RMC Officer Sues to Avoid Saluting, Toasting Queen?

[geo]

Say what you want about his personal life, but how many marriages could survive the pressure his did?  And he has been with Camilla for over thirty years.

Debate the merits of monarchy versus republicanism, but don't throw around undeserved personal insults.

Snotty.....
Problem with your comment about having been with Camilla for some 30 years is that - Diana, his 1st wife, hasn't been dead that long.  Not something you should have posted on your web site and be crowing about.

 

[Inch]

This debate doesn't really seem all that useful.  We are in no way what so ever a 'functional' monarchy; everyone knows this.  We are far more influenced by the U.S. than the U.K. anyway.  I also don't know why some are so steadfast in their eagerness to defend the Queen; soliders don't fight for monarchs or the CDS or your brigade commander. There is a reason the regimental system is so powerful and why soldiers arn't taught indepth courses on foreign policy and political science as a means of motivation; because it doesn't work. Soliders fight for and with the people they know.  Sure the Queen seems like a nice lady and the CDS is freakin' awesome...but after having trained with, lived with and worked with the same people for 5-10 years...those are the people i'll really fight for.  Arguing over whether or not we should pay allegience to the Queen is a  product of the luxury of not currently being shot at. I have no issue with toasting her till the cows come home and respecting the very real traditions and heratige of Canada and the Canadian Forces.  But I know and understand the Monarch is never again going to SEND Canada into battle.   
I can't say that I'd die for the Queen, but I would for pvt. Bloggins anyday.

I would have suggested to this Capt. to raise his issue with his MP and have him or her bring it up in parliment, or better yet wait till he's out of the forces to press his complaint then. However, this is really an issue that is not an important one. The CF has infinitaly more important issues to work on, so i'm glad he was given a polite 'thank you come again' by the CDS and others

I think most of you need to recheck your history. England (later Great Britain and finally the United Kingdom) has been a Constitutional Monarchy since the 1200's, that's almost 800 years since the King (or Queen) has held absolute power there. So your comment about the Queen sending Canadian troops into battle is pretty far off the mark, a British Monarch hasn't had the ability to do that without Parliament's approval since the middle ages.

The point of all this that I think some of you are missing is that while you may find the Monarch to be a useless symbol, the Monarch is a part of Canadian History, just like Vimy Ridge or Juno Beach. It's part of our national identity, all these things make us Canadian. They don't take anything away from our identity, they are our identity and to believe otherwise is just ridiculous.

God save the Queen.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

I had to swallow hard when I swore allegiance to the Queen and her retarded son the Prince of Whales and "all of her heirs". The thing that got me through it is the fact that terms like"the Queen", the Queen's Shilling" and shite like that are anachronistic terms for important words like "Country", "national pride", and "Honour". Most I know have little or no use for all this frivolous crappolla of "Royalty", but I would never want to violate the memory of those that felt they were serving these obsolete notions. I would never want to abuse the foundations of our society, even though they are no longer relevent.

We don't need all these trappings to make us a Country or a culture, but we do need a certain amount of perspective and decency. The rules right now are that we are a Country with a Queen as our head of State. It is a bit embarrassing and ridiculous, but that is how it is. So be it. If someday that changes that would be great with me, but I am a soldier, I take my orders and I serve. If Canada wants to be headed by a Queen then I swear an oath to the Queen and her retarded son.

The swearing of a silly oath does diminish the value of an oath, just like telling your kids there really is a Santa Clause diminishes your integrity. We do it because it it the silly thing our society asks, and in the whole we hope it is worthwhile. So I understand this Captain's feelings, but I do not understand his actions. Come on, litigation? It's absurd to accept the rules you live and work by, accept the pay and benefits of the job, and then refuse to perform the tasks you have sworn to do. Yes, they are stupid. Yes they are an insult to intelligent people everywhere, but so what? You accepted the rules, you live by them. Suck it up. (Rant Done) :rage:

While I hope we are someday freed from the facade of the Monarchy, I am glad and grateful to be living in Canada. If Canadians want this "Royal" illusion then I will fight for their right to believe it, I am just glad none of those Royal dim wits actually order us or lead us into battle.

I will now prepare myself to be flamed. 

Cardstonkid...................consider the "retarded son" comment your one and only freebie. 
army.ca Staff

 

[FastEddy]

"her retarded son"  ?!

I presume this refers to Prince Charles.  I don't see how can deserve this, so I will defend some of his accomplishments:  He has a degree (the first ever for an heir to the throne) in history from Cambridge.  He speaks French and Welsh.  He spent most of the 1970s in the armed forces; flying jets in the RAF, and commanding a minesweeper in the RN.  Also:

"On being appointed Colonel-in-Chief of the Parachute Regiment, a few months before he was 30, The Prince asked to take part in the parachute training course.

The Prince felt he could not "look them in the eye" or wear the Parachute Regiment's famous beret and wings badge unless he had done the course, he told his biographer, Jonathan Dimbleby, 15 years later.

