Turing Not Pardoned for Being Gay

[sapphireofthesea]

I suspect legality has something to do with the decision.
look at it another, reverse that and you open the book for more people to do it. Sounds good, until someone looks at all the reversals and calls miscarrage a justice for one of them (assume ideal case involved) and then suddenly they have more than a handful of lawsuits going on.
If there is a chance for someone to be sued someone will do the suing unfortunately.

They also have a point, a flawed law in hindsight is still a law in the past. From a legal stand point it is the right call to make (though agreeably, it does seem wrong morally considering the change in views)

 

[Monkeyman O'Brien]

seriously?

1. it was a stupid law from a very conservative time, I mean an ACTUAL crime mabye, but this was not a crime, he did not hurt anyone

2. are you comparing the rape of a 13 year old to gay sex? no......

1. The laws the law. Does not matter one bit what you think of it. If you do not like it then you lobby to get it changed. If you break it then you get punished.
People still get punished for non crimes like downloading shit but if you do it and get busted then you knew the risks and did it anyway.

2. Yes... A criminal is a criminal and their other activities do not give them free reign to break the law. Everyone should be held to the law regardless of how nice they are or how they contribute in other ways to society.

 

[Vault101]

seriously?

1. it was a stupid law from a very conservative time, I mean an ACTUAL crime mabye, but this was not a crime, he did not hurt anyone

2. are you comparing the rape of a 13 year old to gay sex? no......

1. The laws the law. Does not matter one bit what you think of it. If you do not like it then you lobby to get it changed. If you break it then you get punished.
People still get punished for non crimes like downloading shit but if you do it and get busted then you knew the risks and did it anyway.

2. Yes... A criminal is a criminal and their other activities do not give them free reign to break the law. Everyone should be held to the law regardless of how nice they are or how they contribute in other ways to society.

the law was bullshit, I dont care if it was "the law" it was a bullshit law based on nothing, he wasnt a real criminal, it was a guy going against society and getting in trouble for it

people have done that for a long time, that almost feels like saying Jesus was a criminal and totally deserved his crucifiction, society at the time was fucking stupid..less so in the 50's but..well still stupid, we know that now

 

[sketch_zeppelin]

Its best that they don't reverse his conviction. What was done to Turing was an injustice and as long as it stays an injustice people will stay pissed off about it (or at least stay pissed off longer) and it won't be forgoten.

Homosexuality isn't a crime anymore (in most of the world) but its always good to have reminders as to what things were like in the past and just how far we have yet to go.

 

[2012 Wont Happen]

He was properly convicted of a criminal offense.
Posthumously pardoning him does nothing for the man.
I'm sure that, if he is looking down on us now, he is more happy about a UK that is currently accepting of homosexuals than a UK that would spend up government resources in a time of economic crises to pardon a dead man.

It should have never been illegal. However, pardoning him doesn't bring him back. We should just be happy that now we live in a world that is tolerant of homosexuality (I suppose that is debatable with my country, but since 2003 it hasn't been a crime here at least).

 

[Daystar Clarion]

seriously?

1. it was a stupid law from a very conservative time, I mean an ACTUAL crime mabye, but this was not a crime, he did not hurt anyone

2. are you comparing the rape of a 13 year old to gay sex? no......

1. The laws the law. Does not matter one bit what you think of it. If you do not like it then you lobby to get it changed. If you break it then you get punished.
People still get punished for non crimes like downloading shit but if you do it and get busted then you knew the risks and did it anyway.

2. Yes... A criminal is a criminal and their other activities do not give them free reign to break the law. Everyone should be held to the law regardless of how nice they are or how they contribute in other ways to society.

the law was bullshit, I dont care if it was "the law" it was a bullshit law based on nothing, he wasnt a real criminal, it was a guy going against society and getting in trouble for it

people have done that for a long time, that almost feels like saying Jesus was a criminal and totally deserved his crucifiction, society at the time was fucking stupid..less so in the 50's but..well still stupid, we know that now

Yes. We know that now.

Hindsight is a brilliant thing, the same way that in another hundred years there will undoubtedly be practices that are considered illegal now, that are standard practice then.

We judge people by the laws of today and the societal standards of today.

In his time, Turing was considered a criminal, and society considered him a deviant. Those were the standards of his time.

He can not be pardoned, for the same reason that we can't start retroactively prosecuting people for things that are crimes today, but weren't in the past.

