As a Canadian who was born and raised in this country, I am appalled that we still force immigrants who want to become citizens to swear an oath of allegiance to the Queen.

Surely, this country that champions itself as being a multicultural nation and an international leader in diversity should no longer require our new citizens to bow and scrape to a foreign monarch, even the current Queen who I and millions of other Canadians respect.

Indeed, it’s time Parliament revised the Immigration Act to toss out this relic oath from our days as a British colony and replace it with a modern pledge of allegiance to Canada.

I say this after reading some nasty attacks last week against newcomers and permanent residents who feel exactly the same as I do.

“Go home!” “Don’t come here.” “This may not be the place for you.”

Those insulting comments came in the wake of the decision by the Supreme Court of Canada not to hear an appeal in a case brought by three permanent residents who sought citizenship but didn’t want to swear an oath to the Queen.

The trio had launched the constitutional challenge several years ago to the citizenship requirement that forces new citizens aged 14 and over to repeat and sign the mandatory oath to the Queen. The Ontario Court of Appeal in 2014 upheld what it considered to be the “symbolic” oath.

As soon as the Supreme Court decision was announced, the attacks began against Michael McAteer, a retired Toronto Star religion editor, Simone Topey and Dror Bar-Natan, all of whom opposed the oath for various reasons.

“Forget the legalese,” wrote Naomi Lakritz, a Calgary Herald columnist. “Here’s a little populist language: If you don’t want to follow a basic rule for becoming a citizen of this great country — the best place in the world to live — then, don’t come here.

“And if you insist on coming here, don’t think you’re entitled to dictate how you are to become a citizen,” she added. “Go home, all three of you, because it’s not the oath that’s repugnant, it’s your attitude.”

A Toronto Sun editorial wailed about people who, like me, don’t like having the Queen as Canada’s head of state or who don’t like seeing the Queen’s face on our stamps and coins.

“If you don’t want to be a citizen of such a country, this may not be the place for you,” the Sun said.

Such attacks are unjustified and unwarranted, given that so many Canadian-born citizens are as outraged and disgusted as the three court challengers that Canada, which brags of its independence, still maintains ties with the British monarchy.

While judges may have decided they can’t change this law, there is nothing stopping Parliament from amending the Immigration Act.

In fact, NDP MP Pat Martin from Winnipeg has tried several times in recent years through private member’s motions to “amend the citizenship ceremony” so new citizens would swear an oath of allegiance to Canada rather than “the Queen and her heirs and successors.”

That’s exactly what Australia, a British Commonwealth country like Canada, did 20 years ago.

If the Aussies could do it without any real fuss, why can’t we?

In Australia, new citizens take this simple Pledge of Commitment: “From this time forward, under God, I pledge my loyalty to Australia and its people, whose democratic beliefs I share, whose rights and liberties I respect, and whose laws I will uphold and obey.” If they want, the new citizens don’t have to use the words “under God.”

Surely our Parliament could use the same pledge by just replacing the name “Australia” with “Canada.”

What the critics of the trio who launched the court challenge to the oath and politicians who argue that such a move would be too divisive don’t realize is that there is a huge number of Canadians who are not so much anti-monarchy as they are pro-Canada.

Indeed, political leaders could pursue this issue as a nation-building effort, one that could engage younger voters and newcomers, rather than using it as a political strategy to drive a wedge between monarchists and the rest of us.

Over time, small but significant actions such as the court challenge to the oath and the highly publicized decision by Lisa Helps, the incoming mayor of Victoria, to decline to pledge allegiance to the Queen during her inauguration ceremony in December can develop into a national movement.

To be sure, Parliament has more urgent priorities than changing this colonial-era oath. But that’s no excuse for not acting at all.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

Also, some politicians may argue this is a meaningless oath anyway and there’s really nothing to be gained by changing it.

They’re wrong, because what we will gain is our national self-respect.