Pardoning Homosexuals convicted under repealed laws

[Quid est Veritas?]

They don't need to pardon them, because they were never convicted of a crime. Your analogy is flawed.

Those that conducted affairs with Germans or continued in secret to practice their occupations were convicted of crimes under the German Reich.

So neither being a Jew nor a Homosexual had been declared criminal, but homosexual or mixed-race sexual practice had.

 

[Hetta]

Some of these people are still alive. Others have left children or partners who naturally want justice. Finally, they will get it.

The idea that it is somehow a waste of time to pardon these people is bitter and vindictive.

They should never have been oppressed for what they are. The absolute least that we can do, as a society, is recognise that we were wrong, and apologise formally.

And the Justice Minister is not responsible for Brexit, the NHS, or British demographics!

It is very important. During the period I was living in the UK, Derek Bentley was pardoned and I learned a great deal about his family's campaign for that pardon. He really should not have been executed, and I could entirely understand why it mattered to them so much that he be pardoned.

People are worth more than money. Period. And miscarriages of justice or judicial wrongdoing should always be acknowledged.

 

[Inkfingers]

Sure looks like what you're claiming. I don't see any "mandatory celebrating" going on anywhere, frankly. Again, providing basic legal protections is hardly "celebrating" anything.

Once more.....I have not said that the pardon is a celebration. I have said that whether you celebrate the pardon is the shibboleth here.

And the mandatory celebration is in your treatment if you do not celebrate this announcement.

Do you really not get this?

 

[Armoured]

Those that conducted affairs with Germans or continued in secret to practice their occupations were convicted of crimes under the German Reich.

Which isn't the same as "being Jewish". Turing was persecuted for BEING homosexual.

 

[Armoured]

Once more.....I have not said that the pardon is a celebration. I have said that whether you celebrate the pardon is the shibboleth here.

And the mandatory celebration is in your treatment if you do not celebrate this announcement.

Do you really not get this?

I "don't get it" because you're saying things that make no sense to me. I imagine a very small circle of people is actively "celebrating" anything about this pardon, and no one is being forced to celebrate it against their will "mandatorally"

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

Which isn't the same as "being Jewish". Turing was persecuted for BEING homosexual.

Nope. Turing was prosecuted for engaging in "indecent sexual acts" with Andrew Murray, which Turing admitted to - not for 'being a homosexual'.

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

Double post

 

[Dave-W]

may be mistaken, but I don't believe being Jewish was a crime under the NAZIs, as such.

I am not sure that technical detail really mattered much to the "residents" of Auschwitz, Sobibor, Treblinka, et al.

 

[Hank77]

And I had (distant) relatives who died in Germany for the crime of being Jewish.

Your point? Should they be declared "not guilty" of that crime?

Your relatives should be pardoned because the law itself was unjust.

 

[Armoured]

Nope. Turing was prosecuted for engaging in "indecent sexual acts" with Andrew Murray, which Turing admitted to - not for 'being a homosexual'.

And then what happened?

 

[Armoured]

I am not sure that technical detail really mattered much to the "residents" of Auschwitz, Sobibor, Treblinka, et al.

Probably not, but we're talking about pardoning people of legal conviction, not sending them to death camps. You're running into your own flawed metphor.

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

And then what happened?

He became a convicted sex offender and because of the recent outing of the homosexual Burgess and Maclean as Soviet spies, he was stripped of his security clearance (as a convicted felon, he would have been stripped of this anyway). At his sentencing he was given the option of either being chemically castrated or serving jail time as the law allowed. He chose the former.

Based on his criminal record and presumed soviet ties, he was denied entrance to the US.

This is similar to how Jews were denied US visas prior to WWII based on Nuremberg law convictions and chemical castration for sexual crimes was a common practice back then (still done in Russia, Indonesia and certain US states in extreme cases).

I fail to see your point. The analogy to Jews in Germany or modern Sex offenders having to register and having their occupations or movements limited is quite close.

 

[Armoured]

He became a convicted sex offender and because of the recent outing of the homosexual Burgess and Maclean as Soviet spies, he was stripped of his security clearance (as a convicted felon, he might have been stripped of this anyway). At his sentencing he was given the option of either being chemically castrated or serving jail time as the law allowed. He chose the latter.

Based on his criminal record and presumed soviet ties, he was denied entrance to the US.

This is similar to how Jews were denied US visas prior to WWII based on Nuremberg law convictions and chemical castration for sexual crimes was a common practice back then (still done in Russia, Indonesia and certain US states in extreme cases).

I fail to see your point. The analogy to Jews in Germany or modern Sex offenders having to register and having their occupations or movements limited is quite close.

*sigh* Is pardoning him costing anyone anything? Is it making some of the stake holders happy?

 

[Armoured]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...n-rachel-barnes-historic-crimes-a7370621.html
Alan Turing law’ unveiled by government will posthumously pardon thousands of gay men convicted of historic offences

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

*sigh* Is pardoning him costing anyoe anything? Is it making some of the stakholders happy?

Turing is already pardoned. If you read the article about the blanket pardon of all those convicted under this law in the OP, you will see many homosexuals are also opposed to it - my third point in the OP outlines why. A Formal apology would in many ways have squared the circle.

It is however costing taxpayer money and occupying parliament while they could have been doing something far more useful.

 

[Larniavc]

This is a definite non-perfect step in the right direction for a country like the U.K.

Being gay should never have been a crime.

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

It seems people don't bother to read the article upon which the whole thread is based.

Even if you approve of pardoning everyone convicted under these laws, there are inherent problems with pardoning someone for something that they do not consider a crime. This seems to be blithely ignored by all.

 

[TheOldWays]

It is however costing taxpayer money and occupying parliament while they could have been doing something far more useful.

Breaking News! Government wastes taxpayers money! Coming up at 6pm, water is still wet!

 

[DaisyDay]

Yes; prudence and thrift are no longer valued it seems.

How much does it actually cost to pardon vs to apologize posthumously to those convicted?

As for the 15,000 still living, it should be up each one as to what he or she prefers. I know in the US, having a conviction on your record can prevent getting jobs, housing and some government benefits, so the benefit is practical as well as moral.

 

[Armoured]

Turing is already pardoned. If you read the article about the blanket pardon of all those convicted under this law in the OP, you will see many homosexuals are also opposed to it - my third point in the OP outlines why. A Formal apology would in many ways have squared the circle.

It is however costing taxpayer money and occupying parliament while they could have been doing something far more useful.

Are more gay people in favour of or opposed to this?