4 ms·

How about a blanket pardon for anyone ever convicted of consentual homosexual relationships?

by EiZei 14y ago

elssar 14y ago
Alan Turing's contributions to science and the war time effort were immense, and immeasurable. However, granting a pardon to him and him alone won't mean much. He was guilty. The law which he broke was draconian, no doubts about it, but it was the law at that time. I do not think he was the only Briton who was oppressed because of that particular law. If there is a pardon, and there should be one, it should be granted to everyone who was convicted under that law.
- brnstz 14y ago
  I agree any pardon should be a blanket one. I wonder about semantics though. Is someone really "guilty" of breaking an unjust law? It's like saying someone is "guilty" of freeing a slave. An unjust law is no law at all, and usually people have to break it before it is changed.
  - saraid216 14y ago
    As far as I know, no one has been pardoned for freeing slaves, either.
    - justincormack 14y ago
      Very importantly slaves were allowed to be freed, by a court of law in the UK.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somersetts_Case http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somersetts_Case
  - elssar 14y ago
    Guilty of breaking the law of the time? Semantics? Guess you could say "he broke a law. There shouldn't have been such a law, but unfortunately it was there, and he broke it."
  - mindcrime 14y ago
    Is someone really "guilty" of breaking an unjust law? No. An unjust law is no law at all Agreed. So, in this case, a "pardon", now that I think about it, isn't exactly the right thing, in a sense. I mean, it's a nice token gesture, but it still implies that a law was actually broken. An apology for being victimized by a non-law would be more appropriate.
    - elssar 14y ago
      Interesting point. At first I was gonna say semantics, but in this case it matters. Guess they need to phrase it better when they start quashing the convictions.
- darkarmani 14y ago
  > He was guilty. That the only time a pardon is needed.
nicholassmith 14y ago
The most sensible thing to do with the situation is the blanket pardon, but I can't see it happening. I think they've made blanket apologies before (slavery springs to mind), but never a blanket pardon.
- Nursie 14y ago
  I can't see that happening right now. The PM has announced that Gay Marriage is going to become a thing here imminently. It's a weird bill because it actually forbids the state church from performing homosexual marriages, not even leaving it open for the church itself to decide, but it does allow other churches to make their own decisions and civil ceremonies to take place. This is a major step (IMHO) but it has had the usual backlash of small minded folks spouting on about family values and how their rights are being eroded (?!) so politically a blanket, retroactive pardon seems very unlikely. Baby steps...
  - stan_rogers 14y ago
    The Church of England is in a bit of a weird position here. It's not so much that Parliament has unilaterally decided that the C of E shall not perform same-sex marriages, but that, as the established Church with the monarch at its legal head, it is as much a creature of advised royal decree and legislation as it is of the 39 Articles or the General Synod (represented by Canterbury). That results in areas of church law originating outside of Parliament winding up in legislation.
    - justincormack 14y ago
      And the C of E did not ask to be treated differently from other churches. Bizarre Tory oddness as always.
_stephan 14y ago
Or better: retroactively declare the old law null and void and pay compensation to all victims that were prosecuted under it.
- meaty 14y ago
  This is exactly what they should be doing, but they will downplay it as all the publicity will actually detract from the current ruling elite's appearance (even if it wasn't them who made the law up).
- Crake 14y ago
  They probably all committed suicide. It's a really common end for GLBT, unfortunately.
- 7952 14y ago
  Or create a memorial. It is in fashion at the moment in the UK. If all you are offering is a gesture, it may as well be something tangible.

How about a blanket pardon for anyone ever convicted of consentual homosexual relationships?

by EiZei 14y ago

How about a blanket pardon for anyone ever convicted of consentual homosexual relationships?

Alan Turing's contributions to science and the war time effort were immense, and immeasurable. However, granting a pardon to him and him alone won't mean much. He was guilty. The law which he broke was draconian, no doubts about it, but it was the law at that time. I do not think he was the only Briton who was oppressed because of that particular law. If there is a pardon, and there should be one, it should be granted to everyone who was convicted under that law.

brnstz 14y ago
I agree any pardon should be a blanket one. I wonder about semantics though. Is someone really "guilty" of breaking an unjust law? It's like saying someone is "guilty" of freeing a slave. An unjust law is no law at all, and usually people have to break it before it is changed.
- saraid216 14y ago
  As far as I know, no one has been pardoned for freeing slaves, either.
  - justincormack 14y ago
    Very importantly slaves were allowed to be freed, by a court of law in the UK.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somersetts_Case http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somersetts_Case
- elssar 14y ago
  Guilty of breaking the law of the time? Semantics? Guess you could say "he broke a law. There shouldn't have been such a law, but unfortunately it was there, and he broke it."
- mindcrime 14y ago
  Is someone really "guilty" of breaking an unjust law? No. An unjust law is no law at all Agreed. So, in this case, a "pardon", now that I think about it, isn't exactly the right thing, in a sense. I mean, it's a nice token gesture, but it still implies that a law was actually broken. An apology for being victimized by a non-law would be more appropriate.
  - elssar 14y ago
    Interesting point. At first I was gonna say semantics, but in this case it matters. Guess they need to phrase it better when they start quashing the convictions.
darkarmani 14y ago
> He was guilty. That the only time a pardon is needed.

nicholassmith 14y ago

The most sensible thing to do with the situation is the blanket pardon, but I can't see it happening. I think they've made blanket apologies before (slavery springs to mind), but never a blanket pardon.

Nursie 14y ago
I can't see that happening right now. The PM has announced that Gay Marriage is going to become a thing here imminently. It's a weird bill because it actually forbids the state church from performing homosexual marriages, not even leaving it open for the church itself to decide, but it does allow other churches to make their own decisions and civil ceremonies to take place. This is a major step (IMHO) but it has had the usual backlash of small minded folks spouting on about family values and how their rights are being eroded (?!) so politically a blanket, retroactive pardon seems very unlikely. Baby steps...
- stan_rogers 14y ago
  The Church of England is in a bit of a weird position here. It's not so much that Parliament has unilaterally decided that the C of E shall not perform same-sex marriages, but that, as the established Church with the monarch at its legal head, it is as much a creature of advised royal decree and legislation as it is of the 39 Articles or the General Synod (represented by Canterbury). That results in areas of church law originating outside of Parliament winding up in legislation.
  - justincormack 14y ago
    And the C of E did not ask to be treated differently from other churches. Bizarre Tory oddness as always.

_stephan 14y ago

Or better: retroactively declare the old law null and void and pay compensation to all victims that were prosecuted under it.

meaty 14y ago
This is exactly what they should be doing, but they will downplay it as all the publicity will actually detract from the current ruling elite's appearance (even if it wasn't them who made the law up).
Crake 14y ago
They probably all committed suicide. It's a really common end for GLBT, unfortunately.
7952 14y ago
Or create a memorial. It is in fashion at the moment in the UK. If all you are offering is a gesture, it may as well be something tangible.