We are discussing human affairs where there rarely are any hard facts.
I consider stoning outdated and barbaric. But there are some in this world who would reply the exact same thing you just replied.
Canada Pays More For Monarchy Than UK
- Thread starter dumpthemonarchy
- Start date
We are discussing human affairs where there rarely are any hard facts.
I consider stoning outdated and barbaric. But there are some in this world who would reply the exact same thing you just replied.
It is really the question of what is already in existence. If somebody proposed such a thing today, that somebody should be appointed because of his birth, such a suggestion would be laughed out of court. Even in Britain they hardly give out hereditary peerage any more. The last one was handed out by Mrs. Thatcher. She gave only one, and the person did not have any sons to pass it on to anyway.
However, now that it is already here, one has to ask, is there a good reason to change it? I don’t see any. Same as Britain does not give out hereditary peerage any more, but it has not abolished the ones it already has.
Concrete reason for change: an independent nation should have its own Head of State.
Harm done in existing system: As I said, the system works fine as long as no intervention from the Monarch is ever needed. But the fundamental point is that monarchy guarantees in no kind of way that the monarch is the appropriate person to be taking the important decisions.
I would also consider that monarchy has significantly contributed to the alienation of Quebecers (of course this is only a factor but it's obvious scrapping the monarchy would improve national unity).
Benefit to a new system: Heightened respect and trust towards our system by putting an end to an undemocratic process of selecting the Head of State.
Last edited:
Now we're off to fantasy land at full speed. Enjoy the trip, I'll go to the cottage instead.
The simple reason that the system in question would be laughed at if proposed in a modern context should be enough to change it.
By supporting monarchy, you are supporting the concept that faith alone should be enough to assure a decent Head of State. Faith that the turn of events will continually favor Canada. Faith that the descendants of the royal family will continually give us the best imaginable persons to hold the responsibility of Head of State... Blind faith in the system is all you have.
Being the scientifically inclined mind you seem to be, i'd imagine you'd expect something than better than that for your country...
I can agree this was simplistic a assertion. Canada's unity is a complex and multi-faceted issue. My point being that Quebecers are overwhelmingly anti-monarchist and find it hard to identify to a monarchist nation.
Last edited:
The PM recomends the GG..... in recent history, the PM's recomendation is ALWAYS accepted. The same with the LG's, they are recomended by their respective Premiers. It's not like the Queen decides who is and is not the GG or the LG's.
You can get used to many things without necessarily supporting with them...
I got used to your Quebec bashing...
Of course it's a good reason. The current system allows us to be ruled by an incompetent simply because of who his or her daddy is. Granted, you might not feel ability is relevant when determining leadership (and I do believe that your view is shared by the majority) but it is important nonetheless. The lack of credible leaders in Ottawa is a reflection and a consequence of your viewpoint.
So far, every reason you have come up with to abolish the monarchy in Canada has been turned. Since, for all intents and purposes, the actual Monarchy( as in Queen, or King) is no more than a figurehead and a link to Canada's past and history, why are you so intent on riding Canada of it, or is it just another attempt by the quebecois to try and throw their weight around and force the ROC to do it their way or they threaten to "hit the hiway" and tear Canada apart.
No, it's not a good reason, because the monarch is, for all intents and purposes, a figurehead. The Monarch has nothing to do with day to day running of the country.
This is why the monarchists have zero credibility. If you read 5P's posts, the monarchy has a very important job to do....read your posts and she is nothing more than a figurehead. Perhaps you two should get together and get the stories straight lest you both end up looking silly.
edited to add - I guess you should take TenPenny along as well.
F*ck....you're even stupider than sjp.
Paradox already alluded to the fact that the Monarchy is, for all intents and purposes, a figure head. If you have comprehension problems, tough sh*t. Go back to school and pay attention this time.
Sure we did. It's still here, isn't it? Most people don't even think about it very often.
Anyway, the monarchy is a figurehead. A bit of sentimental, romantic fluff on the visage of Canada. What more could anyone ask for? lol
Last edited:
In Gerry land I'm sure they have...
Slavery was a part of the US history but eventually they got rid of it right? Not all traditions are good.
Of course, monarchy is nowhere near as barbaric as slavery but I hope you get my point that some traditions are best left behind. We simply don't agree whether monarchy is good or bad.
In my opinion, being born in a ''royal'' family shouldn't give you the right to govern a nation, even if your role is only symbolic.
You are entitled to your opinion that we are not all born equal.
You're on auto-pilot mode aren't you? Do you have a Quebec bashing option on your keyboard that you might turn off?