3 ms·

Obligatory "Pardon implies he did something wrong post". they should apologize.

• Osmium 13y ago
  They have apologised: http://m.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/11/pm-apology-to-alan-turing http://m.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/11/pm-apology-to-alan...
• eksith 13y ago
  Indeed. Absolving him of any wrongdoing in the first place would have been appropriate, but pardon may be the only recourse to push through the House. Ironic that we now have Sir Ian McKellen and Sir Elton John, two men who would have met the same fate in Turing's time.
  • philhippus 13y ago
    The fact that we have "Sirs" Ian and Elton is proof that we have moved on. It is a different world since Turing's time. We also used to burn people alive for heresy. An official apology was gesture enough on this matter.
• dhughes 13y ago
  That's a really good point!
• stan_rogers 13y ago
  Actually, it's more like "pardon implies special exemption", and that's just wrong. Turing was special, but there was nothing special about his legal treatment or the circumstances leading up to it. An apology has already been issued (as noted in a sibling comment). That apology, though addressed specifically to the case of Alan Turing, was general, and included "many thousands of other gay men who were convicted, as he was convicted, under homophobic laws...". That is a meaningful statement. And there are classes of pardons and other actions that could "make it didn't happen", but that would absolve Britain (or, more properly in this case, England and Wales) of responsibility for historical wrongs (and they were hardly unique in that). It did happen, and it would be better to note that it did happen, but that things have changed in such a way in the interim that we, collectively, no longer believe that what happened is acceptable.
• nawitus 13y ago
  Apologize for the actions of people who are long gone?