Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 20th Jul 2013 19:05 UTC
Legal "Alan Turing, the Enigma codebreaker who took his own life after being convicted of gross indecency under anti-homosexuality legislation, is to be given a posthumous pardon. The government signalled on Friday that it is prepared to support a backbench bill that would pardon Turing, who died from cyanide poisoning at the age of 41 in 1954 after he was subjected to 'chemical castration'." Justice.
Thread beginning with comment 567605
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
PhilPotter
by PhilPotter on Sat 20th Jul 2013 21:27 UTC
PhilPotter
Member since:
2011-06-10

Fact of the matter is whether one was a hero in those times or not, a man or woman being sent to prison/forced to take chemicals to castrate their sexual drive simply because of which sex they were attracted to is an absolute travesty. The law was wrong - a pardon implies admission of guilt. Every conviction under this law should be quashed, and everybody apologised to - those who are still alive, and those who have now perished. To do anything else - to admit it was OK for some to be gay but not others - is the political classes showing us they have learnt nothing.

Reply Score: 11

RE: PhilPotter
by kwan_e on Sun 21st Jul 2013 02:05 in reply to "PhilPotter"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

Everyone who holds this view:

To do anything else - to admit it was OK for some to be gay but not others - is the political classes showing us they have learnt nothing.


Unless the government actually says "okay, we'll pardon this one guy, and no one else may get pardoned for this unjust law in the future"

SHUT THE FUCK UP.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[2]: PhilPotter
by Soulbender on Sun 21st Jul 2013 02:59 in reply to "RE: PhilPotter"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

They don't have to say it, they just have to not do it or endlessly argue about it and delay it. You know, what the government usually does.

SHUT THE FUCK UP.

Why? People aren't allowed to disagree with your assessments? Some would say a healthy discussion about the pros and cons would be a good thing.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE: PhilPotter
by Soulbender on Sun 21st Jul 2013 02:11 in reply to "PhilPotter"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

The law has been wrong a lot of times, not only concerning gay people.
Should we really pardon everyone throughout history who's been wrongfully convicted by bad laws?
Or is it only important when a famous person was affected?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: PhilPotter
by kwan_e on Sun 21st Jul 2013 02:28 in reply to "RE: PhilPotter"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

The law has been wrong a lot of times, not only concerning gay people.
Should we really pardon everyone throughout history who's been wrongfully convicted by bad laws?


Yes, actually.

Or is it only important when a famous person was affected?


Strawman.

Not only is the government not saying no one else but Turing should be pardoned, neither are people like me who support such pardons.

I want other people who suffered under this law to also be pardoned, but I recognize, politically, that you have to grease the wheels. Therefore, this is important not because Turing is famous, but because it will make it easier in the future to get everyone else pardoned.

So nice try with the strawman, but you lose.

Reply Parent Score: 0