The British Royalty: How come this never seems to come up in Federal e

[Dave_ON]

Yes, because that would be a valid reason and would have so much to do with the power entrusted to the POTUS as Commander in Chief - and/or anything else. :rolleyes:

There is a requirement that the PM be a Canadian citizen. Do you see that as discrimination against all the residents of Canada who aren't citizens? Or do you see that as a reasonable job requirement?

Clearly we'll never agree on the definition of discrimination, I would posit that anything you cannot control, ie. your place of birth is discrimination. I'm not saying there aren't valid reasons for this discriminatation but let's call a spade a spade.

You have opinions about the Monarchy and I get that and you're more than entitled to them. But if you are trying to convince Canadians that they should get rid of the monarchy based on an American frame of reference you may as well give up now, it's not going to work. Not wanting to be Americans was precisely the reason our country was founded, we saw manifest destiny and didn't like it in the least.

Calling the monarchy discriminatory is a ridiculous argument, no one has ever claimed it has been otherwise. If we are to get rid of the Monarchy with what shall we replace it precisely? This is an earnest question. Based on OUR system, not a presidential republic, what HONEST suggestions do YOU have given the role of our head of state? What would you be able to live with in head of state selection?

[RNG]

I have been following this discussion for many days now. I guess I have decided to add my two cents worth. I like the monarchy for this reason. In the US, as an example of a republic. When you criticize the president, you are defacto criticizing your country. As they are HMFIC and symbol of it.

We can criticize Harper but the Queen is the symbol, so we are not criticizing the country when we do that.

And an elected president or whatever still has political overtones to it that I don't like.

As long as we maintain a powerless symbol, and it doesn't cost too much, I'm all for it.

[bush_cheney2004]

...We can criticize Harper but the Queen is the symbol, so we are not criticizing the country when we do that.

Others don't agree with that...in Ireland, protesters beheaded the Queen in effigy last month, and in Pakistan, they burned her in effigy because of Salmon Rushdie's knighthood back in 2007. She's a symbol allright!

[RNG]

Others don't agree with that...in Ireland, protesters beheaded the Queen in effigy last month, and in Pakistan, they burned her in effigy because of Salmon Rushdie's knighthood back in 2007. She's a symbol allright!

I guess the IRA and Paki Muslims don't really impact on me that much.

[bush_cheney2004]

I guess the IRA and Paki Muslims don't really impact on me that much.

OK...but the point is that the reigning "monarch" does attract a lot of attention that way around the world. She is not insulated from the usual protests and demonstrations because of her office, she is "burned" because of her office.

[RNG]

OK...but the point is that the reigning "monarch" does attract a lot of attention that way around the world. She is not insulated from the usual protests and demonstrations because of her office, she is "burned" because of her office.

Both Ireland and Pakistan were repressed by the British. That is the downside of being the symbol. She didn't do it, but she, and with justification IMO, gets the flak. But the Canadian experience is, I will stick my neck out and say all good. A bunch of FLQ types will probably disagree, but they are criminals that totally escaped justice.

[Shwa]

American explorers do not get to name provinces, but they are allowed to name their boats.

So you admit you are wrong then. Good. Not for everyone ele's sake, but for your own self-awareness.

[bush_cheney2004]

So you admit you are wrong then. Good. Not for everyone ele's sake, but for your own self-awareness.

It is far more satisfying to be right about Queen Victoria than your diversion to the name of a man's boat. If recognizing Columbus in such a permanent way is good enough for your reigning monarch, it is good enough for an American holiday.

[jbg]

The requirement that our president be US born is in relation to allegiance to the nation, not to a figure head - a figure representing a religion.

I think that is the reason that the "born in the U.S.A." requirement has never been dropped by amendment; I think the original motive was to keep certain particular sympathizers with the British, and certain "loose cannons" such as Alexander Hamilton out of the Presidency.

[Shwa]

It is far more satisfying to be right about Queen Victoria than your diversion to the name of a man's boat. If recognizing Columbus in such a permanent way is good enough for your reigning monarch, it is good enough for an American holiday.

Queen Victoria only recognized the name of the district which was named after the river. There is no reason to assume that she recognized Columbus in her acquiescence to the name. The same cannot be said for the American captain who named the river after he "discovered" it.

[bush_cheney2004]

Queen Victoria only recognized the name of the district which was named after the river.

So if the river was named Big Turd Creek, then British Columbia's name would have followed that line of thought?

There is no reason to assume that she recognized Columbus in her acquiescence to the name.

I want to assume that Queen Victoria was somewhat educated for her day and fully understood the significance of the reference.

The same cannot be said for the American captain who named the river after he "discovered" it.

Following the American lead on such things hasn't changed much in Canada!

[Shwa]

So if the river was named Big Turd Creek, then British Columbia's name would have followed that line of thought?

If it was in some exotic Cree or Assiniboine dialect, sure. I mean, 'Saskatchewan.'

I want to assume that Queen Victoria was somewhat educated for her day and fully understood the significance of the reference.

She likely knew of the reference, but didn't name BC because of it. Same can't be said for the American on a boat named because of it.

Following the American lead on such things hasn't changed much in Canada!

