PoliticalCitizen

All right, here's what the new government might look like: 1. Proportionally elected Parliament; 2. PM elected by the Parliament; 3. President elected directly by the voters; 4. Senate with certain number of seats per Province or Territory, with Senators elected by the corresponding Provinces or Territories.

Yes, you're right about the budget. What was it again? 35 Mil in 2002? What about 2009? 50 Mil? That's a hell of a lot of traveling... did a traveling circus accompany her? The website is interesting... Her Exellency? Black woman and a refugee from French-speaking Haiti? What exactly is her relationship to the queen? The whole thing seems ridiculous...

Thank you.

A different, costly, irrelevant and unnecessary, office. Yes.

I was kidding. What was GG's budget? How did she spend it? Why do we need her - another UNELECTED official?

So you DO agree. Maybe monarchy defenders aren't as selectively blind as they come across. Well thank you. I can't, however, say that most of what you're posting originates in the brain

I can't convince you - you appear to have a better understanding of the details involved. You're right - my argument is mostly emotional

So the FACT that the queen is not elected and her right to the throne is by virtue of birth is FALSE? Did I get it right?

No more than your are inglish

Not for long, however. What then - print new money with the face of another foreigner of the same bloodline?

... who elected her. Right?

Great then, if she ever gets fired as a queen we can have her here as a librarian.

People ruled by the people (not a monarch) are not subservient to anyone. Law is established by the people to be observed, authority is ELECTED by the people to SERVE THEM. On another note: Do you think the British Monarchy will survive even in UK? As a tourist attraction, maybe?

Oh trust me, I know my rights

You do NOT have the right to the throne, she has it by virtue of birth or god's will (both equally insulting).

Not true. Some have gone further in separating the church and state than others.

But not Socialism

On one hand: The statue of Liberty.... We, the People... On the other hand: Her Magesty... The Crown... The symbolism is undeniable.

No progressive society would keep symbols of subservience and inequality alive and dear. The chains have fallen long ago, but you're not free until you've freed your mind...

Can you travel without a passport or reside and benefit from social services in a country where you have no citizenship?

Do you have the same rights as the queen?

Please, refrain from personal attacks and stick to the substance. Yes, your historical comments appear to be correct, but that doesn't negate my point - monarchy is archaic, just as feudalism is. Having monarchy in a democratic society is like having a mumified horse that was once (long, very long ago) pulling the carriage attached to the hood of a hybrid car.

Well unfortunately the queen doens't share the same enthusiasm about being "Canadian"... just take a second look at the British Monarchy website... What, in your opinion, makes her "Canadian"?

I meant equality of rights.

Monarchy and Feudalism go hand in hand, the exceptions you quoted just reinforce the rule.