Quetzlsacatanango Posted March 23, 2012 Author Share Posted March 23, 2012 Since you mention it, and it is sort of related to this topic, I do think of myself as Texan first and American 2nd. Subject and Citizen have much different connotation, if not definition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tidus44 Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 The Queen has exemplified honour, duty and service for 85 years (April 21 will be 86 years) and I for one am proud to be considered one of her subjects. I always found that the monarchy, and particularly her as a role model, and swearing to follow the principles she stands for made a heck of a lot more sense than swearing fealty to some sleazy politician or inanimate object. As for what one is called, I'd much rather be considered a "subject" than just another nobody that can be used and abused by some politician. Long live the Queen! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grannywils Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 Seriously folks... While Subject and Citizen may have different connotations to you, Quetz, as a non British "subject". Apparently the British are quite content with the appellation; and in fact they are also known as citizens under the British Nationality Act. But, does this term bother you for any particular reason? As stated earlier, I am just curious? :unsure: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurielius Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 (edited) The Queen has exemplified honour, duty and service for 85 years (April 21 will be 86 years) and I for one am proud to be considered one of her subjects.I always found that the monarchy, and particularly her as a role model, and swearing to follow the principles she stands for made a heck of a lot more sense than swearing fealty to some sleazy politician or inanimate object.Long live the Queen!I have zero issue with your support of the Queen and the Monarchy and understand the position quite well. However, please tell me that the remark about inanimate objects is not referring to the Constitution, I'll assume that is a mistaken inference of your intent on my part..but it does bear the semblance of a 'dig' and to us it evokes the same loyalty that you hold to the Crown.. Edited March 23, 2012 by Aurielius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintii Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 My ancestry on my mother's side is from the UK ... as a matter of fact they arrived here as part of the 1820 Settlers ... my grandmother was proud of her heritage.She had plaques and all kinds of memoribilia pertaining to the royals and according to my mom was proud to be "under" the crown. Many of the women in our family "served" in the WAFS (Women's Auxilliary Ferrying Squadron) and the men went and fought and some died "in Her Majesties service" .As part of our family tradition we all meet once a year and when we do, we always drink a toast to the Queen and wish her a long life ... none of us feels that we have lowerered ourselves in anyway by honoring the Queen and would have no problem in being called her "subjects". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisnpuppy Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 Being a subject does not necessarily mean being subjugated. The Crown no longer has power of life over death. They in fact are also the upholders of things like the Magna Carta that give rights and freedoms to all British peoples. They have to be some of the hardest working people in the world and I have no doubt they work harder than any American politician. They are photographed incessantly, people comment on what they wear, how they walk, with whom they are seen...every moment of their lives are dictated either by their "job" as a Royal or by thousands of years of tradition. Tourism of course for them and because of them but at what expense. Personally I think the Royals are more "subjects" to the Crown that anyone else and do not envy their positions despite whatever gold dishes or designer clothing they may get in compensation. As for the inanimate object comment....well if more of American politicians and officials would agree to honor and uphold the things WRITTEN on that piece of hemp paper then perhaps the United States would not be in the mess it is in. *watches intently shoving popcorn in face* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mythicdawnmaster Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 I for one am honored to be part of the british people, and honored to be considered a subject of her royal highness Queen Elizabeth the Second. Subject does not cause any kind of discord, it is just a word, given to us, as it has been for hundreds of years, britain has always had a monarchy, and i hope always will, it is not just for tourism, it is the heart of our people, and we, at least i, am more than happy to be called a subject, if that means having such a wonderful monarchy on our throne. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quetzlsacatanango Posted March 23, 2012 Author Share Posted March 23, 2012 Seriously folks... While Subject and Citizen may have different connotations to you, Quetz, as a non British "subject". Apparently the British are quite content with the appellation; and in fact they are also known as citizens under the British Nationality Act. But, does this term bother you for any particular reason? As stated earlier, I am just curious? :unsure: Curiosity about how they feel about it is why I asked. If they are fine with it for themselves I am certainly not going to say they should stop. For me, personally, the idea of lowering myself by exalting someone else, who bleeds the same color blood as me, for no other reason, really, than their ancestry, is abhorrent. But that's me. I get that other people don't see it that way. Again, hence the question. Tidus-I 2nd Aurelius.The Constitution is like The Bible. It is not just some paper with words on it. It is an outline of certain principles and if the "inanimate object" disappeared tomorrow it wouldn't change anything.I don't think anyone who believes in those principles finds themselves "swearing fealty" to any politician, unless it so happens that said politician professes to value those same principles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grannywils Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 I, too, agree with Aurielius regarding the Constitution, and have said just about all I have to say on the subject of subject vs. citizens.... :blush: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimboUK Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 The monarchy do a lot more for this country than the self serving crooks we elect. :dry: As for the U.S Constitution yes technically it is an inanimate object but it's not the object that's important, it's what's written on it and what it stands for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now