RMC Officer Sues to Avoid Saluting, Toasting Queen?

[Lumber]

With the passing of the Statute of Westminster in 1931, the Canadian Crown became legally distinct from the other crowns of the commonweatlth, Meaning Canada has a national monarch.

Are the other "crowns of the commonwealth" not the same as our crown, the Queen? Is she not our "national monarch", just as she is the "national monarch" of Englad, and where else have you?

 

[JBoyd]

Are the other "crowns of the commonwealth" not the same as our crown, the Queen? Is she not our "national monarch", just as she is the "national monarch" of Englad, and where else have you?

Yes she is Canada's 'national monarch', that was what I was trying to get across. It seems as though some people feel we are saluting and paying respect to a foreign monarch. We may have a constitutional monarchy here in Canada, but she is OUR Queen, Just as much as she is Antigua's Queen, or Grenada, or Belize, etc.

Her official title is 'Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom, Canada and Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith. '

 

[Lumber]

Yes she is Canada's 'national monarch', that was what I was trying to get across. It seems as though some people feel we are saluting and paying respect to a foreign monarch. We may have a constitutional monarchy here in Canada, but she is OUR Queen, Just as much as she is Antigua's Queen, or Grenada, or Belize, etc.

Her official title is 'Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom, Canada and Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith. '

IMO, the reason people keep view the Queen as a "foreign" monarch is because they do not understand how Canada and England, and Belize and Grenada etc. can be separate, sovereign nations, yet still maintain the same "Head of State". It comes from the colonial era, when Canada, then British North America (B.N.A.), was not a country of its own, but merely a colony of England. The land naturally belonged to England, and so the Queen of England was naturally the Queen of B.N.A., Grenada etc... I think they have a further difficult time in understanding this when they see an example like India, where they severed there ties to the monarchy when they became independent.

When the Queen was the Queen of England and her colonies, and not Queen of many sovereign nations, she had but one nationality: English. Technically, as regnant, she had no nationality, a factthat continues to this day, but people cannot stop seeing her as English (or British) in nationality, and hence "foreign".

I believe that under the State of Westminsister (correct me if I'm wrong), the Canadian parliament has the complete right to control the line of succession of the Canadian monarchy. Since the statute, however, we have maintained the line of succession as the House of Windsor, as have all the other realms of the commonwealth, for obvious reasons.

So if we wanted to, we could establish a "House of Harper" and have a non-foreign monarchy of our own. Now I am not one of the one who sees the Queen as foreign, I put that in to appease the republicans. But it would be 'cool' to have a 'local' Canadian aristocracy, if I may be so frivolous to say so  :

 

[IGA]

As someone who has never been in the military, I must say that I'm a little surprised at the strong pro monarchy feelings expressed. I can understand living up to your oath and the tradition of the monarchy in the CF. Amongst my group of friends and aquaintences the feeling is somewhat different. It is either not caring or strongly of the opinion of the Queen being foreign, and Canada should have our own head of state. I know technically the Queen is not foreign, but in all practical senses she is the Queen of the UK. Someone said Canada has never left the monarchy, but as the Queen of Britain you could say they have left us. The Commonwealth is more of a symbolic group  now. With Britain joining the EU there is no benifit in being in the commonwealth. In fact I beleive Germans and Italians have more rights in Britain than Canadian or Anzacs do. I've never had to take an oath to the Queen, nor would I. I agree with most of you that if you did take an oath  then you should honor it. And as far as I can see, he has. Things do change, maybe his and societies feelings toward the monarchy, and Britain are not as strong as they were when he joined.