Just as the American following the Indian leads on things hasn't changed much in America. Except for the Columbus thing.

[bush_cheney2004]

If it was in some exotic Cree or Assiniboine dialect, sure. I mean, 'Saskatchewan.'

It's not exotic....just another language / dialect.

She likely knew of the reference, but didn't name BC because of it. Same can't be said for the American on a boat named because of it.

No matter, she knew that she was making a permanent reference to Columbia and the etymology of that word is plain to see, i.e. another British stake in the "Land of Columbus".

Just as the American following the Indian leads on things hasn't changed much in America. Except for the Columbus thing.

The Americans have long embraced "Indian" names for such things. There are more Native American languages and names than in Canada. They are....American.

Edited May 20, 2011 by bush_cheney2004

[Shwa]

It's not exotic....just another language / dialect.

To her, they would have been exotic.

No matter, she knew that she was making a permanent reference to Columbia and the etymology of that word is plain to see, i.e. another British stake in the "Land of Columbus".

It likely meant very little, like Saskatchewan. Quaint notion and not entrenched - right or wrong - in British national mythology.

The Americans have long embraced "Indian" names for such things. There are more Native American languages and names than in Canada. They are....American.

Except for the Columbus thing. Which is also "American."

[bush_cheney2004]

To her, they would have been exotic.

Maybe...I hear that Catherine the Great fancied horses.

It likely meant very little, like Saskatchewan. Quaint notion and not entrenched - right or wrong - in British national mythology.

If you say so...maybe it was just a busy day in the palace.

Except for the Columbus thing. Which is also "American."

As it should be....the Americas is a very big place.

[Shwa]

Maybe...I hear that Catherine the Great fancied horses.

Victoria fancied Albert and that was pretty much it.

If you say so...maybe it was just a busy day in the palace.

No, likely it had no significance outside of colonial quaint.

As it should be....the Americas is a very big place.

The Tropic of Cancer is bigger.

[Wilber]

On May 12, 1792, Gray returned south and crossed the Columbia Bar, becoming the first explorer to enter the river. Gray's fur trading mission had been financed by Boston merchants, who outfitted him with a private vessel named Columbia Rediviva; he named the river after the ship on May 18.

The province's name was chosen by Queen Victoria when the Colony of British Columbia, i.e. "the Mainland", became a British colony in 1858.[4] It refers to the Columbia District, the British name for the territory drained by the Columbia River, which has its origins and upper reaches in southeastern British Columbia, which was the namesake of the pre-Oregon Treaty Columbia Department of the Hudson's Bay Company. Queen Victoria chose British Columbia to distinguish what was the British sector of the Columbia District from that of the United States ("American Columbia" or "Southern Columbia"), which became the Oregon Territory in 1848 as a result of the treaty.

Wiki

[bush_cheney2004]

Wiki

yep...sounds about right. That's a much better story/reason than naming it after a Yankee explorer's boat.

[Dave_ON]

AW if you're still following this thread I'm honestly interested on your thoughts. Here's the link as it has since been lost to thread drift.

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=18913&view=findpost&p=673765

[Guest American Woman]

AW if you're still following this thread I'm honestly interested on your thoughts. Here's the link as it has since been lost to thread drift.

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=18913&view=findpost&p=673765

Thanks. I'll get back to you -- it's beautiful out so I've been busy doing yard work, buying flowers, planting, etc. The nice weather should turn to rain soon though, since the weekend's coming up......

[Wilber]

yep...sounds about right. That's a much better story/reason than naming it after a Yankee explorer's boat.

I guess it kind of was, indirectly.

[Sandy MacNab]

Then this should be easy. What benefit is brought by removing it?

Good question! The answer - "Absolutely none" In fact, removal of the constitutional monarchy would be the last gutting of our traditions and national symbols. Since I was a kid, multiculturalism, political correctness and at least 3 PMs from Quebec (Trudeau, Muldoon, Chretch) have just about destroyed what I used to know and love about Canada.

[Smallc]

Well that's equally as silly. Canada has always been all of the things that you claim are destroying Canada. Sorry to burst your bubble.

[g_bambino]

In fact, removal of the constitutional monarchy would be the last gutting of our traditions and national symbols.

The monarchy haters in Canada will say the Crown isn't one of our traditions and symbols; it (and the monarch that heads it) is foreign and imposed upon us and, hence, needs to be sloughed off post haste. Only things that sprang fresh from the soil of Canada are Canadian; the national flag, hockey, voyageurs, Tim Horton's (sorry, Hortons)... Except, oddly, for quite a few traditions with roots that lie elsewhere, such as anything imported from France, the English language, the military, and, stragnest of all, the "royal" in Royal Canadian Mounted Police. In other words: the "the monarchy isn't Canadian" argument is a sham meant only to make it seem as though supporting the Crown is un-Canadian. But republicans will try, with a straight face, to have you believe it.

[Sandy MacNab]

Well that's equally as silly. Canada has always been all of the things that you claim are destroying Canada. Sorry to burst your bubble.

You don't know what you're talking about. Multiculturalism and political correctness have turned Canada into a bland, colourless blob of cultural library paste. And No, I'm not going to explain it to you.