(Caps added)
Not:
Bill C - 484 passed Second Reading yesterday - 147 to 133.
Isn't Joanne's fault though, the single (1) story in the news today about C-484 (G&M) indeed suggested in its earliest versions that the Bill had gone through 2nd reading. They have since corrected their mistake.
So we are earlier along in the process than was reported and there is still time to contact that list of 20 Liberal assholes RT has conveniently compiled and give 'em heck.
There is also time for real journalists in the MSM get off their asses and report on this thing. One story?
UPDATE: One of my commentors suggests G&M got it right the first time.
The confusion here seems to be about what exactly a vote on "second reading" is. Here's a quick civics lesson to clear things up.
A bill is read in Parliament for the first time when it is introduced. There is no vote at first reading. The initial vote any bill faces is on having it read a second time (hence the vote being referred to as a vote on "second reading"). If the bill passes the vote on second reading it's sent to committee, which then reports on the bill. A "report stage" debate and vote follows. If the bill passes that vote, a motion is made to read the bill a third time. If the bill passes the vote at third reading, it is sent to the Senate.
In short, a vote on second reading is actually the first vote a bill faces. C-484 still has a committee to pass through in addition to two more votes in the House before it even makes its way to the Senate, where it would have to start the process all over again.
Also, keep in mind that the Justice committee can amend the bill during its deliberations. This gives MPs the opportunity to change the more controversial, seemingly anti-choice passages contained in C-484.
[...]
Probably a less confusing but correct title would be "Unborn-victims bill passes first VOTE in Commons".
Mea Culpa. But still two more VOTES to go.
17 comments:
Good catch. Thanks very much.
The Cons don't actually want to own up to this legislation and hence it's only a private member's bill but it appears they massively supported it which is no surprise. The Liberal support for this Bill has allowed it to pass first reading if the numbers reported are correct. So this is yet another example of the Liberals not standing up to resist the Con's agenda.
The confusion here seems to be about what exactly a vote on "second reading" is. Here's a quick civics lesson to clear things up.
A bill is read in Parliament for the first time when it is introduced. There is no vote at first reading. The initial vote any bill faces is on having it read a second time (hence the vote being referred to as a vote on "second reading"). If the bill passes the vote on second reading it's sent to committee, which then reports on the bill. A "report stage" debate and vote follows. If the bill passes that vote, a motion is made to read the bill a third time. If the bill passes the vote at third reading, it is sent to the Senate.
In short, a vote on second reading is actually the first vote a bill faces. C-484 still has a committee to pass through in addition to two more votes in the House before it even makes its way to the Senate, where it would have to start the process all over again.
Also, keep in mind that the Justice committee can amend the bill during its deliberations. This gives MPs the opportunity to change the more controversial, seemingly anti-choice passages contained in C-484.
Anon,
So the origonal G&M story was right?
There is also time for real journalists in the MSM get off their asses and report on this thing.
I have not seen one sophisticated discussion about this in the media I'm exposed to...not one careful analysis of the core issue of personhood when it comes to the irrational concept of "fetal rights," little discussion of the fact that this doesn't make pregnant women any safer, nor any reporting of the fact that who is supporting this (the irrational anti-choice bigots and zealots like Joanne here) reveal a lot about the true intentions of this bill.
Although it's worth a shot, I'm not sure contacting those Liberals will do any good...if they're like Dan McTeague, the only thing you can expect is defensiveness and petulance.
I suggest generous helpings of uncivil (but not offensive) language.
bigcitylib: The short answer is yes, the first G&M story was correct. Probably a less confusing but correct title would be "Unborn-victims bill passes first VOTE in Commons".
Just like you've always said that gun registration never leads to confiscation, THIS bill WILL NOT lead to the criminalization of abortion. If that's what you think, you're insane.
