The Relevance of the Queen in CF
- Thread starter Pikache
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 110
In my humble opinion,
The Queen isvery much a relevant part of the Canadian Forces and all Canadians.
She represents our history and the finest traditions of our military. Without our past, we have no grounding - no point of reference. Without that, we exist only in today.
The Queen is a symbol we serve - something larger than ourselves - larger than our country even. She symbolizes centuries of shared history throughout the Commonwealth.
It is important to me that we do not serve a President or a Prime Minister. We serve a symbol - something relatively untarnished by the sometimes distasteful nature of politics.
To the Queen !
The Queen isvery much a relevant part of the Canadian Forces and all Canadians.
She represents our history and the finest traditions of our military. Without our past, we have no grounding - no point of reference. Without that, we exist only in today.
The Queen is a symbol we serve - something larger than ourselves - larger than our country even. She symbolizes centuries of shared history throughout the Commonwealth.
It is important to me that we do not serve a President or a Prime Minister. We serve a symbol - something relatively untarnished by the sometimes distasteful nature of politics.
To the Queen !
N
nbk
Guest
Right on I‘d fight for a chick any day.
- Reaction score
- 11,244
- Points
- 1,160
Personally it‘s hard for me to get worked up about "THE QUEEN!". I know shes a symbol and represents traditions and when your new to the army it‘s something used to inspire awe but after a while it starts to lose significance. When you can rhyme off the top of your head countless times how the army screws you over or even just screws up and nothing is done about it you begin to have a tarnished opinion. I know thats a bad thing to say but it‘s also realistic. It‘s like when your growing up and you realise for the first time that your father isn‘t perfect. Yes i know the queen doesnt have a direct effect on what the army does or what happens to you but like i said, when things in your immediate surroundings are crappy and all you hear is negitive things from people it‘s hard to feel like you belong to this great institution. The army won‘t pay for laser eye surgery but they will pay for a sex change? I think if the army cleaned up it‘s act and got it‘s stuff squared away the queen and all our noble traditions would take on a more heartfelt meaning.
"It is important to me that we do not serve a President or a Prime Minister. We serve a symbol - something relatively untarnished by the sometimes distasteful nature of politics."
We do serve a prime minister though. The queen doesn‘t make any decisions regarding us (does she? i could be wrong??). The canadian government tells us where to go and what to do.
If you think the queen/royal family is untarnished by politics you should read some UK news papers. They are the main story more often then not in the tabloids every week. (In britian of course)
"It is important to me that we do not serve a President or a Prime Minister. We serve a symbol - something relatively untarnished by the sometimes distasteful nature of politics."
We do serve a prime minister though. The queen doesn‘t make any decisions regarding us (does she? i could be wrong??). The canadian government tells us where to go and what to do.
If you think the queen/royal family is untarnished by politics you should read some UK news papers. They are the main story more often then not in the tabloids every week. (In britian of course)
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 110
Ghost,
Yes, we do serve the PM - but symbolically we serve the Queen. I was referring to the importance of the symbol. PMs come and go - the Queen/King is forever.
As for scandals. Yes, the royal family is at the heart of come scandals - but if you read the British press, you‘ll notice that the Queen herself is quite sacred. We serve the Queen and NOT the royal family.
Gabriel
Yes, we do serve the PM - but symbolically we serve the Queen. I was referring to the importance of the symbol. PMs come and go - the Queen/King is forever.
As for scandals. Yes, the royal family is at the heart of come scandals - but if you read the British press, you‘ll notice that the Queen herself is quite sacred. We serve the Queen and NOT the royal family.
Gabriel
- Reaction score
- 11,244
- Points
- 1,160
At every turn the CF seems to do away with more and more traditions. I remember the navy had to get rid of certian quotes or toasts because someone didn‘t think they were PC. The only thing left of the airborne regiment is the memory of it, of which some of that memory is in pictures. (Well theres the jump companies but i mean the actual regiment)
The JRs mess in petawawa has (or had?) a bunch of pictures of the airborne regiment and it‘s members. People have or have been trying to get them taken down because it didn‘t make them feel comfortable. I‘ve heard mention that the tradition of paying for a round of beer for everyone in your mess when your promoted (or buying your way out) might be shut down because it (in someones mind) a. pressures people to drink b. pressures people to pay for beer when they need the money and c. pursuades under age soldiers to drink. Theres countless other little traditions that slowly over time are being weeded out of the system.
