In a rather amazing outbreak of sanity in politics, our honourable Health Minister has been stripped of his veto powers by a vote of 95 to 50. This was the result of a 'concience vote', whereby parliamentary members were not forced to vote along party lines, but could make their own bloody decisions for a change. I don't know about you, but I'm pretty keen on this idea and rather think it should apply at all times. Sadly, nobody seemed very interested in pointing out the obvious reality behind the idea of the conscience vote. I wrote this in to the Herald Sun whilst the debate was still raging, but the bastards decided not to publish it.

The Idiot's Guide to Conscience Votes for Stupid Dummies.

There seems to be some uncertainty amongst the public and our top politicians concerning the nature of the ‘conscience’ vote. This general rule applies to most decisions regarding reproductive rights and all decisions regarding gay marriage and euthanasia. The options are these:

1. If you believe the invisible superhero in the sky will be angry and may use big bad magics on us, tick this box.
2. If you have respect for a person’s right to make decisions on issues effecting only themselves, tick this box.

Pretty simple really. No prizes for guessing which camp our Deputy PM falls into. He says he made his decision regarding RU486 after reflecting “at length”. I am merely curious Mr. Vaile, but did this reflection include an analysis of the facts, or did you just spend your time wondering what your imaginary friend might think? The idea behind democracy and freedom is not that the majority vote away the rights of minorities. Withholding rights to abortion, gay marriage and euthanasia is tantamount to legislating religious beliefs. In general, we should be tolerant of people’s religious beliefs, but not when those beliefs govern decision making on legislation effecting everyone – believers and infidels alike. If you believe that RU486 is wrong, Mr. Vaile, then don’t use it. Oh sorry, I forgot – you’re a guy.