Jump to content
Kayriss

Canadian Republicanism

Should Canada Seek Complete Legal Independance From Britain?  

35 members have voted

  1. 1. Should Canada Seek Complete Legal Independance From Britain?

    • Yes
      15
    • No
      16
    • Don't Care
      1


Recommended Posts

Absolutely 100%.

 

It's a relic. We can still be a republic and be unique from the US. I don't define myself as living under a constitutional monarchy, I define myself as a Canadian.

 

Edit: Interesting site here

 

          A Canadianized head of state would be the embodiment of Canadian sovereignty, diversity and pride - a position to which all Canadians could aspire.

 

          Our head of state should be a true representative of the People of Canada. Presently, our current head of state, the Queen, does not represent Canada when she travels abroad and we think that’s not in our best interest.

 

          The act of attaining full-fledged status as a democratic republic within the Commonwealth would be the completion of a process of independence that began over a century ago.

 

          Canada’s head of state should be a Canadian citizen and not be above our laws. Presently, the Act of Settlement of 1701 constitutionally binds Canada to only heads of state who are members of The Church of England, thereby legislatively preventing Roman Catholics, Jews, Hindus, Muslims or anyone not a member of that Protestant denomination from becoming Canada’s head of state. Section 15(1) of Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms expressly forbids discrimination on the basis of "race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability".

 

          Canadians increasingly want to address the so-called "democratic deficit" that’s prevelent in Canada’s political system. In every good democracy, there’s a solid framework of checks and balances to ensure against the proliferation of abuses. One way to address that would be to have an elected head of state, not an appointed Governor General who is simply the deputy of a distant monarch.

 

          Monarchy and inherited rights in government, symbolic or otherwise, in concept, is one incompatible with Canadian values of egalitarianism. In fact, in poll results taken during the height of the Golden Jubilee and Royal Visit, 58 per cent of Canadians saw the Queen and the Royal Family simply as celebrity figures who should not have any formal role in Canadian society¹ and 52 percent saw the monarchy as an outmoded and regressive institution that has no real relevance to most Canadians today².

 

          New Canadians should not be subjected to swearing an oath to a monarch who not only isn’t a Canadian citizen herself, but also, in some cases, represents many aspects of what prospective citizens are trying to leave behind. They’re coming to Canada to embrace a way of life that emphasizes equality and the rights of the individual, not peerage, royalty and classism. CCR will work tirelessly toward Canada revising the Citizenship Act to allow new Canadians to swear allegiance to Canada and its laws and not the Queen.

Edited by Biggie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really care, as much as the GG's spending habits piss me off, we may as well keep the Queen.

 

It's not as though when we become a republic, we're going to become more independant or more democratic. The head of state is just a figurehead, and the whole thing about onlyy a member of the church of england being head of state is a load of crap, seeing as all members of the royal family are anglican.

 

For all technicalities, the Queen is the head of state, but Britain holds no power whatsoever to Canada. And I'm supposed to believe that "independance" from Britain will improve our status worldwide?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With throwing away the Queeen etc we can work on our real Canadian culture, im hopeing to see real canadian heros on dollar bills someday, people like terry fox, michael douglas, etc, thats real Canadian independance without being american and without being held back by tradition

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With throwing away the Queeen etc we can work on our real Canadian culture, im hopeing to see real canadian heros on dollar bills someday, people like terry fox, michael douglas, etc, thats real Canadian independance without being american and without being held back by tradition

Nothing quite screams "culture" like printing people from your country on your money, eh?

 

Besides, it's usually prime ministers that get put on the bills, anyway, so terry fox and tommy douglas are out of the picture.

 

The only conclusion I could see is that the Queen would be replaced with Trudeau.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i say hell yes. Free us from the Brits. Why the heck is the Queen still on our coins and $20 dollar bills? She has nothing to do with our country! She's just a figure-head, a symbol and nothing else. And not much of a symbol.

 

I'd rather have Terry Fox or Wayne Gretzky on my freakin' money than that old bird. Somebody who is TRULY Canadian.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only Prime Ministers would be on the currency, people.  And Wayne Gretzky's a joke.

Yeah, a hockey player on our money, that would be just taking it a bit too far.

It'd be retarded. And Hockey isn't Canada's only national sport. Lacrosse is Canada's summer national sport, and we're known to be dominant in Curling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't see why we couldn't put Terry Fox or Rick Mercer on our money.

You're not serious, are you?

 

Sure, Fox is a hero, I won't dispute that. But putting him on money? Doubt it. Like I said before, it's only figureheads (the queen and some governor generals) and prime ministers that get on money.

 

But Rick Mercer? He's a cultural icon at most. Imagine if Britney Spears were put on money in the united states, because that's the equivalent, putting a cultural icon on our money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get all the "free us from Britain" stuff. to be freed from something, don't they have to be opressive somehow? Free us from what? free us to DO what? And let's also not forget this very important, indisputable fact:

 

Canada would not be a country without Great Britain.

 

Read that sentance again. Because it is the truth. We would not exist as we do today without Great Britain. So keep that in mind when you point out that we don't owe the UK anything, or that they have nothing to do with us. Which I'm sure you will anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get all the "free us from Britain" stuff. to be freed from something, don't they have to be opressive somehow? Free us from what? free us to DO what? And let's also not forget this very important, indisputable fact:

 

Canada would not be a country without Great Britain.

 

Read that sentance again. Because it is the truth. We would not exist as we do today without Great Britain. So keep that in mind when you point out that we don't owe the UK anything, or that they have nothing to do with us. Which I'm sure you will anyway.

Sure, but if you want to get technical, we wouldn't be a country without France, either. Today, we don't owe the modern UK anything. And the British crown really does have nothing to do with the average Canadian. We won't forget our history, but we shouldn't hang on to an antiquated system of government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The monarchy is basically a waste of tax money, both here and in England. Doesn't the queen make something in the realm of £7 billion a year just for being queen? And what do they do for us anyway? Not a whole bloody lot, except visit us often enough to have a public toilet named after one of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah. We should get rid of the British Queen and have our own. Like Avril. She'd look hot with a crown.

 

Anyway, Britain are basically America Jr... the farther we distance ourselves from them the better off we'll be.

Britain is most definately not America Jr. If any country takes that cake it's Canada. don't even try to pretend that isn't true.

 

Doesn't the queen make something in the realm of £7 billion a year just for being queen?

 

seven billion pounds a year? no way in hell. if she made that she'd be the richest person on earth, and she isn't.

Edited by wonks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.