I don‘t feel that the queen is an important symbol in the canadian army anymore, thats just my opinion. I understand that other people disagree, great. The point i ment to make is that the symbol of a professional military with high moral is just as important, if not more so, as holding the queen in high regard.
Having soldiers who can rhyme off the queens birthday and her connections with canada but can‘t stand their job and count the days until their contract is up isn‘t a good trade off. Hope i‘m not going way off course with this though.
The JRs mess in petawawa has (or had?) a bunch of pictures of the airborne regiment and it‘s members. People have or have been trying to get them taken down because it didn‘t make them feel comfortable. I‘ve heard mention that the tradition of paying for a round of beer for everyone in your mess when your promoted (or buying your way out) might be shut down because it (in someones mind) a. pressures people to drink b. pressures people to pay for beer when they need the money and c. pursuades under age soldiers to drink. Theres countless other little traditions that slowly over time are being weeded out of the system.
I don‘t feel that the queen is an important symbol in the canadian army anymore, thats just my opinion. I understand that other people disagree, great. The point i ment to make is that the symbol of a professional military with high moral is just as important, if not more so, as holding the queen in high regard.
Having soldiers who can rhyme off the queens birthday and her connections with canada but can‘t stand their job and count the days until their contract is up isn‘t a good trade off. Hope i‘m not going way off course with this though.
Michael Dorosh
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Traditions come and go though - always have, always will. A private in university getting promoted and having to pay for beer for 100 other soldiers can represent a true hardship. I would think if it was a close knit unit, the other soldiers would understand, and not make a point of insisting on their comrade being made to do that. If it was the soldier‘s section only, perhaps. Other young corporals flush with cash should go all out if they feel like celebrating.
There is a very real line at which tradition and hazing is drawn; it has nothing to do with being PC, it comes down to the kind of Army you want to serve in. The Army has to reflect the values of society - I would argue we‘re supposed to be better than Joe Civvie, that extends to how we treat each other, in uniform or out.
Used to be you could disparage blacks, women and ethnics because that‘s just the way it was. I don‘t think anyone here is sorry those days are gone.
Other traditions tend to spring up just as quickly - once you‘ve done something two years running, you‘ve suddenly got a tradition on your hands, right? This is nothing new, and nothing to be alarmed about.
Used to be that if you could say Thank You after downing the morning rum ration, you got a "door prize" - a second tot. Well, we don‘t have rum rations anymore. But you know, we do have regimental coins and all the traditions that go with them. Some go, new ones come in.
As for HM Queen Elizabeth II - she‘s the Colonel In Chief of my regiment (among others), so we certainly feel a fondness for her - but aside from presenting our new Queen‘s Colour a dozen years ago, I don‘t think we even get a Christmas card from Buckingham Palace. The honoraries do go to report to Her relatively frequently, and I am sure she passes her well wishes on to the officers and men, but we don‘t hear much about it.
I feel more allegiance to the Second World War vets still alive - they made a name for my regiment that we still feel obligated to live up to. I think that is where the real tradition lies, at least for many of us.
There is a very real line at which tradition and hazing is drawn; it has nothing to do with being PC, it comes down to the kind of Army you want to serve in. The Army has to reflect the values of society - I would argue we‘re supposed to be better than Joe Civvie, that extends to how we treat each other, in uniform or out.
Used to be you could disparage blacks, women and ethnics because that‘s just the way it was. I don‘t think anyone here is sorry those days are gone.
Other traditions tend to spring up just as quickly - once you‘ve done something two years running, you‘ve suddenly got a tradition on your hands, right? This is nothing new, and nothing to be alarmed about.
Used to be that if you could say Thank You after downing the morning rum ration, you got a "door prize" - a second tot. Well, we don‘t have rum rations anymore. But you know, we do have regimental coins and all the traditions that go with them. Some go, new ones come in.
As for HM Queen Elizabeth II - she‘s the Colonel In Chief of my regiment (among others), so we certainly feel a fondness for her - but aside from presenting our new Queen‘s Colour a dozen years ago, I don‘t think we even get a Christmas card from Buckingham Palace. The honoraries do go to report to Her relatively frequently, and I am sure she passes her well wishes on to the officers and men, but we don‘t hear much about it.
I feel more allegiance to the Second World War vets still alive - they made a name for my regiment that we still feel obligated to live up to. I think that is where the real tradition lies, at least for many of us.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 210
The great thing about being a monarchist, and in the military, is that I don‘t even need to expend a tenth of a second debating this topic in my head before I decide.
