Quote:
Originally posted by RedHot25+May 9 2005, 09:29 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (RedHot25 @ May 9 2005, 09:29 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Flames Draft Watcher@May 9 2005, 09:05 PM
Well that idea scares me. Is my MP going to vote his/her conscience or is that person actually going to represent their constituency?
At least if they are towing the "party line" then I can feel safe voting for the party that has a platform that follow my beliefs.
The statement sounds like a cop-out to me. Moral issues are too contentious so the Conservatives don't want to take a stand on them. And yet they claim to support the traditional definition of marriage. That seems like a bit of a contradiction to me.
|
Yup - and the perception is, I think for a lot of people, is that: is it really a "free" vote per se? Honestly, (the perception is) that you really know what way they are going to vote on it to begin with, so why not just state that?
To be blunt, as stated, have some balls and come out with your opinion. [/b][/quote]
And how doesn't the free vote address that? You want MPs with some balls? You let them make their own choice with regards to that issue.
That creates accountabliity.
Its better than saying ooo I had to vote along party lines, I'm a brainless clone blah blah blah.