"I felt I should lead from the front or at least be able to do some of the things that one expects others to do for the country," said The Prince."

http://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/personalprofiles/theprinceofwales/biography/militarycareer/

Twenty years ago people laughed at his interest in organic farming.  He spends a lot of time and money (his own, i.e., inherited family, as opposed to public, wealth) on charitable causes.

Say what you want about his personal life, but how many marriages could survive the pressure his did?  And he has been with Camilla for over thirty years.

Debate the merits of monarchy versus republicanism, but don't throw around undeserved personal insults.

Well said "NCSnotty" you've restored my faith in Junior Officers. I was beginning to wonder ?, however, it is evident that there are a few Clots that have squeaked by.

Cheers.

 

[IN HOC SIGNO]

I guess it's easy to believe the media stereotype of Royalty, especially those spewed out by the Fleet St mob.
Charles served as a Naval Officer and from all the Brits I talked to who served with him he was a stand up guy.
I have met some whom I would consider retarded who rose to the rank of commanding Her Majesty's ships but my understanding is that he was not one of them.  ;D

 

[ModlrMike]

Cardstonkid... I believe that the Oath of Allegiance contains the words "I shall bear true allegiance... etc". If you find that your personal beliefs are at odds with the oath that you swore to uphold, then do the honourable thing and seek your release. As an officer you are required to set the example through both word and deed!

 

[NCSnotty]

I'll try to refer my post about Prince Charles to the original topic:

In our leaders -- military, political, royal, or otherwise -- we generally consider their ability to perform their duties as more important than their personal lives.  In our Governor General, or King, or Queen, their primary responsibility is to ensure that a democratic government exists for the country.  In a Commander-in-Chief, we look for, at a minimum, knowledge of the Armed Forces and some leadership ability.  I think the people our current constitutional monarchy has given us are more than adequate for the task, their personal lives notwithstanding.  (I'll undermine my argument by pointing out that having an adulterer as head of the Church of England is problematic for some...)

To change the currrent system, and its players is, however, an inherently political act, not a legal one.  I think Captain Kenny's biggest sin is to try to be an officer and a politician at the same time, (which is, I think, illegal) by masking his politics in legal robes.

 

[eerickso]

Promoted Capt in 1985, this guy was posted out of 1 PPCLI in 1987and hasn't seen the field for some 20 years!  
B Eng, MSC, Phd all on our nickle...... great career huh?

Methinks the Colonel of the Regiment should ask him to remove his PPCLI accoutrements and adopt badges that are more appropriate to his inclinations...... (which are none).

Yeah, or he should've been fired 10 years ago and told to apply to the department of physic.

 

[medaid]

Cardstonkid... I believe that the Oath of Allegiance contains the words "I shall bear true allegiance... etc". If you find that your personal beliefs are at odds with the oath that you swore to uphold, then do the honourable thing and seek your release. As an officer you are required to set the example through both word and deed!

+1 ModlrMike

Those who didnt see fit the wording of said oath should have never sworn or affirmed it. If you had no intentions on serving Her Majesty maybe it time to get out...

 

[Cardstonkid]

You might be surprised possibly stunned to believe that some people can actually love Canada without a magical fairyland monarch benevolently loving us from on high. I guess if you personally disagree with the tattered remains of history that still resides with us then you do not deserve to serve in the CF? WOW, well I do not think Santa is real, yet I still take my kids to the mall to sit on his lap. I do not think the Easter Bunny is real, yet I still by chocolate eggs for my kids.

I do not think the Queen and her heirs really run Canada, or that it is "their" money that pays my wages, BUT I still swear allegiance to the Crown because it is a metaphor for the collective rules, culture and history of our nation.

It bothers me because it is not real, just like I feel a bit guilty hiding Easter Eggs and telling my kids that it is from a Giant Bunny! That does not stop me from doing it, because on the whole the harm that is done is probably worth it.

My apologies for calling HRH The Prince of Whales a Retard. I see how that is a bit much. To imply that I should not serve because I have to plug my nose at all the "Royal" stuff is a bit past the pale as well.

The point is that I am willing to serve, and like many others I am willing to look past the Royal anachronisms.

 

[HItorMiss]

I am willing to look past the Royal anachronisms.

In your opinion thats is.....

I myself take great pride in serving my Queen and her intrest at home and abroad. Then again I suppose I have an outdated sense of loyalty to a vision and way of life perhaps greater then some people are willing to see.

 

[Bane]

Inch; Thank you for correcting me on the Canadian Forces being never 'again' be sent into battle. I should not have used the word again.

You are mostly right to comment that england hasn't been an absolute Monarchy for some time, I must add that there is nothing in the 1225 Magna Carta that refers to the Monarchs ability to declare war. Also, the parliment was almost exclusivly a formal advisory commitee anyway, not the parliament we know and love today . It did have authority to set taxes which could at times limit a monarchs ability to fight a war: Ex.  Charles I, ascended the thrown in 1625, had a difficult time fighting the majority of the 30 years war after he choose not to conviene parliment for ten years!

