LETTER: Abolishing the monarchy ignores a few small points

Opinion Feb 10, 2017 Dundas Star News

Re: Scrap the Senate along with the monarchy, Feb. 9 Letters to the Editor.

We’ve had this debate twice before. The first is called the American Revolution; the second is called the War of 1812.

At the conclusion of the first debate, the nation was divided in half, and the southern half became a republic, including the provinces of New York New Jersey and so on. The northern, colder half of the country remained with the Crown and became Canada.

The suggestion we should abolish the monarchy ignores a few small points. As the Constitution states, only the Crown can call an election, appoint the prime minister, sign bills into laws, give commissions in the armed forces and so on. So to abolish the Crown would end all government, all laws and all sovereignty. In fact, it would be literal anarchy.

To replace the present form of government with a republic would make us one step closer to rejoining our southern long-lost provinces. I, for one, have no interest in living under President Donald Trump, or any other form of a republic. If the author of this letter to the editor wishes to live in a republic, he is in the wrong half of the continent.

David Moore

Ancaster


LETTER: Abolishing the monarchy ignores a few small points

Opinion Feb 10, 2017 Dundas Star News

Re: Scrap the Senate along with the monarchy, Feb. 9 Letters to the Editor.

We’ve had this debate twice before. The first is called the American Revolution; the second is called the War of 1812.

At the conclusion of the first debate, the nation was divided in half, and the southern half became a republic, including the provinces of New York New Jersey and so on. The northern, colder half of the country remained with the Crown and became Canada.

The suggestion we should abolish the monarchy ignores a few small points. As the Constitution states, only the Crown can call an election, appoint the prime minister, sign bills into laws, give commissions in the armed forces and so on. So to abolish the Crown would end all government, all laws and all sovereignty. In fact, it would be literal anarchy.

To replace the present form of government with a republic would make us one step closer to rejoining our southern long-lost provinces. I, for one, have no interest in living under President Donald Trump, or any other form of a republic. If the author of this letter to the editor wishes to live in a republic, he is in the wrong half of the continent.

David Moore

Ancaster


LETTER: Abolishing the monarchy ignores a few small points

Opinion Feb 10, 2017 Dundas Star News

Re: Scrap the Senate along with the monarchy, Feb. 9 Letters to the Editor.

We’ve had this debate twice before. The first is called the American Revolution; the second is called the War of 1812.

At the conclusion of the first debate, the nation was divided in half, and the southern half became a republic, including the provinces of New York New Jersey and so on. The northern, colder half of the country remained with the Crown and became Canada.

The suggestion we should abolish the monarchy ignores a few small points. As the Constitution states, only the Crown can call an election, appoint the prime minister, sign bills into laws, give commissions in the armed forces and so on. So to abolish the Crown would end all government, all laws and all sovereignty. In fact, it would be literal anarchy.

To replace the present form of government with a republic would make us one step closer to rejoining our southern long-lost provinces. I, for one, have no interest in living under President Donald Trump, or any other form of a republic. If the author of this letter to the editor wishes to live in a republic, he is in the wrong half of the continent.

David Moore

Ancaster