Burnaby49 wrote:The Canadian government does not justify it's existence on moral grounds but on legal ones. It is the duly appointed government.
I would like to know precisely what is meant by the expression "duly appointed".
I expect that this means the government was appointed as specified in the Constitution, the supreme law of Canada.
Why is the Constitution the supreme law of Canada?
I expect that the reason for this is that the Queen signed it. Why do I think that? Well, just say Trudeau sr had shown up on that rainy day in April, 1982 and the Queen had said, "during our plane flight here We have had a change of heart and are no longer willing to sign this Constitution Act". Would the courts still allow the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to be used as a defence? I don't believe so.
So what makes her Majesty my Queen? Did "God" make Her my Queen? Well maybe, and I'm not going to say I can disprove that, so perhaps the Constitution is my supreme law. By that logic of course, the government is duly appointed and therefore I have no legitimate reason to show reasonable dissent. However, I don't agree that this assertion can be proven or disproven and therefore it should be considered possible that her Majesty is not my Queen, which would mean that the Constitution is not my supreme law, which would mean that the government is not "duly appointed" to govern Me.
Of course, the arguments between what I referred to as dissenters and statists can be applied in favour of the statists to say that She is my Queen because her state prevails as the law making institution in the land, with the force to back up its authority. The only part of the definition of "statist" that doesn't apply in this case is that the alleged government of Canada might not be perceived as "highly centralised". However, given that every single legislator, judge, enforcement officer, military officer, and many other public servants have pledged allegiance to the same Woman, there could be an argument made to say that it is highly centralised in authority structure despite a diversity of the bureaucratic portfolios assigned to the numerous branches of government that exist in Canada.
So in order to show that the legitimacy of the alleged government to claim the authority to govern Me, it must be demonstrated that her Majesty Elizabeth II is my Queen. I'd be happy to assume for the sake of argument that this is the case for further discussion.