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 | |
| Embryo Experiments | Apologetic | Vote details |
| Human Cloning | Apologetic | Vote details |
| Abortion | Apologetic | Vote details |
| Abortion of the Handicapped | Apologetic | Vote details |
| Register of Pro-Life Doctors | Apologetic | Vote details |
| Euthanasia | 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 |
| Smacking | Apologetic | Vote details |
Christian Freedoms and Heritage
| Christian Freedoms and Heritage | Apologetic | |
| Incitement to Religious Hatred Offence | Apologetic | 2001 votes 2005 / 06 votes |
| Religious Broadcasting | Apologetic | Vote details |
| Religious Education | Apologetic | Vote details |
| The Blasphemy laws | Apologetic | Vote details |
Other
| Homosexual Age of Consent | Apologetic | Vote details |
| Section 28 | Apologetic | Vote details |
| Homosexuals in the Armed Forces | Apologetic | Vote details |
| Gender Recognition Bill | Apologetic | Vote details |
| Gender Recognition Act - Religious Liberty |
Apologetic | Vote details |
| Gambling | Apologetic | Vote details |
| Reclassification of Cannabis | Apologetic | Vote details |
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.
There has been a private member's Bill to introduce euthanasia. Votes on this Bill are included. But we have not included votes on the Mental Capacity Bill as MPs who opposed euthanasia took a variety of tactical approaches on the legislation. Some opposed the Bill entirely. Other MPs (at least initially) supported the Bill arguing that the legislation does not necessarily mandate euthanasia, although that was a risk that that could be the result in some cases. These MPs sought assurances from the Government in the form of Ministerial amendments to the Bill in the House of Lords. Ministerial amendments were made in the Lords. When they were subsequently debated by the Commons the Government imposed a severe time restriction. The situation became confused and several votes followed one after another. It is not possible to determine from these votes an individual MP's view on euthanasia.
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 vote on religious broadcasting.
PDF
Word