I again I thank you for the correction, as being specific in ones in language is very important.

 

[geo]

Both Canada and Australia have our issues with the whole Royalty thing - but, it's part of what we were and, to an extent - what we are.  Our parliamentary system with the two houses is similar in concept to the US with it's two houses - but from a personal viewpoint, I think our system works better than theirs IMHO

I have sworn my alliegance to the Queen AND to Canada
I have worn a capbadge my entire career that is adorned by the Queen's crown
I have my RSM/CWOs warrant framed & proudly on display
I am who I am... what can I say ?

 

[medaid]

My point with regards to the whole thing is that you swore or affirmed an oath. It is an oath of law. You swore or affirmed it knowing very well what it said, the CF's history, it's role within the Common Wealth and it's Commander-In-Chief and Canada's head of State. YOU KNEW all of that, and you swore that oath or affirmed that oath willingly and witout reserve. If you did, and you had no intentions on remaining faithful to Her Majesty, then I would say your enrollment was irregular, or, you need to re-evaluate your stance and get out.

If you dont agree with the oath that you took when you were enrolled. You and this is the general YOU, do not deserve to wear that uniform and you do not deserve to call yourself a Canadian Forces Soldier.

 

[NCSnotty]

The notion of swearing an oath of allegiance is important, because it implies a relationship with a person (the Queen) and not an abstract idea.  We don't swear to uphold a constitution, or to a politician (God forbid), or to the holder of an office, but to a real person.  In our system we are asked to be loyal to someone who could (theoretically) personally call us to account if we do not fulfill our duties.  This is a natural human way of operating, e.g., we are loyal to friends, family, respected superiors, etc.  I think this is a great advantage of our system over the American one, and others.

Another important point is that the throne is never empty.  "The King is dead, long live the King" was a principle of Roman law.  The heir apparent to the throne assumes it immediately upon the death of the incumbent.  The coronation is a later formality, (cf. the swearing in of governments).

 

[smitty66]

The CF should hand this "Gentleman" his walking papers. As someone who has used his affiliation with the "Crown" to further his education and flex his ability to teach as a College Professor seems rather hypocritical.  The idea of an outwardly and publicly disloyal officer instructing the future leaders of the CF, sickens me. From what I have read, Capt "Chapaflap" has been given his moment in the sun and minute of fame, it's pink-slip time! I think he has been indulged quite enough. Barring that he should do the honourable thing, and turn in his kit and Queen's Commission and release. Good luck to him in his civilian endeavors.
The time wasted by the system in defending itself against these allegations would be better spent on dealing with matters more important to the CF. I am quite certain that the time of the lawyers and staffs involved could be put to better, more productive use. 

 

[RangerRay]

Not to mention the funds DND has to spend because of this waste-of-rations, as opposed to say, oh, Afghanistan...  :rage:

I agree with others here.  If one is not prepared to swear/affirm allegiance to Her Majesty without reserve, one should not apply for Her Majesty's Canadian Armed Forces.

 

[Trooper Hale]

My apologies for calling HRH The Prince of Whales a Retard. I see how that is a bit much.

You could at the very least spell His title correctly. While I've never seen anything about it, I'm fairly sure that HRH The Prince Of Wales has little or no authority over Whales that we commonly find in the ocean or hanging off the back of Japanese ships.
While it doesn't seem like much, for someone of your age to say "Whales" instead of "Wales" totally debases your argument.
For me, swearing the oath was one of the proudest days of my life. As a proud Monarchist i felt more pride then i could describe and to be a part of the "Prince Of Wales's Light Horse" was a very fabulous thing.
Its just a simple case of respect.

 

[Kiwi99]

Teacher at RMC, OK.  But soldier first.  If he is so against saluting, then deploy this 'soldier' to Afghanistan where there is no saluting outside the wire.  He should be pleased as punch to be in such an enviroment me thinks.  Oh, but wait, maybe he is against real soldiering as well. 

 

[FastEddy]

You could at the very least spell His title correctly. While I've never seen anything about it, I'm fairly sure that HRH The Prince Of Wales has little or no authority over Whales that we commonly find in the ocean or hanging off the back of Japanese ships.
While it doesn't seem like much, for someone of your age to say "Whales" instead of "Wales" totally debases your argument.
For me, swearing the oath was one of the proudest days of my life. As a proud Monarchist i felt more pride then i could describe and to be a part of the "Prince Of Wales's Light Horse" was a very fabulous thing.
Its just a simple case of respect.

Its a good thing I kept reading down to the end of this page or I would have duplicated your pickup on the "Whales".

IMO, this is not just a simple spelling error, but just another intended slight against HRH.

Cheers.