For me, it is just so clear and simple:
1. The Queen is the Sovereign and Head of State.
2. The Sovereign has sole authority to govern. Hence, they are "sovereign".
3. All government business is conducted in The Queen‘s name. This includes the authority to tax, to pass laws, to enforce laws, to judge laws and people, to declare war, to sue for peace, and anything else within a sovereign‘s prerogative (obviously many of these rights are necessarily conveyed to the representative government).
4. Thanks to the stability and tradition of nearly 1,000 years of constitutional monarchy, we have a system of government that best represents the rights of the majority and the rights of the minority; representative democracy within a framework of divine sovereignty, changeable by the will of the subjects because The Queen rules with the consent of the governed.
It may not have always been this way, but certainly the present head of state has done an admirable job of maintaining the dignity and status of the office without trivialising its role in a way only our elected officials seem to be capable of.
It is never a question of whether the sovereign‘s behaviour is beyond reproach. It is. Always.
And because of that, I am more than happy to fulfil my constitutional duty to my country to serve it‘s lawful and rightful head.
It is sad that some can quote the Queen‘s birthdate but can‘t soldier. Perhaps they should choose another calling, because they are probably not serving the Crown in their best capacity.
Certainly, however, one should endeavour to devote themselves to their duty, in whatever capacity it may be, military or not. If not for The Queen, then at least for benefit of their community, family and self.
I am reminded of the Queen‘s own devotion to her duty when she spoke at her Coronation Day speech, fifty years ago this summer, on June 6, 1953.
"I have behind me me not only the splendid tradition and annals of a thousand years, but the living strength and majesty of the Commonwealth and Empire, of societies old and new, of lands and races different in history and origins, but all by God‘s will united in spirit and in aim. Therefore, I am sure that this, my coronation is not the symbol of a power and splendor that is gone, but a declaration of the hopes of the future, and for the years I may by God‘s grace and mercy be given to reign and serve you as your Queen."
An aside:
My proudest moment thus far in my quite short military career was swearing the Oath before my CO. Even when I joined customs, we only signed a sheet of paper on which the oath was printed -- I felt a bit chitzed out, and technically the oath wasn‘t sworn before a commissioner of oaths and so it is of murky legality.
For me, it is just so clear and simple:
1. The Queen is the Sovereign and Head of State.
2. The Sovereign has sole authority to govern. Hence, they are "sovereign".
3. All government business is conducted in The Queen‘s name. This includes the authority to tax, to pass laws, to enforce laws, to judge laws and people, to declare war, to sue for peace, and anything else within a sovereign‘s prerogative (obviously many of these rights are necessarily conveyed to the representative government).
4. Thanks to the stability and tradition of nearly 1,000 years of constitutional monarchy, we have a system of government that best represents the rights of the majority and the rights of the minority; representative democracy within a framework of divine sovereignty, changeable by the will of the subjects because The Queen rules with the consent of the governed.
It may not have always been this way, but certainly the present head of state has done an admirable job of maintaining the dignity and status of the office without trivialising its role in a way only our elected officials seem to be capable of.
It is never a question of whether the sovereign‘s behaviour is beyond reproach. It is. Always.
And because of that, I am more than happy to fulfil my constitutional duty to my country to serve it‘s lawful and rightful head.
It is sad that some can quote the Queen‘s birthdate but can‘t soldier. Perhaps they should choose another calling, because they are probably not serving the Crown in their best capacity.
Certainly, however, one should endeavour to devote themselves to their duty, in whatever capacity it may be, military or not. If not for The Queen, then at least for benefit of their community, family and self.
I am reminded of the Queen‘s own devotion to her duty when she spoke at her Coronation Day speech, fifty years ago this summer, on June 6, 1953.
"I have behind me me not only the splendid tradition and annals of a thousand years, but the living strength and majesty of the Commonwealth and Empire, of societies old and new, of lands and races different in history and origins, but all by God‘s will united in spirit and in aim. Therefore, I am sure that this, my coronation is not the symbol of a power and splendor that is gone, but a declaration of the hopes of the future, and for the years I may by God‘s grace and mercy be given to reign and serve you as your Queen."
An aside:
My proudest moment thus far in my quite short military career was swearing the Oath before my CO. Even when I joined customs, we only signed a sheet of paper on which the oath was printed -- I felt a bit chitzed out, and technically the oath wasn‘t sworn before a commissioner of oaths and so it is of murky legality.
