Canada is the Freest Nation in the World, Legatum Study Says (how much, party)
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.
Good point. How can someone be free when they can`t gather enough fire power to shoot 80 people at a movie theater?
or shoot at people attempting to break into my home? after all, when you have nobody armed in the movie theater except for the dranged individual, what else can you expect in a gun free zone, also know as a criminal haven.
Ill see your poo-pooing real events that actually happened and raise you a:
I'm just stating facts, you can't go burning a cross in someone's front yard. LOL Your freedom of speech does not extend to trampling all over the rights of others. That's besides the fact burning anything in someones front yard is going to get you arrested.
That has nothing to do with freedom of speech but privacy. These programs are important for the security of this nation, there is acceptable amount of intrusion into that privacy if you expect these programs are to be successful. Clearly the government has crossed that line.
I saw an interview with Michael Hayden the former head of the NSA. He made an excellent point, to paraphrase him when a 9/11 occurs people are going to be pointing their fingers at the government asking why they couldn't prevent this and to do more, it's only when they find out what more is the complaints start rolling in.
Sorry, you are thinking of something totally different. The so-called "sovereign citizen movement" is something unrelated that got started by a group of paranoid dissident American extremists who don't actually know what a sovereign citizen is in reality. They are people who believe they are slaves who have absolutely no freedoms in America.
.
In that case, you are mistaken. I have two family members who recently became canadian citizens. They had to vow allegiance to Her Majesty the Queen Elizabeth. You can look up the canadian pledge of allegiance.
I believe you meant to say "commonwealth citizen" instead of "sovereign citizen". The term commonwealth citizen has replaced the term "british subject".
To become a commonwealth citizen (including a canadian citizen), you are required to pledge allegiance to the Queen and her family. Not to the country you're in.
In that case, you are mistaken. I have two family members who recently became canadian citizens. They had to vow allegiance to Her Majesty the Queen Elizabeth. You can look up the canadian pledge of allegiance.
Correction: "oath of citizenship." Canada has no pledge of allegiance.
Quote:
I believe you meant to say "commonwealth citizen" instead of "sovereign citizen". The term commonwealth citizen has replaced the term "british subject".
To become a commonwealth citizen (including a canadian citizen), you are required to pledge allegiance to the Queen and her family. Not to the country you're in.
No such thing as a "commonwealth citizen," except perhaps in colloquial usage (e.g. "The Commonwealth Games are a chance for all Commonwealth citizens to come together to compete in sports."). At any rate, the term certainly has no legal meaning. People in Commonwealth countries are normally referred to as Canadian citizens, Australian citizens, etc., according to the country where they hold citizenship.
Note especially that being a citizen of one Commonwealth country gives you no rights in any other Commonwealth country, as the phrase "Commonwealth citizen" might imply. Just like Americans, Italians, and Vietnamese, among others; Canadians require a visa to visit Australia, they must apply through normal Australian methods and channels to move or work there, and so on. This is why the term has no legal meaning--because it confers no rights or privileges between citizens of Commonwealth countries. Or, to make this concept clearer, it "confers no rights or privileges between citizens of independent countries that happen to be part of the Commonwealth."
Constitutionally-speaking, the Oath of Citizenship does require the taker to swear an oath to Canada; in the sense that the Queen is constitutionally-regarded as Queen of Canada. I should point out that, for all of Canada's purposes where the Queen is involved, she does not act as Queen of the UK, of England, or the Commonwealth, or anyplace that is not Canada. As Head of State of Canada, she will only take advice from Canada.
Canadians have not been British subjects since the Canadian parliament passed Canada's Citizenship Act in 1947.
Canada's oath of citizenship...... I swear (or affirm) that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, queen of Canada, her heirs and successors, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada and fulfill my duties as a Canadian citizen.
Tell you what. When you become a Canadian citizen, and have studied Canadian history and law, you might be able to tell me something. Until then, you are simply a foreigner commenting (incorrectly, and on incorrect assumptions) on Canadian traditions and law. I've studied both, and I can assure you that you are wrong.
My credentials have been established in the Canada threads, and Canadian posters have continually supported my findings.
Do you really want to get into a debate with me on Canadian constitutional law? Do you really?
Tell you what. When you become a Canadian citizen, and have studied Canadian history and law, you might be able to tell me something. Until then, you are simply a foreigner commenting (incorrectly, and on incorrect assumptions) on Canadian traditions and law. I've studied both, and I can assure you that you are wrong.
My credentials have been established in the Canada threads, and Canadian posters have continually supported my findings.
Do you really want to get into a debate with me on Canadian constitutional law? Do you really?
I know this might be a touchy subject for you but there is no need for all these emotions. You said there was no such thing as a commonwealth citizen, as a matter of fact there is. Your credentials have not been established at all. A poster quoted the oath of citizenship, it is clear now for all that the allegiance is to the royal first. Sorry to tell you that but once you pledge allegiance to a qeen/king, they become your ruler and you their subject. This is just how it is. If you do not want to be a subject, live in a republic.
Correction: "oath of citizenship." Canada has no pledge of allegiance.
No such thing as a "commonwealth citizen," except perhaps in colloquial usage (e.g. "The Commonwealth Games are a chance for all Commonwealth citizens to come together to compete in sports."). At any rate, the term certainly has no legal meaning. People in Commonwealth countries are normally referred to as Canadian citizens, Australian citizens, etc., according to the country where they hold citizenship.
Note especially that being a citizen of one Commonwealth country gives you no rights in any other Commonwealth country, as the phrase "Commonwealth citizen" might imply. Just like Americans, Italians, and Vietnamese, among others; Canadians require a visa to visit Australia, they must apply through normal Australian methods and channels to move or work there, and so on. This is why the term has no legal meaning--because it confers no rights or privileges between citizens of Commonwealth countries. Or, to make this concept clearer, it "confers no rights or privileges between citizens of independent countries that happen to be part of the Commonwealth."
Constitutionally-speaking, the Oath of Citizenship does require the taker to swear an oath to Canada; in the sense that the Queen is constitutionally-regarded as Queen of Canada. I should point out that, for all of Canada's purposes where the Queen is involved, she does not act as Queen of the UK, of England, or the Commonwealth, or anyplace that is not Canada. As Head of State of Canada, she will only take advice from Canada.
Canadians have not been British subjects since the Canadian parliament passed Canada's Citizenship Act in 1947.
Man, I wish we did have something like that available.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorel36
I know this might be a touchy subject for you but there is no need for all these emotions. You said there was no such thing as a commonwealth citizen, as a matter of fact there is. Your credentials have not been established at all. A poster quoted the oath of citizenship, it is clear now for all that the allegiance is to the royal first. Sorry to tell you that but once you pledge allegiance to a qeen/king, they become your ruler and you their subject. This is just how it is. If you do not want to be a subject, live in a republic.
You might have missed the part of your link which states, it's not used in Australia or Canada.
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.
