it can without Quebec.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
But loyalty to the monarch is. In theory, isn't there some power that lets the Queen appoint a governor who has complete control over Canada? I doubt you'd actually let that happen.

Not really, sky. The monarch fills the same function here as she does in Britain. She is a defanged head of state, but her assent is still required for anything really important to happen, like laws being passed. She is also the ultimate head of the armed forces. In short, she is a fail safe, final check against potential abuse by the PM and cabinet while at the same time saving us all from the spectacle of low life politicians slinging mud at each other for the priviledge of occupying a similar position.

The Queen gives assent to the appointment of a GG. That is done as all other matters that involve the monarch. The PM recommends a person for the postion and the Queen agrees. From then on that person then represents the Crown, but is a servant of the Queen and might refer to her in some important matters, like the Patriation of the Constitution.

But in all, the powers of the GG (and the monarch) are very restricted. Assent could be withheld... once... and then he or she had better have been very right or we would most likely be a republic within 12 months.

One other important function of the monarch/GG is in the formation of governments. For instance, say the recently formed Liberal government had failed on the Speech from the Throne. The GG would then have been in a position to either dissolve Parliament and send us to the polls again, or find another party that might have a chance to gain the confidence of Parliament. In short, there are times when we need a non-politician to be there to make jusdgement calls. The GG fills that role.

You have to get the personage of the Queen out of the picture. It is more a matter of loyalty to our institutions and our country. It's been working quite well for us for these last 150 years.

[notyoueither]

Although, it does annoy a lot of people. No more I think than having twits politicing to occupy the post though.