 

[armyvern]

As someone who has never been in the military, I must say that I'm a little surprised at the strong pro monarchy feelings expressed. I can understand living up to your oath and the tradition of the monarchy in the CF. Amongst my group of friends and aquaintences the feeling is somewhat different. It is either not caring or strongly of the opinion of the Queen being foreign, and Canada should have our own head of state. I know technically the Queen is not foreign, but in all practical senses she is the Queen of the UK. Someone said Canada has never left the monarchy, but as the Queen of Britain you could say they have left us. The Commonwealth is more of a symbolic group  now. With Britain joining the EU there is no benifit in being in the commonwealth. In fact I beleive Germans and Italians have more rights in Britain than Canadian or Anzacs do. I've never had to take an oath to the Queen, nor would I. I agree with most of you that if you did take an oath  then you should honor it. And as far as I can see, he has. Things do change, maybe his and societies feelings toward the monarchy, and Britain are not as strong as they were when he joined.

Pro-Monarchy feelings??

Don't be so quick to assume that is the case.

There are a great many here who respect that Oath that we swore. Swearing that Oath is swearing to respect it. While in uniform -- it is one's duty to uphold it. It does not mean that one has to agree with it ... but they must uphold it. Insulting her publicly or her position is NOT upholding that Oath -- it is an act of insubordination. We are supposed to be more professional than that.

I've previously pointed out that "while She is recognized as Our Queen, and until Canada changes that, if ever" then She must be given the respect and loyalty due to Her by us.

Does that mean that I agree with the Monarchy? Does that mean that I am a loyalist? I certainly never said that. But, right now she is ... and I will uphold that Oath until the law of this land changes. It is a part of my Duty.

 

[Roy Harding]

IGA:

ArmyVern pretty much summed up my own feelings on the matter. 

Simply as a point of conversation, I'm a libertarian, and would argue that NO government body has any right to control of my person or property - whether that government is headed by a President or a Monarch. 

However - as a soldier I willingly and freely gave my allegiance to the state - which state, in this country, at this time, is embodied in the person of Her Majesty.  To not show the respect required by the laws and traditions of the institution which I freely joined would, I think, disqualify me from belonging to that institution. 

It's that simple.

 

[Kat Stevens]

So if we wanted to, we could establish a "House of Harper" and have a non-foreign monarchy of our own. Now I am not one of the one who sees the Queen as foreign, I put that in to appease the republicans. But it would be 'cool' to have a 'local' Canadian aristocracy, if I may be so frivolous to say so  :

Hey why not?  I hear Conrad Black will be looking for a new gig...... in 4-12 years....  >

 

[armyvern]

Hey why not?  I hear Conrad Black will be looking for a new gig...... in 4-12 years....   >

Does that mean that we have to give him back his Canadian citizenship that he revoked?  :-\

 

[Lumber]

Does that mean that we have to give him back his Canadian citizenship that he revoked?  :-\

It would be the Canadian thing to do.

 

[armyvern]

It would be the Canadian thing to do.

Can we start a poll?  >

 

[aesop081]

Can we start a poll?  >

Do you mean one of those internet polls where people who have zero knowledge on a subject offer their opinions ?

 

[Roy Harding]

Do you mean one of those internet polls where people who have zero knowledge on a subject offer their opinions ?

Yeah!! Like that!

We could give the Globe and Mail comments section a run for their money.

 

[Blackadder1916]

I believe that under the State of Westminsister (correct me if I'm wrong), the Canadian parliament has the complete right to control the line of succession of the Canadian monarchy. Since the statute, however, we have maintained the line of succession as the House of Windsor, as have all the other realms of the commonwealth, for obvious reasons.

The Statute of Westminister is listed in the Schedule to the Constitution Act, 1982.  Thus it is part of our constitution.

The preamble to the Statute of Westminister, 1931 states

And whereas it is meet and proper to set out by way of preamble to this Act that, inasmuch as the Crown is the symbol of the free association of the members of the British Commonwealth of Nations, and as they are united by a common allegiance to the Crown, it would be in accord with the established constitutional position of all the members of the Commonwealth in relation to one another that any alteration in the law touching the Succession to the Throne or the Royal Style and Titles shall hereafter require the assent as well of the Parliaments of all the Dominions as of the Parliament of the United Kingdom:

"the law touching the Succession to the Throne"  is the Act of Settlement, 1700.

