Rollins has a phrase for this sort of situation that I’ve been using for a few years.
“Your choice is fish.”
I have used this in many a situation where the choice offered is no choice at all. Apparently there’s a name for this. Hobson’s Choice. Found the link in a fark thread on SCOTUS debating the 2nd Amendment… that’d be a completely different post.
But ultimately this private members bill would be a way of telling women considering an abortion, “Your choice is fish”.
Bill C-10 – A bill to make sure that illegal content doesn’t get tax credits or a bill enabling the use of an undisclosed morality system to censor film in Canada? Considering that no film has ever applied for a Tax Credit that could be described by the talking-points brought up on this so far (child porn & extreme violence), I’m of the opinion that the true reasoning is the latter.
Bill C-484 – A bill that would create a loophole that would be used to deny women the freedom to get an abortion. Not that the abortion would be denied, just an unclear threat that she could be charged with murder after the fact. But it’s not an attack on abortion. The Harper government aren’t going to re-open the abortion debate. They said so. They just want to make sure that someone who kills a pregnant woman gets charged for ending two lives, that’s all they want.
I’m growing tired of this government.