Are you saying we shouldn't toast or that the toast shouldn't be omitted?Hylander_ca said:Just want to see where our loyalties are.....I personally think that we shouldn't.
:mg:
CE621 said:Way she goes,time for Canada to grow up and stand up on her own,we earned it.While erosion of military traditions is appalling to me,I believe this to be evolution and helps give Canada the full respect she deserves.
To say that keeping a foreign monarch will somehow make us more Canadian and less American is convoluted thinking......like fucking for virginity.The crown is part of our history and that`s where it belongs.
Should the toast to the Queen be omitted from Mess Dinner's
Cardstonkid said:The average Canadian has little or no use for the Monarchy. Swearing an oath to the queen and her heirs is a debasing of what a personal oath is. (i.e. a personal oath is a commitment of loyalty that gives one no choice but to serve the interests of the individual the oath was made to. Since the Queen nol onger rules or pays wages she is now only a symbol and metaphor of the "law;" she is no longer really a candidate for a personal oath.)
a_majoor said:Although HM happens to live out of the country, she is in title and in fact the Queen of Canada. As a Sovereign person things like nationality don't apply.
An oath to the Queen also stresses the apolitical nature of the Armed Forces. We are not swearing oaths or pledging allegiance to a political figure but to an enduring embodiment of the State who stands outside of the political realm. In the United States the military swears their oath to the Constitution for many of the same reasons.
Cardstonkid said:This is a valid point and should not be dismissed lightly. The quibble I have is that the symbol of the Monarchy is devolved on par with the Beaver, and the maple leaf. They are national symbols that give us a rally point and tradition but the question is do we not debase the value of a toast or an oath if it is to a real person that only has value as a symbol? Wouldn't it be better to swear an oath to uphold the Canadian Constitution rather than to proclaim our allegiance to the Queen and her heirs? It would make more sense and it would sharpen the value and intent of the oath. We could still keep the monarchy and most of the traditions associated with it.
This is purely because the Average Canadian is disgustingly ignorant about this Nation's history and the Crown's place within it.Cardstonkid said:The average Canadian has little or no use for the Monarchy.
Loachman said:This is purely because the Average Canadian is disgustingly ignorant about this Nation's history and the Crown's place within it.I refuse to be reduced to their level.
Kat Stevens said:You're bang on, bossi. The bleeding hearts and artistes are firmly in the drivers seat.... SHARP and Son of SHARP were just the beginning. The army is now a giant petrie dish for social engineering experiments.
GreyMatter said:Back to the Queen. Want to toast her at dinner? No problem. Want to prize our English heritage? Great. But I swore my loyalty to my country, not the representative of a somebody else's country. The age of colonialism is over.
GreyMatter said:Back to the Queen. Want to toast her at dinner? No problem. Want to prize our English heritage? Great. But I swore my loyalty to my country, not the representative of a somebody else's country. The age of colonialism is over.
GreyMatter said:But what purpose do they serve other than as a showpiece?
GreyMatter said:Yes, we have been independent for some time now, but not truly independent until 1982.