Not necessarily so. George III was a staunch ultra-Protestant that had no time for giving the Catholics any slack, and he wielded a substantial amount of influence and patronage in the 1770s Commons. It only takes the right butterfly (say, a incident between Canadiens and the British colonial administration that leads to a riot) to piss off the British in passing a Quebec Act that would be as oppressive on the Canadiens as the rest of the Intolerable Acts were on the other 13 colonies. If this happens, it becomes very likely that Canada shall side of its own will with the Patriot movement, join the Continental Congress, and fight the ARW together.
George III was pragmatic. After all, he passed the Quebec Act OTL, despite his Protestant feelings, because he needed allies against the American Rebels. If there was an incident, George III would have grit his teeth but done nothing. He wanted to keep the American colonies more than uphold his ultra-Protestant stance.
The American Rebels, OTOH, were stupid enough the bite the hand that fed them. When Rochambeau's French army was in the 13 Colonies, he received harrassment from the American Rebels, who refused him lodgings, charged him exhorbitant money for provisions and so on, despite the fact that his army was the only credible threat to the British instead of the ragtag Rebel army led by the overrated George Washington. Can you guess why Rochabeau and his army was harrassed? It was because he was a Papist and French. Even after Rochambeau basically won Yorktown for the Rebel side, he continued to be harrassed. At one point after Yorktown, he was arrested by a Rebel sheriff demanding that he pay an exorbitant sum for lodgings or be sent to jail. George Washington had to send in dragoons to rescue him so that he wouldn't end up in jail. So, the American Rebels were just as much ultra-Protestant as George III, unlike what you say.
The experience of fighting the ARW together would foster strong feelings of brotherhood between Canada and the 13 colonies.
I doubt it. The Americans don't do gratitude very well. After all, they displayed no gratitude to the British for kicking out the French in the Seven Years War, and they displayed no gratitude to the French for kicking out the British in the American Revolution twenty years later. Their anti-Papist and anit-French feelings would overide any gratitude they just maybe might feel.
Not really. France had no real urge to recover Quebec after 1763, it was a closed deal to them. They would make no difficulty to Canada becoming a part of the USA.
No. France did not want the USA to dominate the whole North American continent. During the American Revolution, they were willing to ensure that North America be divided between the Americans and British. That way, it ensured that the British and Americans remain enemies, weakening the British. France wanted Canada (which were populated wholy by New France colonists at the time) to remain British because it would force the British, the weaker power in North America, to play nice to the New France colonists in order to resist the new-born and agressive United States. As long as the British and Americans remain enemies, the New France colonists were safe which was what France wanted. If either the Americans or British ended up dominating the North American continent, nothing would then stop them, being anti-Papist and anti-Catholic that they were, from assimilating the New France colonists. France refused to aid the American Rebels in conquering Canada after Yorktown for this very reason. Very smart.
But they are. It is called the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights, which give much better rights than the QA. You are challenged to show the part where it discriminates against Catholics and French-speakers.
You are challenged to demonstrate whether the Americans would have been willing to honour what a piece of pâper written by elites says. There was no reason for the New France colonists to trust in the goodwill of the Americans any more than the British.