I do struggle with the sort of nationalism displayed here, and by the commentator panelist of this week's Question Time, it goes something like "But isn't it proper for the Scottish people to govern ourselves, we're a country?".
The idea is that the only answer to this question for someone who believes in democracy is yes. But the questioner has choosen the grouping and it simplifies politics - in reality there are many different layers of decision making, covering different sizes of populations and these layers all exist at once.
Because the following are also true
"Isn't it proper for the people of Fife to govern themselves, it is the Kingdom of Fife afterall?"
"Isn't it proper for Shetlanders to govern themselves, after all they are a group of islands?"
"Isn't it proper for Aberdonians to govern themselves, after all it is a historic city?"
I don't mean they are true in that I'm suggesting they should declare themselves independent and aim to get into the EU. I mean that at some level, these groups of people have a right to make decisions together which mainly affect them. That's why we have local authorities and at the Scottish level, that's why we have the parliament. But that works on certain issues, delivery of local services etc. When it comes to larger issues, like running energy infrastructure, monetary policy, 212combating climate change, defending our borders and providing international aid, it makes more sense for us to work with our neighbours and to have a democratic voice in that level of decision making. We might work with the rest of the UK or with Europe to achieve certain goals.
Because its also true that:
"Isn't it proper for the people of the UK to govern ourselves?"
"Isn't it proper for the people of Europe to govern ourselves?"
I am comfortable with having different levels of 'belonging' and attachment, some of which are geographical - the town I live in, the county, the region, Scotland, the UK, Europe (the UN, humanity, the world, the universe 
). But some are through my personal history and family connections (which includes counties in England), places I've visited and liked, some are cultural (lots of these across the UK), language etc, some are political.
And in terms of having a voice, we have community councils, city or county councils, the Scottish parliament (which has regional representation as well as constituencies), the UK government (with different constituencies) and Europe. I think all these groupings have value, you can argue about which things should be decided at each level
but given the shared interests we have across the UK I think its a bit odd to say that no decisions should be made at that level.
Indeed the SNP plan to make decisions at that level with regards the currency, I haven't yet read the white paper, but I remember they were saying about having a shared energy policy and I get the impression that they'd like a lot of other things to remain the same too (university research funding, network rail etc).
The difference is that they'd like to take away our MPs, who give us a democratically elected voice on these matters, and replace them with the odd Scottish person on a board somewhere, which the rUK may or may not agree to.
I find it quite strange to see the SNP (&co) argue for no decisions to be made at a UK level, but want to be part of Europe. While UKIP want no decisions made at Europe, but only at the UK level.
(I started writing this last night, sorry if the discussion has moved on, of if my post is disjointed. I hope no one here has friends or family caught up in the helicopter accident, its so shocking).