Recital of Stat. 1 W. & M. Sess. 2. c. 2. §2. and that the late Queen and Duke of Gloucester are dead; and that His Majesty had recommended from the Throne a further Provision for the Succession of the Crown in the Protestant Line. The Princess Sophia, Electress and Duchess Dowager of Hanover, Daughter of the late Queen of Bohemia, Daughter of King James the First, to inherit after the King and the Princess Anne, in Default of Issue of the said Princess and His Majesty, respectively and the Heirs of her Body, being Protestants.

Therefore to change our Head of State or the order of succession to that office would require Canada to amend its constitution, which it could do without affecting the succession of any other commonwealth realm.  However, for the UK to amend the Act of Settlement, they would require approval from all the other realms affected by the Statute of Westminister if they wanted a uniform change of succession.

 

[aesop081]

would require Canada to amend its constitution,

And we all know how easy that is...........

 

[sean1]

In Australia like Canada the crowns are seperate with her Majesty known as Queen of Australia. Trying to explain to those who have no wish to understand and continually scream that she is foreign is also frustrating. We had a referendum on the subject of a republic which failed mainly due to republicans not being able to agree on a model  ;D As for this RMC officer if he feels so strongly hes free to resign his commission and seek a civillian career.

 

[Reccesoldier]

There are a great many here who respect that Oath that we swore. Swearing that Oath is swearing to respect it. While in uniform -- it is one's duty to uphold it. It does not mean that one has to agree with it ... but they must uphold it. Insulting her publicly or her position is NOT upholding that Oath -- it is an act of insubordination. We are supposed to be more professional than that.

Well said Vern.

Can we start a poll?

 

Only if "Let the pompous git rot in hell" is one of the choices.

 

[medaid]

I've never had to take an oath to the Queen, nor would I.

Would you like to give up your citizenship then? Although if you were naturalized citizen i.e. someone who was born in Canada, I can see why you have never sworn an oath to the Queen before. If you were like many of those in the Canadian public who were immigrants then you have sworn an oath to the Queen already. You have sword the Oat of Citizenship.

"I swear (or affirm) that I will be faithful
and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty
Queen Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Canada,
Her Heirs and Successors, and that I will faithfully
observe the laws of Canada and fulfil my duties as a
Canadian citizen."
- Canadian Oath of Citizenship

You will clearly see that in the oath, Her Majesty the Queen was clearly stated as the Queen of Canada.

I've always wondered why naturalized citizens never had to swear or affirm the Oath of Citizenship. Are their loyalties affirmed or sworn at birth? I don't think so. I still remember affirming an Oath of Allegiance when I was in Cadets. I guess times have changed?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

During the Tenure of our previous government, I was told that I had a sworn duty to the Minister, I told them that I had sworn an oath to Queen and country (several times I might add) and that took precedence over covering my Ministers butt, for some dumbass goof that he made.

 

[IGA]

MedTech, I've never had to swear an oath to the Queen. Born and raised and still live in Canada, too bad our head of state can't say the same thing. I understand the legal part of the  Queen not being foreign. In reality she is foreign, she doesn't live here and is a citizen of another country. Who does she think she is Stephan Dion. I  just think it is time for Canada to have our own head of state. I think the commonwealth is not relevant anymore. And I find it embarrassing when the Queen is representing Canada on the world stage like the opening of Olympics or world fairs  And I also agree with what Army Vern had to say . But like i said IMHO it would be better not to have to swear an oath to a foreign head of state.

 

[George Wallace]

............. Born and raised and still live in Canada, too bad our head of state can't say the same thing. I understand the legal part of the  Queen not being foreign. In reality she is foreign, she doesn't live here and is a citizen of another country. Who does she think she is Stephan Dion. I  just think it is time for Canada to have our own head of state. ...............

So?  What do you think of a Prime Minister or a Member of Parliament not being born in Canada?  Wouldn't that be the same thing?  "A Foreigner" making all of those political decisions for you in Ottawa, must really rile you up.    >