I showed the title and first post of this thread to my classmate and she cried.
Raxacoricofallapatorius god of shenanigans
Member
Seen
2 mos ago
mdk said
And to add insult and injury, from now on Britain declares today a Public Holiday called Dependence Day.
OP
K-97 said
And to add insult and injury, from now on Britain declares today a Public Holiday called Dependence Day.
People celebrate by lighting fireworks and then dousing them with a cold bucket of water.
idlehands heartless
Member
Seen
1 yr ago
Oh, my. Doing that in Glasgow where they went majority yes.
Rare The Inquisitor
Member
Seen
7 yrs ago
Well, UK will just avoid Scotland as usual and everything will go back to normal. Unless Scotland does what America did and rebel against the Queen.
It hurts the message of the average no voter. I think in these times we need to come together and remember that we're on the same team. Right winged protestant neo nazi's that have the odacity to call themselves the Scottish Defense League while they openly burn scottish flags is abhorrant. I hope the yes voters don't retaliate, and I hope that the average no voters come forward to drown this out. This could be divisive, and both sides don't need this.
The fucking orange lodge man.
The fucking orange lodge man.
Rare said
Well, UK will just avoid Scotland as usual and everything will go back to normal. Unless Scotland does what America did and rebel against the Queen.
Uh, no. There's gonna be major changes. Unless you think a devolved English parliament, along with more powers for the existing Scottish, Welsh, and N. Irish parliaments, is "going back to normal".
scribz said
It hurts the message of the average no voter. I think in these times we need to come together and remember that we're on the same team. Right winged protestant neo nazi's that have the odacity to call themselves the Scottish Defense League while they openly burn scottish flags is abhorrant. I hope the yes voters don't retaliate, and I hope that the average no voters come forward to drown this out. This could be divisive, and both sides don't need this. The fucking orange lodge man.
I was about to say, exactly the same as the Orange Order and that all over again. It's sad. People just use stuff like this as an excuse for violence and antisocial behaviour, just like they do with football and protestant vs. catholic and all that shite.
Halo said
.I was about to say, exactly the same as the Orange Order and that all over again. It's sad. People just use stuff like this as an excuse for violence and antisocial behaviour, just like they do with football and protestant vs. catholic and all that shite.
Yeah man. It's shit. I hate the idea of any of the no voters I hold dear to me being brandished with the same brush because of these wankers.
TheMusketMan The Trooper
Member
Seen
7 yrs ago
Well, at least Scotland was a good sport about it.
Oh.
I'm sure things will simmer down in a week or so.
Hm. A rebellion in a first world country? That would be very interesting. Though I think that they would ultimately be defeated by a little thing called attrition; since Scotland depends on their English brethren for so much. And most likely the UN will support the English because starting a rebellion because more people said no than yes is stupid. So there probably won't be a rebellion.
Anyway better luck next time.
scribz said
Scots losing their shit.
Oh.
I'm sure things will simmer down in a week or so.
Rare said
Unless Scotland does what America did and rebel against the Queen.
Hm. A rebellion in a first world country? That would be very interesting. Though I think that they would ultimately be defeated by a little thing called attrition; since Scotland depends on their English brethren for so much. And most likely the UN will support the English because starting a rebellion because more people said no than yes is stupid. So there probably won't be a rebellion.
Anyway better luck next time.
Gwazi Magnum
Member
Seen
7 yrs ago
Rare said
Well, UK will just avoid Scotland as usual and everything will go back to normal. Unless Scotland does what America did and rebel against the Queen.
I doubt it, the majority voted to stay in the UK.
So whatever rebellion was started would be opposed by even greater resistance, on top of scotland and england military forces.
Rare: The queen has nothing to do with it. If we went independent, we'd still hold fealty to the queen.
Edit:
Actually on second thoughts this would of been pretty awesome too.
Edit:
Actually on second thoughts this would of been pretty awesome too.
