I think this is surely the way to go. I personally cringe when I explain the promise to them. Not because I have any ill feeling towards religion, but because I know that these cadets (for the main-part) will be making an empty promise because they swear no allegiance to any God.
I think it is right for the option to remain, but I feel that in terms of serving the majority of people, a neutral promise to the effect that the cadet will serve the organisation is better.
In equal part to 'âŚThe Queen, my Country and my Flag. Quite surprised to see the topic back up for discussion. Looking forward to some fresh points.
[quote=â40bâ post=8000]Found this in the recent Cadet Working Group minutes. Thought ACC members would find interestingâŚ
Iâm very surprised there wasnât one. On attestation to HM Forces the ânon-religiousâ option has been available for quite some time. I guess things donât actually change unless anyone actually requests something different.
Problem solved it would seem!
agreed, why has this taken so long to change? the Reference to queen country and flag should stay IMHO, but the god part? are we not now a multicultural organisation? they should be given the choice of pledges as already suggested.
Please see my bold.
Am I the only one that sees conflict in this?
Does that not mean we have all culture, ethnicities and religions in the organisation. Therefor should also change queen, country and flag, as not all people have the same belief/loyalty to Queen, country and flag.
Please see my bold.
Am I the only one that sees conflict in this?
Does that not mean we have all culture, ethnicities and religions in the organisation. Therefor should also change queen, country and flag, as not all people have the same belief/loyalty to Queen, country and flag.[/quote]
Then they shouldnât be in the organisation.
Please see my bold.
Am I the only one that sees conflict in this?
Does that not mean we have all culture, ethnicities and religions in the organisation. Therefor should also change queen, country and flag, as not all people have the same belief/loyalty to Queen, country and flag.[/quote]
Cadet forces of other countries are also recruiting and they may be able to cater to their needs. No problem.
I the meantime, there is absolutely no contradiction in British people, of different ethnic and cultural backgrounds, pledging allegiance to the same Queen, country and flag. Iâm Welsh and I am proud to do so.
If you canât do this, you donât belong in our organisation (though it does get confusing where we have cadets actually of a different nationality - Iâve had US, Polish, Fillipino, German, French and Irish cadets).
GOM, I think some of our Scottish Cadets may not agree. Plus you could argue the one or two Sqn on the Isle of Man dont agree as they dont have a Queen they have the Lord of Man (yes the queen is a Lord) but she is not their Queen. Plus you can legitimately have a dual nationality cadet and therefor have someone that many not agree. Should we not be all inclusive?
In a word, no.
The whole point of the promise is that the cadet is swearing that they will obey our rules, uphold their responsibilities and serve loyally.
While I agree we should make the God element of the promise optional, as some may find it difficult to agree to serve a god they do not believe in, or question the existence of, the case is different for the Queen. There is no question of her existence and if a cadet wonât serve the Queen they wonât serve her officers, and as such are not suitable for service in the ATC. Her legitimacy is not what is in question, itâs whether or not you will what she asks. Nationality is therefore irrelevant, plenty of American officers flew for the RAF pre-december 1941.
[quote=âflagoâ post=8025]GOM, I think some of our Scottish Cadets may not agree.
[/quote]
Unless Mr Salmond gets his majority in the referendum, if they want to be in the ACO they will have to agree! 
After that, well, if itâs a âyesâ vote, weâll just have to wait and see if he has any funding to maintain Cadet organisations after the MoD has moved most of its money out of Scotland!
[quote=âBaldrickâ post=8026]and if a cadet wonât serve the Queen they wonât serve her officers,[/quote]You do realise that you are speaking a load of nonsense here, donât you? Can anybody honestly believe that the reason that cadets obey officers is because of the authority of the monarch? Do they not follow the orders and instructions of the SNCOs and CIs in the Corps who donât hold a mandate from Her Maj?
Cadets play the game just as the rest of us do. We obey the orders of superiors because they are designated as superiors and that is part of the game and they understand it to be so. If they wish to do otherwise they are free to quit the game.
We are asking cadets to serve THIS organisation loyally and that is all that should matter. If there is a valid case as to whether it is appropriate for this organisation, with its relaxed membership criteria as previously mentioned, to ask its cadets to do their duty to what may be somebody elseâs queen then that needs to be reviewed.
Looking at the promise just now I canât help but feel that simply using the first sentence would be perfectly adequate.
[quote=âincubusâ post=8028][quote=âBaldrickâ post=8026]and if a cadet wonât serve the Queen they wonât serve her officers,[/quote]You do realise that you are speaking a load of nonsense here, donât you? Can anybody honestly believe that the reason that cadets obey officers is because of the authority of the monarch? Do they not follow the orders and instructions of the SNCOs and CIs in the Corps who donât hold a mandate from Her Maj?
Cadets play the game just as the rest of us do. We obey the orders of superiors because they are designated as superiors and that is part of the game and they understand it to be so. If they wish to do otherwise they are free to quit the game.
We are asking cadets to serve THIS organisation loyally and that is all that should matter. If there is a valid case as to whether it is appropriate for this organisation, with its relaxed membership criteria as previously mentioned, to ask its cadets to do their duty to what may be somebody elseâs queen then that needs to be reviewed.
Looking at the promise just now I canât help but feel that simply using the first sentence would be perfectly adequate.[/quote]
A load of old RUBBISH it may be in reality, but the whole authority of the chain of command is based upon the promises we make to eachother. You may not fully believe it, but if we start chipping away at it, then why donât we ditch saluting as well, thatâs essentially archaic old twaddle.
[quote=âBaldrickâ post=8029]A load of old RUBBISH it may be in reality, but the whole authority of the chain of command is based upon the promises we make to eachother. You may not fully believe it, but if we start chipping away at it, then why donât we ditch saluting as well, thatâs essentially archaic old twaddle.[/quote]The spams seem to manage just fine and they salute anything that moves. Plenty of other militaries also cope without having a background of royal authority too. Making the promise more relevant to our demographic will not bring about the end of civilisation (or tradition) as we know it.
But they all still swear allegiance to something. Even if we were a republic weâd have to swear allegiance to the state.
[quote=âBaldrickâ post=8031]But they all still swear allegiance to something. Even if we were a republic weâd have to swear allegiance to the state.[/quote]If we were serving the state, yes.
Are we asking the cadets to serve the state or to serve the ATC?
Iâd say the state, because the organisation is run by officers who hold a queenâs commission. Even the CIsâ and SNCOsâ authority derives from your warrants and certificates which are signed by the chief of staff. Whose own authority derives from his commission. Itâs a logical/legal fallacy I know but itâs what we have. I understand that weâre Not the real forces and we can all resign if we want, but it is this element which makes us a military organisation as opposed to a youth club.
Iâm Welsh, yet pledge allegiance to the Queen and the United Kingdom. There is no contradiction in that unless youâre determined to find one. Scotland and Wales remain a part of the United Kingdom until independence and even then the Queen will still be Queen of Scotland.
Yes, the Queen is Lord of Man, Duke of Normandy (for Channel Islands cadets), Queen Elizabeth I of Scotland, etc, etc⌠The principle is the same.
If Scottish cadets have a problem with that, thatâs their problem, not ours. Try the Woodland Fairy Folk (or whatever itâs called), or some other youth organisation that doesnât require an oath of allegiance. Our club, our rules.
GOM, I believe that youâre thinking of the Woodcraft Folk there.
or even further left are Kibbo Kift
I prefer my version. 