Dorries' amendment shot down in flames

Well, it appears that the latest in Nadine Dorries' attempts to limit women's reproductive freedom got pretty short shrift in Parliament (The Guardian).  From the Guardian's live blog:

What does it mean? On Twittershortly before the vote took place Labour's Chris Bryant posted this: I suspect Nadine Dorries has done more harm to social conservatism on abortion than anyone in 25 years. Hurrah! Really? It is certainly a terrible defeat, perhaps even a textbook example of how not to approach a free-vote, conscience issue. Dorries tabled what appeared at face value a relatively technical change, and yet she ended up losing the support of her government, a large section of her party and even the co-sponsor of her amendment (Frank Field). But this wasn't really a decisive encounter in the culture war; it was more a case of Westminster ganging up on one of parliament's easiest targets. (Which is why the PMQ's exchange earlier was significant. When your own party leader treats you as a figure of ridicule, you are in trouble.) Does this really tell us much about the balance of power between social liberalism and social conservatism in Britain today? I doubt it. The only lesson that really stands out is that, if you want change legislation on a contentious issue, don't ask Dorries to take the lead.

I don't suppose that will stop her attempts to limit abortion rights.