Gwazi Magnum
Member
Seen
7 yrs ago
scribz said
Rare: The queen has nothing to do with it. If we went independent, we'd still hold fealty to the queen.Edit: Actually on second thoughts would of been pretty awesome too.
Eh... maybe.
Canada is only still influenced by the Queen cause we left peacefully.
America left with a pool of blood and the Queen has zero influence in their legal system anymore.
darkwolf687
Member
Seen
3 mos ago
scribz said
Digusting, that's all I have to say. A divided Scotland has been left behind, and clearly there's a small group of thuggish Loyalists who don't want that divide healed.
I had a feeling they'd be trouble once the Orange order showed their ugly mug during the campaign.
They bring shame to the Union flag, and to a wonderful British song too.
Magic Magnum said
Eh... maybe.Canada is only still influenced by the Queen cause we left peacefully.America left with a pool of blood and the Queen has zero influence in their legal system anymore.
Magnum, the Queen has no influence in our justice system. She's just a figurehead mate, no real power is hers. The only reason she still has her royalty is because of tourism and patriotism.
The commonwealth still shows fealty to the queen in an official manner (though purely ceremonial). Yes, this includes Australia and New Zealand. Independent Scotland would have still been part of the Commonwealth, ergo, still have queen.
darkwolf687
Member
Seen
3 mos ago
Brovo said
Magnum, the Queen has no influence in our justice system. She's just a figurehead mate, no real power is hers. The only reason she still has her royalty is because of tourism and patriotism.The commonwealth still shows fealty to the queen in an official manner (though purely ceremonial). Yes, this includes Australia and New Zealand. Independent Scotland would have still been part of the Commonwealth, ergo, still have queen.
Eh? I thought it was a scenario where de jure she has power (I believe one of her powers is the authority to refuse to legitimise a law, as she has to sign it does she not?), but de facto she can never use it because parliament would remove the monarchy if she did. I was under the impression she held the same authority in the commonwealth realms but for the reason that they would remove her as their figure head she couldn't use it.
HollywoodMole
Member
Seen
10 yrs ago
darkwolf687 said
Eh? I thought it was a scenario where de jure she has power (I believe one of her powers is the authority to refuse to legitimise a law, as she has to sign it does she not?), but de facto she can never use it because parliament would remove the monarchy if she did. I was under the impression she held the same authority in the commonwealth realms but for the reason that they would remove her as their figure head she couldn't use it.
No, in other countries she's just a pinhead. (Which still leads people in the USA to think Canada is a monarchy.
darkwolf687
Member
Seen
3 mos ago
HollywoodMole said
No, in other countries she's just a pinhead. (Which still leads people in the USA to think Canada is a monarchy.
Ah, I see.
darkwolf687 said
Eh? I thought it was a scenario where de jure she has power (I believe one of her powers is the authority to refuse to legitimise a law, as she has to sign it does she not?), but de facto she can never use it because parliament would remove the monarchy if she did. I was under the impression she held the same authority in the commonwealth realms but for the reason that they would remove her as their figure head she couldn't use it.
We have the Governor General, who represents the Queen. He or she does technically have the authority to veto a law/bill, but it would be considered a gross misuse of power to do so and there's only a select few times where it's even happened here that I can recall, because democracy. Basically the only way the populace here would tolerate him vetoing a law is if it was extremely controversial and there were questions about whether it was legitimately passed or not. Otherwise it's subverting democracy, which would be bad. Very bad. So his post is primarily just to oversee the house of commons to make sure it keeps its shit in the cage and not on random pedestrians, and to listen to the queen go "Canada? What's a Canada?"
Dervish Let's get volatile
Member
Seen
0-24 hrs ago
HollywoodMole said
No, in other countries she's just a pinhead. (Which still leads people in the USA to think Canada is a monarchy.
We're actually officially considered a constitutional monarchy. The Queen is in fact our head of state in Canada. It's more symbolic than anything, but it does mean the Prime Minister has to do things like ask the Queen via Governor General for permission to have an election.
© 2007-2024