 

[Monkeyman O'Brien]

the law was bullshit, I dont care if it was "the law" it was a bullshit law based on nothing, he wasnt a real criminal, it was a guy going against society and getting in trouble for it

people have done that for a long time, that almost feels like saying Jesus was a criminal and totally deserved his crucifiction, society at the time was fucking stupid..less so in the 50's but..well still stupid, we know that now

And? No one cares what you think of the law. No one at all.
As I said, if you don't like laws then you try to get them changed but if you break them then tough shit for you. If you do not like a countries laws then you are free to leave.
And as for Jesus, he was not a criminal. Pontius Pilatus tried his best to get him off the hook but the people demanded he die and the propaganda about him claiming to be a king did violate Roman law. So he just had a shitty lawyer.
If he had of declared himself a king then he would have been breaking the law and thus would have deserved death.
And society is always stupid. Who knows, maybe in 100 years the law will have changed again and people will go back to executing homosexuals and they will look back on us tolerating them now as stupid.

End point is this. The law is the law. You don't like it. Tough shit. Leave if you want. You break it and you get punished.

 

[The Last Nomad]

He wasn't simply Homosexual... He was in love with a much older man who didn't return his feelings (who may not gay have been at all).
Bit of a dick move by himself if you ask me, but not deserving of what he got.

But do you really care about opinions of people who feel homosexuality is a crime?
I don't...

 

[Erttheking]

It's kinda disgusting, but people shouldn't waste their energy being stuck in the past.

 

[richd213]

Maybe the government should posthumously pardon all gay people that were harmed due to stupid laws based on bullshit.

They won't do it though because that would show that the state is not always right.

 

[Monkeyman O'Brien]

I do. So you lose that argument.

But you're no one. So I still win.

So obviously, the burning of witches was entirely justified, and putting Jews in death camps also was. They all knowingly broke the law after all.

Seriously, where did you get that strange ideas that all laws are always right, and should always be enforced?

I never said the laws are right. Strawman arguments are pathetic.
I said that if you break the laws then you knew the consequences and took the risk. If you do not like the law then you try to change it or you leave. But you do not get to break the law then whine and call the laws unfair just because you do not like them.

 

[dyre]

It's the House of Lords. Why would a bunch of old farts concern themselves with the plight of people they find icky?

If that hadn't been the case, then at least they would have issued a condemnation or something similar to "This is wrong, and should not have happened".

They did say that. They said it was wrong and terrible, and that they won't just sweep that conviction under a rug and try to "put right what cannot be put right"

"It is tragic that Alan Turing was convicted of an offence which now seems both cruel and absurd-particularly poignant given his outstanding contribution to the war effort. However, the law at the time required a prosecution and, as such, long-standing policy has been to accept that such convictions took place and, rather than trying to alter the historical context and to put right what cannot be put right, ensure instead that we never again return to those times"

Ah, splendid. They've certainly exceeded my expectations of them. Perhaps they're at least somewhat worth having around after all.

Seems the best they could do, to be honest.

Yup, they did that they could. The OP was just being deliberately misleading to rile Escapists

 

[Daverson]

Erm, I think all this discussion about whether or not you can pardon someone for something that was illegal at the time it was committed is somewhat irrelevant. You can pardon someone for doing something illegal, if it's still illegal today. Unless I'm very much mistaken, that's kind of the whole point of a pardon.

I looked it up on wikipedia, and apparently all British soldiers convicted of cowardice during WW1 were pardoned back in 2006, so it's not like they can't do it. Regardless of what parliament might actually be thinking, in light of this you can only really view it as plain and simple homophobia.

 

[Vault101]

the law was bullshit, I dont care if it was "the law" it was a bullshit law based on nothing, he wasnt a real criminal, it was a guy going against society and getting in trouble for it

people have done that for a long time, that almost feels like saying Jesus was a criminal and totally deserved his crucifiction, society at the time was fucking stupid..less so in the 50's but..well still stupid, we know that now

And? No one cares what you think of the law. No one at all.
As I said, if you don't like laws then you try to get them changed but if you break them then tough shit for you. If you do not like a countries laws then you are free to leave.
And as for Jesus, he was not a criminal. Pontius Pilatus tried his best to get him off the hook but the people demanded he die and the propaganda about him claiming to be a king did violate Roman law. So he just had a shitty lawyer.
If he had of declared himself a king then he would have been breaking the law and thus would have deserved death.
And society is always stupid. Who knows, maybe in 100 years the law will have changed again and people will go back to executing homosexuals and they will look back on us tolerating them now as stupid.

End point is this. The law is the law. You don't like it. Tough shit. Leave if you want. You break it and you get punished.

... I generally dont have a problem with the law as it is now

but you cant just follow the "law" becasuse its "the law" without actually thinking and considering what it means, thats how horrible things have heppned to people in the past..because "oh well..its the law" even if it is retarded

 

[The Unworthy Gentleman]

He broke the law, he had to face the consequences. Just because the laws of changed doesn't mean we have to pardon every criminal who wouldn't be in prison. They disregarded the rules and they have to face the consequences for that.

Him being a founder of computer science has nothing to do with it.