T
trackratte
Guest
You might as well say, what is the relevence of the Canadian Flag to the Canadian army. For really its just a piece of cloth right?
you can say that, but if said, i will be somewhat tempted to kill the person who says it. Much so for the Queen, with the exception of having political power (however small). See Governor General
you can say that, but if said, i will be somewhat tempted to kill the person who says it. Much so for the Queen, with the exception of having political power (however small). See Governor General
- Reaction score
- 11,244
- Points
- 1,160
How sacred is our canadian flag to the goverment?
They let people burn it at will.
It‘s not flown in the house of commons (Or some place like that, don‘t exactly remember where but it upset someone in quebec. Could be wrong)
Burning the flag should earn someone jail time. You can‘t use freedom of speach as a defense either, thats over used. You can‘t stand in a building and shout fire not can you call a hospital and say theres a bomb.
Canada day i‘m told theres protesters planning on burning our flag in ottawa to protest canada not condeming the US for the war in iraq. Their going to be in for a great surprise :warstory:
They let people burn it at will.
It‘s not flown in the house of commons (Or some place like that, don‘t exactly remember where but it upset someone in quebec. Could be wrong)
Burning the flag should earn someone jail time. You can‘t use freedom of speach as a defense either, thats over used. You can‘t stand in a building and shout fire not can you call a hospital and say theres a bomb.
Canada day i‘m told theres protesters planning on burning our flag in ottawa to protest canada not condeming the US for the war in iraq. Their going to be in for a great surprise :warstory:
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 210
I believe it is the Quebec "national" assembly, where the Canadian flag is not flown.
It is most assuredly flown above Parliament Hill at all times, and half-masted on appropriate days.
Any day it‘s not, and I‘ll gladly tear up my Canadian passport and leave.
As for the flag in general -- different times and different attitudes call for different measures.
Lets be frank here ... it literally IS "just" a piece of cloth. No matter what reverence it holds, or respect it should be shown, we should put it into perspective. The Queen is a person, some might say chosen by divine providence, to represent the Sovereignty of Canada (and "Her Other Realms and Territories...etc.").
The flag is simply a cloth representation of that sovereignty, and this flag was chosen on February 15, 1965, by the government of the day. I didn‘t elect that government, since it was 10 years before I was born, so therefore my preference does no lean towards our present flag. The Red Emblem would suit me fine, as it shows the Royal Arms, and for me makes a direct connection to our place in the Empire.
And, as much as I disgree with it, burning of our flag as a form of protest - detestable and most disloyal - is just not a capital crime, and is fully protected by our Charter of Rights and Freedoms (another document I have no love for, but I digress).
Thankfully, my loyalty to my Crown instills the duty and knowledge on me that whatever the case may be, I will gladly lay my life down not only for that flag, but for those misguided (Canadian) souls who choose to burn it in lawful protest, as is their right under the Charter.
It may be hard for some to understand this seemingly contradictory stance on this issue, but I am unable to offer a clearer way of describing how I feel.
Yes, there should be laws against burning the flag. But there ain‘t. Certainly, I‘d like to see someone _try_ to burn the Canadian flag I wear on my shoulder, or, should I care to do so, fly on my property. They will certainly find out very quickly how much I value my right to my own personal freedom and my right to defend my property from trespass.
It is most assuredly flown above Parliament Hill at all times, and half-masted on appropriate days.
Any day it‘s not, and I‘ll gladly tear up my Canadian passport and leave.
As for the flag in general -- different times and different attitudes call for different measures.
Lets be frank here ... it literally IS "just" a piece of cloth. No matter what reverence it holds, or respect it should be shown, we should put it into perspective. The Queen is a person, some might say chosen by divine providence, to represent the Sovereignty of Canada (and "Her Other Realms and Territories...etc.").
The flag is simply a cloth representation of that sovereignty, and this flag was chosen on February 15, 1965, by the government of the day. I didn‘t elect that government, since it was 10 years before I was born, so therefore my preference does no lean towards our present flag. The Red Emblem would suit me fine, as it shows the Royal Arms, and for me makes a direct connection to our place in the Empire.
And, as much as I disgree with it, burning of our flag as a form of protest - detestable and most disloyal - is just not a capital crime, and is fully protected by our Charter of Rights and Freedoms (another document I have no love for, but I digress).
Thankfully, my loyalty to my Crown instills the duty and knowledge on me that whatever the case may be, I will gladly lay my life down not only for that flag, but for those misguided (Canadian) souls who choose to burn it in lawful protest, as is their right under the Charter.
It may be hard for some to understand this seemingly contradictory stance on this issue, but I am unable to offer a clearer way of describing how I feel.
