4 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

But you werent caught and your life wasn't ruined because of it.

 

That is  valid and I wasn't caught.  My point is that I knew I was breaking the law and that if caught I would have been prosecuted.  The Gay men knew they were breaking the law and that if they were caught they would face the consequences.  Some were caught and did,  but the majority didn't.  Just like the majority of us didn't. I fear you are taken my comparison too literally.  Most of us break the law or push the envelope in one way or another.  Some laws are just and some aren't. The law against homosexuals was wrong on many counts and it took far too long to recognise that.  It is still skewed to some extent even now.  But the law was changed as many others are and a full pardon has been given retrospectively along with completely wiping the slate completely clean.  This time I think that is the right balance.

 

May I just say that it is interesting to be on the other side of this.  It is usually me defending the gay community and I am encouraged that you guys are of the same mind.

6 hours ago, Prbkk said:

Qisite ritght tus offer an aponsack and papsndisn. What happened to Turing ( arguably the most significant figure in the early years of computing, as well as a major player in Enigma/Bletchley Park) was disgraceful ( but no less so than the thousands of others who were persecuted).

Time for the Australian govt to get in line with the gay marriage thing ( with 70% public support) so that young kids growing up gay do not feel ostracised and second class.

 

The gays In Australia, big supporters of a plebiscite a while bavck, have moved toward favouring a parliamentary vote because there Isn't the support they believed there was for a people's vote. They now want a vote In parliament because they think It will succeed.

Neither Is guaranteed and a lot on the labor side will vote against.

I really don't care. This Is proving to be a distraction from real Issues and that's unfortunate.

It will change, but when and how, who knows?

As for an apology, laws change, so I don't believe one Is necessary.

It is history...

~~~ Got talked out ~~~

Quote

'Turing Bill' for gay pardons fails in Parliament

A bill that would have wiped clean the criminal records of thousands of gay men has fallen at its first parliamentary hurdle.

The private member's bill would have pardoned all men living with UK convictions for same-sex offences committed before the law was changed.

There were emotional scenes with one MP fighting back tears during his speech.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37707030

 

My thoughts are some of the crimes were still crimes even if one were to discard the homosexual aspect.

 

Section 13 of that act (gross indecency between men), if it were gross indecency, IE doing it in a public place then it is still a offence even if a man and woman, so every case would need the trial notes reviewing.

 

13 hours ago, Basil B said:

It is history...

~~~ Got talked out ~~~

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37707030

 

My thoughts are some of the crimes were still crimes even if one were to discard the homosexual aspect.

 

Section 13 of that act (gross indecency between men), if it were gross indecency, IE doing it in a public place then it is still a offence even if a man and woman, so every case would need the trial notes reviewing.

 

 

Oh, so more Associated Press misleading rubbish.

 

Edited October 22, 20169 yr by JetsetBkk

4 hours ago, JetsetBkk said:

 

Oh, so more Associated Press misleading rubbish.

 

what exactly was misleading about the AP report?

21 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

what exactly was misleading about the AP report?

 

See the post above mine:
 

18 hours ago, Basil B said:

It is history...

~~~ Got talked out ~~~

Quote

'Turing Bill' for gay pardons fails in Parliament

A bill that would have wiped clean the criminal records of thousands of gay men has fallen at its first parliamentary hurdle.

The private member's bill would have pardoned all men living with UK convictions for same-sex offences committed before the law was changed.

There were emotional scenes with one MP fighting back tears during his speech.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37707030

 

My thoughts are some of the crimes were still crimes even if one were to discard the homosexual aspect.

 

Section 13 of that act (gross indecency between men), if it were gross indecency, IE doing it in a public place then it is still a offence even if a man and woman, so every case would need the trial notes reviewing.

 

On 21/10/2016 at 0:11 AM, webfact said:

Justice Minister Sam Gyimah said the government was trying "to put right these wrongs."

The AP was correct at the time, but a private members bill put forward yesterday was talked out by Justice Minister Sam Gyimah...

Possibly because the Government want to put forward a watered down version.

10 minutes ago, JetsetBkk said:

 

See the post above mine:
 

 

You mean because they reported accurately what the government said?