Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

House of Lords debates pardon for Alan Turing

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 161 posts

Re: House of Lords debates pardon for Alan Turing

#31

Post by jackmaney »

eeky wrote: post #25
nknighthb wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Like the majority of people, I oppose gay marriage. From your past comments, you appear to be American. I am therefore ecstatic to inform you that you are in the minority. http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/09/support-...

I said majority of people, not Americans. My statement stands correct. Look at what other countries have done to recently stem gay culture: Russia recently passed a unanimous (436-0) vote which banned gay propaganda[1]. Homosexuals acceptance is pushed hard in the western media, but don't let that skew your worldview. Reactionary responses are not uncommon. [1] http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/11/russia-law-b…

So, how are things waaaay over there on the wrong side of history?

Re: House of Lords debates pardon for Alan Turing

#32

Post by mindstab »

taybin wrote: post #5

They should pardon all the people convicted under that law. Not just the famous, useful ones.

I believe they plan to, and that is what is being debated, they are just using Alan Turing as the most famous example of an deceased person that should be pardoned.

Re: House of Lords debates pardon for Alan Turing

#34

Post by JetSetWilly »

nknighthb wrote: post #9
MereInterest wrote: post #6

If I remember correctly, the last time this came up, they gave a good reason for not pardoning him. They knew that he was innocent, and that the government of the time had wronged him. Still, they refused to give a pardon. Not because they agreed with the actions against Turing, but because they felt that pardoning him would be an attempt to cover up their mistreatment of him. They refused to pardon him, because it w…

This "good reason" makes no sense whatsoever. It's somebody's poor attempt at doublespeak. Pardons are not a coverup.

It seems like a good reason to me. They couldn't pardon him when it mattered, and now they want to puff themselves up with how magnanimous and tolerant they are, just when it doesn't matter? Screw that!

The pardon doesn't serve anybody's interests but their own, it simply uses what was done to Turing to enhance their own political reputation.

Reminds me of the mormons baptising dead jews - it is actually offensive.

Re: House of Lords debates pardon for Alan Turing

#35

Post by jackmaney »

eeky wrote: post #29
lysol wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, let's. If homosexuals should be allowed to experience their sexuality than why not permit them to fulfill their emotional, romantic, and other needs? It's such an artificial line to draw and we certainly can discuss both gay marriage and the legality of homosexuality in the same discussion.

The problem arises that the legality of marriage was designed around traditional families. There's nothing that stops homosexuals from fulfilling their emotional, romantic, and other needs. But when you involved tax deductions because children are such an expensive commitment, it gets hairy. I do support civil unions (but not gay adoption), and I am tolerant of gays (I discuss these issues with friends who are gay),…

You do realize that if the definition of marriage had never changed, then interracial marriages would still be illegal, right?

Re: House of Lords debates pardon for Alan Turing

#36

Post by dllthomas »

rmc wrote: post #15
eeky wrote: post #10

Like the majority of people, I oppose gay marriage. But what the British government did with chemical castration to Alan Turing and others is absolutely reprehensible - and they should pardon all of them. Let's not conflate these issues please.

> Like the majority of people, I oppose gay marriage. That is factually incorrect. The majority of the population support marriage equality.

Majority of which population?

Re: House of Lords debates pardon for Alan Turing

#37

Post by jlgreco »

jacobwcarlson wrote: post #4
tome wrote: post #2

Shouldn't all people punished under criminalization of homosexuality be retrospectively pardoned?

The idea is that by not changing bad decisions made in the past, those mistakes aren't forgotten or brushed under the rug.

Is it really credible that giving a pardon to all those persecuted under homosexuality laws would make us forget our shameful past? That does not seem credible to me, that just seems like a haphazard excuse.

Re: House of Lords debates pardon for Alan Turing

#38

Post by corin_ »

mindstab wrote: post #32
taybin wrote: post #5

They should pardon all the people convicted under that law. Not just the famous, useful ones.

I believe they plan to, and that is what is being debated, they are just using Alan Turing as the most famous example of an deceased person that should be pardoned.

Why not do it all in a single bill? They could still make him a figure head, even name the bill after him and include a specific point about pardoning him, but include everyone else too.

If this ends up getting through all the stages and they then want to do the same for everyone else, at the very least it's a waste of time going through the stages again (if there's no more debate), or if there is still debate then even more time wasted.

The only reason not to include it in this bill, if that is their long-term plan, is if they think it is more likely to pass with just one name, which seems odd to me.

Re: House of Lords debates pardon for Alan Turing

#39

Post by thejsjunky »

dyno12345 wrote: post #8
MereInterest wrote: post #6

If I remember correctly, the last time this came up, they gave a good reason for not pardoning him. They knew that he was innocent, and that the government of the time had wronged him. Still, they refused to give a pardon. Not because they agreed with the actions against Turing, but because they felt that pardoning him would be an attempt to cover up their mistreatment of him. They refused to pardon him, because it w…

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-16919012 The explanation given was that the law was wrong, not that he hadn't broken it so as to have a pardon, and you can't posthumously commute a sentence

> not that he hadn't broken it so as to have a pardon

Reasoning I find confusing. A pardon is by definition something given to people convicted of breaking the law. It can be and is sometimes used as a relief for people who have been -wrongly- convicted if there is no other mechanism (or just because it's easier), but that's not implied or required.

Is this some difference between US and UK law?

Re: House of Lords debates pardon for Alan Turing

#40

Post by corin_ »

JetSetWilly wrote: post #34
nknighthb wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This "good reason" makes no sense whatsoever. It's somebody's poor attempt at doublespeak. Pardons are not a coverup.

It seems like a good reason to me. They couldn't pardon him when it mattered, and now they want to puff themselves up with how magnanimous and tolerant they are, just when it doesn't matter? Screw that! The pardon doesn't serve anybody's interests but their own, it simply uses what was done to Turing to enhance their own political reputation. Reminds me of the mormons baptising dead jews - it is actually offensive.

It no longer matters to Turing, but it still sends a message to the country that how he and others were treated was wrong, which is a good thing.

Whether a pardon is needed after an official apology was already issued is debatable, as they both send the same message, personally I'd like to see it passed but won't really care much if it doesn't.

It's very different to "converting" dead people to your religion, as this act would have been offensive to them if done when they were alive. However Turing would not have been offended if pardoned while alive.

Post reply on HN