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 545493
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: fat lot of good
by Laurence on Mon 17th Dec 2012 09:47 UTC 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

RE[8]: fat lot of good
by kwan_e on Mon 17th Dec 2012 11:48 in reply to "RE[7]: 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".

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.
"

I'm not saying they're saying that. I'm saying the attitude sets a precedent. Do you consider it unlikely? Well guess what, it's unlikely that granting the pardon will set a precedent of uncontrolled flood of lawsuits against the government you and the others are fearmongering about.

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).


That's being done as well.

Why is it so hard for people like you to understand that society can do many things at the same time?

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.


I've said time and time again that this could be the start of something. For me, this is a play for a bigger movement, something that could give the gay marriage movement more momentum.

Every little bit helps.

Unfortunately, it doesn't make for a good story about epic failure, but as I keep having to say: all or nothing rhetoric achieves mostly the latter. I would like to have this achieve a lot, but you cowards would rather nothing happen if you don't get all your demands.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[9]: fat lot of good
by Laurence on Mon 17th Dec 2012 12:25 in reply to "RE[8]: fat lot of good"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

I'm not saying they're saying that. I'm saying the attitude sets a precedent. Do you consider it unlikely? Well guess what, it's unlikely that granting the pardon will set a precedent of uncontrolled flood of lawsuits against the government you and the others are fearmongering about.

Well, I guess either arguments are entirely hypothetical

That's being done as well.

Yes, but sadly against much opposition.


Why is it so hard for people like you to understand that society can do many things at the same time?

Because generally society cannot. Generally most people care long enough to follow one thing closely then get bored and move onto something completely unrelated.

We've seen this with the whole SOPA campaigns, there's been a number of similar follow up proposals that have been largely ignored because everyone has "done their bit" and now moved on to the next trend.

It's only really people like you and I that seem to care enough about issues like these ;)

I've said time and time again that this could be the start of something. For me, this is a play for a bigger movement, something that could give the gay marriage movement more momentum.

That was also said about lowering the age of consent between two men, civil partnerships and so on. Yet here we still are, discussing the lack of equality ;)


Unfortunately, it doesn't make for a good story about epic failure, but as I keep having to say: all or nothing rhetoric achieves mostly the latter. I would like to have this achieve a lot, but you cowards would rather nothing happen if you don't get all your demands.

Oh grow the f--k up already. Just I have a different opinion, it doesn't make me a coward or pushing for "all or nothing".

Kids like you really need to learn how to have a conversation with peers without throwing negatives around like spoilt brats.

Edited 2012-12-17 12:27 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2