Yes, there should be laws against burning the flag. But there ain‘t. Certainly, I‘d like to see someone _try_ to burn the Canadian flag I wear on my shoulder, or, should I care to do so, fly on my property. They will certainly find out very quickly how much I value my right to my own personal freedom and my right to defend my property from trespass.
Michael Dorosh
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Charest returned the Canadian flag to the Quebec assembly this week, incidentally, it was just in the news today. It hasn‘t been displayed on the floor of the assembly since the seperatists took power nine (?) years ago. Charest is decidedly Federalist, and showed it with the flag.
Burning the flag is stupid, but it is also an expression of freedom of speech. It should not be illegal, but those that burn the flag should be looked down by any right thinking person just as people who swear in public, spit on the sidewalk, and all those other annoyances should be looked down on.
Burning the flag is stupid, but it is also an expression of freedom of speech. It should not be illegal, but those that burn the flag should be looked down by any right thinking person just as people who swear in public, spit on the sidewalk, and all those other annoyances should be looked down on.
Michael Dorosh
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Oh, and portcullisguy, nicely said, but under the Constitution, you have no right to private property in this country. There‘s no such thing, thanks to Mr. Trudeau.
According to the Alberta Real Estate Association:
According to the Alberta Real Estate Association:
You also don‘t have the right to defend any property you deem to be yours; if you harmed someone for trying to burn a flag on your property, you would be charged "appropriately", ie if you punched the miscreant piece of ****, you would be charged with assault.
- Reaction score
- 11,244
- Points
- 1,160
Whats legal is not always right and vice versa.
I would not consider myself my fathers son if i let someone burn the flag in the name of free speach or whatever else.
Above the terminology, the canadian flag belongs to the honour and memory of canadian soldiers who fought and in many cases died to keep the colours the way they are.
People who come to canada and burn the flag as well as canadians who burn the flag are spitting in the face of those who gave them the chance to burn it. I should quit preaching, it‘s just something that really irks me.
I would not consider myself my fathers son if i let someone burn the flag in the name of free speach or whatever else.
Above the terminology, the canadian flag belongs to the honour and memory of canadian soldiers who fought and in many cases died to keep the colours the way they are.
People who come to canada and burn the flag as well as canadians who burn the flag are spitting in the face of those who gave them the chance to burn it. I should quit preaching, it‘s just something that really irks me.
Michael Dorosh
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Oh, I think we all agree Ghost.
What about the police officer - who has also sworn an oath to the Queen - whose duty it is to arrest you because you messed up some moron who burned a flag in public?
Really, any idiot who would burn a flag and think he is making a statement is to be pitied, not beaten. If that‘s the only way they can get a point across, well, they had no point to make to begin with.
What about the police officer - who has also sworn an oath to the Queen - whose duty it is to arrest you because you messed up some moron who burned a flag in public?
Really, any idiot who would burn a flag and think he is making a statement is to be pitied, not beaten. If that‘s the only way they can get a point across, well, they had no point to make to begin with.
I
Illucigen
Guest
Becareful with terms there. While Charest and the Quebec Liberals do support federal unity, they also strongly demand distinct society and special status within the federation for Quebec.
They won‘t go changing the term "national" assembly, nor will St Jean Baptiste have the "Fete National" name taken away.
Remember, every province in canada is sovereign of its own volition. They simply signed away /some/ rights to the Federal government at Confederation (a term not much used in political science anymore).
If you want to look at it this way, the Charest Government of Quebec/Liberal party of Quebec is much more in tune with the Alberta government which continually pushes for more decentralized government, more power next to the people, rather than in Ottawa.
Good to see the flag return though... I think the issue is that when you take drastic measures such as these to "protect" your cultural identity, the rest of the world fails to see what you are trying to do and instead labels you extremist.
But thats the end of my political ramblings
They won‘t go changing the term "national" assembly, nor will St Jean Baptiste have the "Fete National" name taken away.
Remember, every province in canada is sovereign of its own volition. They simply signed away /some/ rights to the Federal government at Confederation (a term not much used in political science anymore).
If you want to look at it this way, the Charest Government of Quebec/Liberal party of Quebec is much more in tune with the Alberta government which continually pushes for more decentralized government, more power next to the people, rather than in Ottawa.
Good to see the flag return though... I think the issue is that when you take drastic measures such as these to "protect" your cultural identity, the rest of the world fails to see what you are trying to do and instead labels you extremist.
But thats the end of my political ramblings
Similar threads
