Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 15th Dec 2012 19:11 UTC
In the News "Peers and scientists including Professor Stephen Hawking are once again pushing for an official pardon for codebreaker Alan Turing. Turing's death from cyanide poisoning in 1954 was ruled a suicide, coming after his conviction for gross indecency at a time when homosexuality was illegal." The fact that he still hasn't been pardoned is an utter disgrace.
Thread beginning with comment 545412
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: fat lot of good
by Laurence on Sun 16th Dec 2012 16:41 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: fat lot of good"
Laurence
Member since:
2007-03-26

I'm not American, but your point is still asinine. Oh, if the Americans don't show remorse for their civil rights abuses then no one has too?

You're twisting my argument. I'm fully in support of showing remorse. In fact I've said that about a dozen times now; so I don't appreciate your childish rebuttals. I'm was illustrating the hypocrisy of your judgements.


I'm Canadian, and we have our own shameful laws to deal with, and I totally support compensation for those affected by them. Japanese Canadians deserve compensation for internments in the 1940s. Natives deserve recognition and compensation for persecution in the 1950s, and so on, for ever, it seems.

Your Queen is my Queen, and I am ashamed of both our governments for their actions taken in the past.

I guess we at least agree on something ;)

The British government (and monarchy) has committed a lot of wrong doings - none of them excusable. So I'm genuinely not trying shrug them off. I just think there are better ways to honour the victims than this.

edit: and I'm not alone. Even some gay activists share this view: http://blog.jgc.org/2011/11/why-im-not-supporting-campaign-for.html

Edited 2012-12-16 16:46 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: fat lot of good
by kwan_e on Mon 17th Dec 2012 00:01 in reply to "RE[5]: fat lot of good"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18



Sorry, but that article still trots out that "but it was law back then". It is never a legitimate argument.

That attitude sets an even more dangerous precedent by allowing people to think of present laws as "oh well, it will get changed in the future, so let's not bother about it now".

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: fat lot of good
by Laurence on Mon 17th Dec 2012 09:47 in reply to "RE[6]: fat lot of good"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26


Sorry, but that article still trots out that "but it was law back then". It is never a legitimate argument.

That attitude sets an even more dangerous precedent by allowing people to think of present laws as "oh well, it will get changed in the future, so let's not bother about it now".

I think you're pulling your own interpretation from that article. It isn't saying let's not bother now, it's saying let's get the law changed now and improve the state of equality for everyone instead of trying to appease the one notable figure who is already dead.

If we really want to show our support for gay men and women, then I'd rather see campaigns to see gay marriages legalised (etc).

so lets be honest, as much as many of you would like to say that you're all for equal rights, this specific movement is more about doing what you think is right for your heroes rather than doing what's right for gay and bi citizens nationwide.

Reply Parent Score: 2