"The Queen is Canadian"
Fifty-six years of service to Canada and the Commonwealth.
Image: Canadian currency
In The Queen is Canadian, the National Post writes -
Maybe it's an impertinent question. We feel awkward asking it. But we can't be the only ones who have been buffaloed by news reports about Charles Roach's continuing litigation crusade against the oath of allegiance to the Queen for immigrants. So let's put it out there: If you don't want to live in a constitutional monarchy governed by the British Crown, why the heck would you come to Canada?
Mr. Roach is a lawyer originally from Trinidad who believes that the language of Canada's citizenship oath - which requires new Canadians "to be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty the Queen" - is offensive. In particular, he says it is offensive to black individuals from countries that, in the words of a republican press release about his Charter challenge, "were oppressed or forcibly subjugated during the height of the British Empire." Most historians would identify the peak of the British Empire as arriving around 1902, after imperial victory in the Second Boer War. This was, let it be noted, many decades after the British government had succeeded in largely eradicating the world slave trade. And the Boer War itself was a struggle against the future practitioners of apartheid - one which transpired partly as a consequence of native African pleas for imperial protection against racist Boer republicans.
. . .[Mr Roach] must now seek relief in the Charter of Rights, whose authority derives entirely from the E-R II signature at the bottom. . .
The ironies and beauties of life.