Your intolerance of the political views of others is incomparable. If they don't agree with you, they're "assholes". You fervently believe that the only reasons conservatives pass laws is because they are always trying to sneak something through to fit this "hidden agenda", which mysteriously centers around abortion rights. ONLY YOU have the best interest of Canadians at heart. ONLY YOU want to do the 'right thing'. NOBODY else could possibly be able to do the right thing in their view because it doesn't match YOUR view. The intolerance, ignorance, and prejudice of you neocoms is unfathomable. You really do get cranky and frustrated when you're not in control, don't you? Does that imply you are control freaks? Of course not, because LIBERALS know better, and everything the conservatives do is a scandalous underhanded deceitful ploy. May your brain rest in peace, wherever it has gone.
Obviously it's beyond your comprehension that the intent of the bill is as it seems, to protect the lives of wanted unborn children.
Liberals have lost all credibility as a party worthy of governing a playground, let alone a country. For years you've depended on the MSM to cover for you and not bring up your hypocrisies. Well, the internet isn't controlled by the liberal media establishment, and you're having a much harder time fooling Canadians with your phony outrage and indignation. And the proof is in, or isn't in, your bank account.
Thanks again for selecting Dion.
THIS bill WILL NOT lead to the criminalization of abortion.
Then why are conservatives talking about it as a step in the right direction to what they eventually want?
You need to ask them that, instead of scolding people who don't agree with you.
Your intolerance of the political views of others is incomparable.
I stopped here. Dishonesty isn't a legitimate political view and if you think that, you are an enemy of democracy and of, well, The Enlightenment quite frankly.
You are, in fact, a screeching, raging. hysterical and above all irrational enemy of the Canadian people who must be marginalised before you are stopped altogether in ways you won't like. One being an end to the preferential tax treatment your churches enjoy and greater scrutiny of their political activism and their associations, just as a start. But really, the Right presents an embarrassment of riches for issues around which true democrats and liberals can be mobilised. So really, at this point, you might want think about dialing it down a bit.
Is anyone surprised Dion abstained? The man is politically paralyzed. I'm a little surprised he wasn't able to get the other Liberal MPs to at least abstain on the vote. Maybe he's losing control of his caucus or maybe he's letting them vote their conscience.
The NDP is staking its position on this bill and will reap some political benefit. Jack Layton is going on Lou Dobbs on CNN tonight and will make more political hay.
The NDP's pro-active in countering this government. The Liberals are walking around with their hands in their pockets unless they're actively supporting the government as they are by having giving the government the votes to get this thing to a house standing committee. But for Liberal support it was dead in the water.
Ti-guy, what is going on with the Liberals? My prediction is that the next polls will see a rise in NDP fortunes. The left won't allow the Liberals to take them for granted.
My prediction is that the next polls will see a rise in NDP fortunes.
I'll believe that when I see it.
Forget the polls,
it's who actually gets off the couch to vote, not who answers the phone to offer mere words.
Which is why the Liberal vote was drastically overpolled as compared to the actual vote in Alberta as well as the recent Quebec by-elections.
Liberals are demoralized, leaderless, and positionless: who can blame them for not wanting to get off the couch.
THIS is why Dion has imasculated himself on the national stage. His internals (more expensive and accurate in its ability to predict actual voting liklihood) tell him what will really happen in a real election.
Total decimation of the Liberal party.
He'd rather be a weak kneed, spinelss faux leader, than be an unemployed politician.
It's really that simple.
THIS is why Dion has imasculated (sic) himself on the national stage.
Speaking of emasculation, has anyone checked out Peter Van Loan's tits, Jason Kenney's hips or John Baird's arse lately?
Conservatives sure do love their curvy, voluptuous, saftig men.
Killing kids after birth should be allowed up until they demonstrate a sense of self-awareness, before that they're just a bunch of cells that happen to form a shape we identify as human.
Sorry. I meant to say killing kids of liberals after birth should be allowed up until they demonstrate a sense of self-awareness,
hmmm, that was large whack of liberals who supported the bill. Perhaps their not really liberals.
...could it be after all these years of fetus culling, the left have aborted themselves right out of existence. Is it only the botched abortions that are left?
Post a Comment