Apologetics & Vote Details

If you want to know why we believe certain votes are morally right or wrong click on an 'Apologetic' link below. If you want to know more information about the votes or how particular votes were recorded, click on a 'Vote details' link below.

Sanctity of Life

The Sanctity of Life
Apologetic
3-parent babies
Apologetic
Vote details
Abortion
Apologetic
1990 vote
2008 votes
2014/15 'Sex selection' votes
Abortion and the disabled
Apologetic
1990 vote
2008 vote
Abortion counselling and 'cooling off' period
Apologetic
Vote details
Abortion: Register of Pro-Life Doctors
Apologetic
Vote details
Embryo Experiments
Apologetic
1990 vote
'Saviour siblings' vote
'Animal-human embryos' vote
'The need for a father' vote
Euthanasia and Assisted suicide
Apologetic
1997/2000 votes
2015 votes
Human Cloning
Apologetic
Vote details

Marriage and the Family

Marriage and the Family
Apologetic
Adoption
Apologetic
Vote details
Civil Partnerships
Apologetic
Vote details
Civil Partnership - Sibling Amendment
Apologetic
Vote details
Divorce
Apologetic
'Fault' vote
'Wait' votes
Parental Notification Bill
Apologetic
Vote details
Same-sex marriage
Apologetic
Vote details
Smacking
Apologetic
Vote details

Christian Freedoms and Heritage

Christian Freedoms and Heritage
Apologetic
Charities Act
Apologetic
Vote details
Church employment freedoms
Apologetic
Vote details
Incitement to 'homophobic' hatred offence
Apologetic
Vote details
Incitement to Religious Hatred Offence
Apologetic
2001 votes
2005 / 06 votes
Religious Broadcasting
Apologetic
Vote details
Religious Education
Apologetic
Vote details
Sexual Orientation Regulations
Vote details
The Blasphemy laws
Apologetic
Vote details

Other

Gambling
Apologetic
2004/05 votes
2006 vote
Gender Recognition Act
Apologetic
Vote details
Gender Recognition Act - Religious Liberty
Apologetic
Vote details
Homosexual Age of Consent
Apologetic
Vote details
Homosexuals in the Armed Forces
Apologetic
Vote details
Section 28
Apologetic
Vote details
Reclassification of Cannabis
Apologetic
2003 'class C' vote
2008 'class B' vote

More information

Most of the votes involved a free vote. It is a matter of concern that some political parties have used the party whip to require MPs to vote for policies which many Christians would see as morally wrong (e.g. the repeal of Section 28, or the introduction of homosexual civil partnerships).

Some votes have had to be excluded. For example, the votes on Sunday trading have proved too complex to analyse in the time available.

The vote on the introduction of the national lottery was also excluded as none of the main political parties opposes the principle of the national lottery. The main vote in Parliament on the legislation bringing in the lottery was not actually on the principle, but rather the particular scheme for implementation. An analysis of MPs votes would yield very little information about their beliefs on this question and hence has not been done.

Where votes in the House of Commons are referred to, the vote totals are always two higher on both sides than the totals given in Hansard (the official record of House of Commons proceedings). This is because there are two tellers (MPs who count the vote) on both sides.

By convention, tellers support the vote they count. The exception is where a technical motion has been used in order to force a vote. So far as we are aware, in the issues considered here this only applies to the votes on religious broadcasting and on banning sex-selective abortion.