Do You want an independent Scotland with it's own Head of State, or England's Queen as your head of State?

An independent Scotland with its own Head of State. Let England keep its royal family (and pay for it); we'll do better on our own, without Trident, without being subject to George W. Bush, and without England sapping our human and natural resources. We should follow the example of other small countries which are doing much better on their own than they did as dependencies of other, larger countries, such as Norway, Iceland, Ireland ... We have nothing to lose but our chains, the chains which have bound us to England for 300 years, ever since the English bribed the Scottish nobility to give up our independence against the wishes of the people. Now is time for the Scottish people to reclaim that independence!

I live in rural Dumfriesshire.

No I want nothing to do with any Royal family as they stand today.

By this I mean that if you look at history the Queen we have right now doesn't really have any right to sit on the throne. Her ancestors killed most of the true Royal family.

And to be honest are the really a good example of how people should live?

4 children, 4 broken marriages!!!

I would rather be a republic.

I live in Scotland, I was born in Scotland.

I went to England for a holiday with my family and even though we kept ourselves to ourselves, we were attacked verbally while there.

Since England is a part of the United Kingdom,there is a Queen on England---Elizabeth II.The reach of the British Monarchy has extended and now reigns many lands,so I think it is best to call Elizabeth Queen of the United Kingdom,because many of her people feel that their countries are being slighted when only one of the realms is mentioned.I understand just who people are talking about when they say "Queen of England," but there are many historians who want accuracy and realms that want to be recognized.England,Scotland,Wales and Northern Ireland make up the United Kingdom.And to further add confusion,the Queen has different titles for each of her Commonwealth realms! So,to make it easier,Queen of the UK is probably the best route in terms of correctness.

She's our Queen too and yes I would definitely keep her as head of state. Independance is fine commercially but at the end of the day does it really matter? Will we really be that better off. I don't think so. The issue we would have in an indipendant Scotland is covering the amount of dole queue tossers and paying the taxes should the likes of that Solidarity eedjit get some sort of power.

Dundee

I prefer having the Queen as our head of state!

Without England looking after us we Scots will soon turn into a third world country.

We just don't have the resources and climate up here to survive for long in the 21st century.

Long live the Queen and may our taxes forever be used to keep her and the rest of her wonderful family in the luxury they deserve!

I don't want the Royal Family. Look at their reputation. I was born in Glasgow living in Oban.x

the uk has a better say in europe when it's together and actually it was a scottish monarch that united the kingdoms.

As a scot for over 40 yrs i cant bring myself to answer what only to me seems a totally insane question?

work out the answer yourself and tell us all when you come to a conclusion???

this is none of my business, but I have to say that if Scotland secedes from the Union, it will weaken you drastically in the world

well the haggis bashers moan about it enough let them have one and throw the ones we got out of ours