Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Nothing you stated in your post would have to change under a parliamentary republic, as a matter of fact nothing you said would counter any argument that Canada is actually a DE-FACTO parliamentary republic. The Queen's role at this point in our history is purely symbolic...we're a monarchy in name only.
Canada has always been a monarchy, and I sure don't see any monarchists complaining and trying to stir up trouble about it being the way it is. It would seem to me that the real shriekers here are the anti-monarchists who don't like Canada the way it is and are agitating to change it to a republic.
As has been said before, why change something that isn't broken? If anti-monarchists are so unhappy with it perhaps they should consider changing themselves instead of trying to change a whole country and move themselves to another country that is already a republic. And don't let the door hit them in the backside on the way out, there will be plenty of newcomers happy to hold the door for the malcontents exiting so the newcomers can enter and take their place within our Canadian monarchy.
Last edited by sunshineleith; 02-04-2012 at 02:30 AM..
Reason: removed off topic/orphaned material
The monarchists make very valid points about a non-political head of state. Can you imagine in your wildest dreams a premier of a province in Canada waving their finger in the face of the Queen telling her she has one more year. That is exactly what the moron divisive gov of AZ did to Obama. I'm no fan of Obama, but that is just downright disrespectful. Last time I checked Obama was the head of state. That does not seem to matter to the extremists that now own the GOP. Their actions totally diminish the office of president. A monarchy is looking very good right about now. United Empire Loyalists!!!
If it ain't broke don't fix it.
Last edited by sunshineleith; 02-04-2012 at 02:31 AM..
Reason: Removed off topic/orphaned material
I'm not Canadian, but I'm surprised by the number of votes FOR the monarchy.
In retrospect - this is the one time I would have liked to have seen a poll that was not anonymous. It would have been interesting to know who voted in the poll just to see who was Canadian and who was not Canadian. I suspect there may have been some who voted for a republic who were not Canadian citizens.
In retrospect - this is the one time I would have liked to have seen a poll that was not anonymous. It would have been interesting to know who voted in the poll just to see who was Canadian and who was not Canadian. I suspect there may have been some who voted for a republic who were not Canadian citizens.
.
You may be right about the origins of the voters here, but this makes it sound like if it was all Canadians that the results would be unanimously in favour of the monarchy.
This is certainly not the case. Canadians when asked about the monarchy are pretty divided on the issue, with support variable depending on the region of the country and demographic factors.
I personally have no vested interest in a continued monarchy, but it's not mine to remove. It goes against my principles that any 'Crown', whatever symbolism you place upon it, should be inherited and that that in-of-itself commands our respect and gratitude, hooray for the Crown in such a removed figurehead. Someone mentioned Crown lands as though they were a national treasure but only a century ago they were the exclusive rights of the royal family, not held in trust for the people. Times have changed and the narratives shift to support the tastes but I find the institution parasitic, dressed up as national and benevolent. Neither do I need a defender of the faith, especially if that faith is Anglican, the separation of Church and State is an American (Enlightenment) principle I do quite admire, even if we muck it up so often, one that has spread. I'd sooner spend their (the royal family's) national salary and wealth to educate 6 000 more children in isolated First Nations communities. To me the monarchy is outdated, undemocratic, unprincipled, unnecessary. God save me from the Queen.
Last edited by sunshineleith; 02-04-2012 at 02:37 AM..
Reason: Removed threadjack/off topic/orphaned material
I personally have no vested interest in a continued monarchy, but it's not mine to remove. It goes against my principles that any 'Crown', whatever symbolism you place upon it, should be inherited and that that in-of-itself commands our respect and gratitude, hooray for the Crown in such a removed figurehead. Someone mentioned Crown lands as though they were a national treasure but only a century ago they were the exclusive rights of the royal family, not held in trust for the people. Times have changed and the narratives shift to support the tastes but I find the institution parasitic, dressed up as national and benevolent. Neither do I need a defender of the faith, especially if that faith is Anglican, the separation of Church and State is an American (Enlightenment) principle I do quite admire, even if we muck it up so often, one that has spread. I'd sooner spend their (the royal family's) national salary and wealth to educate 6 000 more children in isolated First Nations communities. To me the monarchy is outdated, undemocratic, unprincipled, unnecessary. God save me from the Queen.
As far as monarchy I disagree with your assesment. The PM is a politician and regarded as such by the people. The Queen is the head of state and is a figure of national unity and is respected as such. Heck I heard that the repubican movement in Australia is all but dead now. They realize they have a system that works like in Canada. Why fool with it.
Moderator:snip
Last edited by sunshineleith; 02-04-2012 at 02:39 AM..
Reason: Removed threadjack/off topic/orphaned material
For some reason I'm pretty sure that in Aus, Canada and the UK their politics are not this divisive and hateful. You sure it is not their political system with the monarchy being apolitical?
Westminster-style parliament, mostly. And more parties providing more choice among voters, unlike the two party "duopoly" system--if you don't mind the expression--which may be behind a lot of the divisiveness in the USA.
I still think none of this would change if we became a republic, although I do see the merit of having an apolitical head of state, basically what we have now...I just want to get rid of the Queen and her heirs.
Westminster-style parliament, mostly. And more parties providing more choice among voters, unlike the two party "duopoly" system--if you don't mind the expression--which may be behind a lot of the divisiveness in the USA.
I still think none of this would change if we became a republic, although I do see the merit of having an apolitical head of state, basically what we have now...I just want to get rid of the Queen and her heirs.
Get rid of the Queen and move to a presidential system while keeping the Westminster system ?
Now one thing about PMs, they hate the idea of any president being elected by popular vote which of course would give any him/her moral power, so any Canadian PM would give the people the choice of the Royal status quo or having a president selected by parliament which Howard gave the Aussie voters a choice of.
Could we have a republic without changing our parliamentary system? That is, not acknowledge the royals, but keep the governor general and all other aspects of parliament without having to adopt a continental form of government? I don't really care for the whole royalty business but I'm not so opposed to it I'm willing to fight those who do care about them, and definitely not so opposed I think we should radically alter the ways our federal and provincial governments operate. I think it's only really logical to make some minor change and otherwise preserve our system as it is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PostSecularist
It's quite possible. Have both a Prime Minister which runs the government in Parliament and a President who is the head of state. The Governor General position would convert into a Presidential position if the Monarchy is abolished.
Sure, you could convert to a republic without changing anything except the head of state. In that case, the Governor-General would be replaced by a President, who wouldn't really have any power. You could also still remain part of the Commonwealth, as countries like India have done.
There seems to have been some confusion over what this thread is about. Here's a reminder:
Canadian Monarchy or Republic?
Some of my Canadians friends have been talking about forming a Republic once Queen Elizabeth II passes on. Do Canadians think that'll happen?
The question was directed at Canadians. Despite this, as always, Amercians and other nationalities will inevitably participate. That's fine. As long as you stay on topic. American politics, the deep South, Obama . . . not. Minor comparisons to other countries and their monarchy/political systems are not a concern, but when the entire thread gets derailed because of it, it rather defeats the purpose of having a Canada forum. And gives me a lot of editing I would rather not do to get it back on track.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
not. Minor comparisons to other countries and their monarchy/political systems are not a concern, but when the entire thread gets derailed because of it, it rather defeats the purpose of having a Canada forum. And gives me a lot of editing I would rather not do to get it back on track. 
