Proposal for Canada's Monarchy
EyeBrock @ Mon Mar 16, 2009 5:55 pm
Yea, it's obvious which culture you prefer.
kenmore @ Mon Mar 16, 2009 6:15 pm
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
Yea, it's obvious which culture you prefer.
Do you like walk around in a military uniform from 1812?
we have a patient who wears one all the time .... really humorous
EyeBrock @ Mon Mar 16, 2009 6:16 pm
Lame reply nursey. Truth hurts?
commanderkai @ Mon Mar 16, 2009 6:21 pm
llama66 llama66:
Absolutely, it is the tie that binds. My Irish heritage screams that we remain Loyal and remain part of the Commonwealth, The Monarchy is such a huge part of our history, I really hope it continues to be.
That's the point. It's history. Sure we can give some respect to it, like leaving Queen Elizabeth on the 20, but outside of that, no.
I have no British blood in me, being part French Canadian and part Italian Canadian, but in the end I'm Canadian. If you want to swear an oath to the monarchy, go ahead, but I'd rather swear an oath to Canada, and what it represents, instead of the monarchy, and what that represents.
Canada isn't a British colony anymore, it's an independent state. We might as well break off the last remnants of our status as a colony...seriously that's the main reason I have issues with the Forces. I can't pledge my loyalty to the Queen.
Bodah @ Mon Mar 16, 2009 6:26 pm
kenmore kenmore:
Alot you know.. my dad was British.. born in Farnham Essex.. loyal to a fault and supporter of the monarchy.. but me? well I live in the now.. a proud mix of french and english.. have dual citizenship.. speak french, english and spanish.. believe in Canada and a united federalism.
Funny, do I have to dig up your post where you stated Justin Trudeau should be the PM, its takes alot more than the right combination of eggs and jizz to make a good Prime Minister.
Thinking like a true monarchist when it suits you huh ?
MacDonaill @ Tue Mar 17, 2009 6:38 pm
herbie herbie:
Makes infinitely more sense than spending millions on an office no one gets to vote for.
Not really. The office itself costs money, sure. But if it were elected it would cost even more. A couple hundred million dollars more every few years.
$1:
Are you opposed to spending money on elections?
On unnecessary ones, absolutely. $1:
Do you think the GG would have done anything differently when Harper approached her if she was elected?
She may have. It would have depended on her platform during the imaginary GG election.
$1:
That little NDP logo by your avatar should mean you're not one of those brainwashed into accepting "the least".
My NDP membership means nothing if I don't have the freedom to have my own opinions without inciting insults on my intelligence by other members. One thing that annoys me about many politicised people is their dogmastism. It especially enrages me when it comes from the left, who pretend to be the champions of free speech and freethinking.
Raziel @ Tue Sep 14, 2010 2:41 pm
rhesusman rhesusman:
Why not have a separate Canadian monarchy? Why not ask some member of the House of Windsor move to Canada, become a Canadian citizen, and marry a Canadian (the first generation monarch would be British, but not the generations after that)? That way, you solve the problem of having a foreigner as head of state, the religiously discriminatory provisions of the Act of Settlement could be abolished, you retain the history and tradition (they'd still be related to the British monarchy), and it would keep Canada different from us. Why hasn't someone suggested this as a compromise solution to the monarchist/republican debate?
I can tell you, Rhesusman, that I've considered it a great deal, and I've come to the inescapable conclusion that we should simply switch the Canadian Monarchy from male to female primogeniture. That way, far from usurping the good Queen Elizabeth, we would simply succeed her, not with King Charles III, but with Queen Anne II, and later Queen Zara. This could be accomplished with a small constitutional amendment and would pretty well ensure a separate line of the House of Windsor for Canada alone. Likely we would have to make some law requiring the maintenance of a personal residence within Canada for the Canadian Royal Family or whatever, but regardless, the line would eventually become our own (give it a generation or two, Princess Anne already has a Canadian daughter-in-law, so it's not so big a stretch). This would save us from having Prince Bat-ears and his idiot son, Prince Harry, hanging out in any official capacity (I have no problem with Prince William coming to visit, he's cool).
And since we're starting our own actually independent monarchy, we could do worse than getting rid of all those religious requirements and crap, and the legitimate children thing. And I seriously doubt that anyone in Canada would object to commoner-royal intermarriage since we have no nobles to pick from, the line should become at least partly Canadian in rather short order. Ooh! And we could have an actual Maple Crown, like one with maple leaves instead of fleur-de-lis on it.
Anyway, female primogeniture, always a good idea.
Mustang1 @ Tue Sep 14, 2010 4:12 pm
Raziel Raziel:
rhesusman rhesusman:
Why not have a separate Canadian monarchy? Why not ask some member of the House of Windsor move to Canada, become a Canadian citizen, and marry a Canadian (the first generation monarch would be British, but not the generations after that)? That way, you solve the problem of having a foreigner as head of state, the religiously discriminatory provisions of the Act of Settlement could be abolished, you retain the history and tradition (they'd still be related to the British monarchy), and it would keep Canada different from us. Why hasn't someone suggested this as a compromise solution to the monarchist/republican debate?
I can tell you, Rhesusman, that I've considered it a great deal, and I've come to the inescapable conclusion that we should simply switch the Canadian Monarchy from male to female primogeniture. That way, far from usurping the good Queen Elizabeth, we would simply succeed her, not with King Charles III, but with Queen Anne II, and later Queen Zara. This could be accomplished with a small constitutional amendment and would pretty well ensure a separate line of the House of Windsor for Canada alone. Likely we would have to make some law requiring the maintenance of a personal residence within Canada for the Canadian Royal Family or whatever, but regardless, the line would eventually become our own (give it a generation or two, Princess Anne already has a Canadian daughter-in-law, so it's not so big a stretch). This would save us from having Prince Bat-ears and his idiot son, Prince Harry, hanging out in any official capacity (I have no problem with Prince William coming to visit, he's cool).
And since we're starting our own actually independent monarchy, we could do worse than getting rid of all those religious requirements and crap, and the legitimate children thing. And I seriously doubt that anyone in Canada would object to commoner-royal intermarriage since we have no nobles to pick from, the line should become at least partly Canadian in rather short order. Ooh! And we could have an actual Maple Crown, like one with maple leaves instead of fleur-de-lis on it.
Anyway, female primogeniture, always a good idea.
Uhh...yeah...sure...female primogeniture...no full/equal primogeniture? How delightfully sexist.
I'll assume, or hope, that was tongue in cheek.
EyeBrock @ Tue Sep 14, 2010 4:14 pm
A bit nuts methinks Mustang.