Turing pardon denied - Page 3 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

The Clk Man · #31 02-08-2012, 08:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LarryBible

I've never "persecuted" anyone. Although I have very strong disdain for the actions of such people I have never confronted anyone or done anything to anyone personally.

If someone is so imbalanced that they are effected by someone voicing an opinion on a discussion forum, I'm sure that they were doomed to start with. I didn't make them that way. They chose to be that way. They are screwed up because they chose to be screwed up. No one forced them to live their chosen life style and I've never personally hassled anyone for doing so.

BTW, you apparently did not read the part about my suggesting that people taking responsibility for their own actions. Of course, liberals are known for not taking responsibility for their own actions so I suppose it would be too much to ask for them to do so. I take full responsibility for my own actions and NONE of them have ever been confrontation of a gay person.

Well stated Larry.

jplinville · #32 02-08-2012, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Clk Man

Well stated Larry.

Do you, of anyone on this board, actually have room to make comments on this subject? I could easily bring up many instances where you directly insulted members here, as well as other fora, for their personal sexual lives. Calling people Fags is one of your favorites...

The Clk Man · #33 02-08-2012, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jplinville

Do you, of anyone on this board, actually have room to make comments on this subject? I could easily bring up many instances where you directly insulted members here, as well as other fora, for their personal sexual lives. Calling people Fags is one of your favorites...

To keep your stress level down jp, yes, I have called people those names.

Air&Road · #34 02-09-2012, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by davidmash

This was discussed at length in a different thread. In a nut shell he chose to be straight only because it was the right/moral thing to do. Had gay been the right thing he could just have easily chosen to be gay. When pressed, he could not provide the time when he chose to be straight nore could he provide any explanation as to why an individual would choose to live a life where persecution and ridicule is the name of the game.

I believe there was also some discussion of legality as well. Since being gay was illegal in his generation he would not consider doing anything that was illegal so being straight was really the only option.

Talk to Kerry as he was the one who was having the main argument with LB.

Most of the above is DAVID's perception, after framing different questions in different ways.

To answer the question as to whether I believe it is a choice:

YES, I believe that it is a choice.

Air&Road · #35 02-09-2012, 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kerry

From previous exchanges with LB, I'd say his position is that what you do has nothing to do with 'who you are'. A person should obey the law, end of discussion. The law is the determiner of who you are. Hence, when the law forbids homosexuality, there aren't really any homosexuals, only lawbreakers.

Nothing like paraphrasing someone elses posts and twisting them to suit what you would have WANTED them to say.

Air&Road · #36 02-09-2012, 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dropnosky

ok, I missed that one. Sounds fun, ill do a search

I will only say that I do not believe gay or straight to be a choice, you simply are what you are. To not pardon this guy when his only crime was his sexual orientation and he was horribly punished for it, when NOW such things are completely accepted seems unreasonable.

They already apologized, which seems an admission of being wrong, so why not pardon if they already admit that persecuting this guy was wrong?

In the case of the person mentioned in the original post, I don't think that he was treated fairly at the time he was breaking the law. Castration is not exactly punishment that matches the crime.

What I WROTE was that he broke the law of the day. By definition, he was a criminal because he broke the law. Had he been a law abiding citizen, he would NOT have broken the law of the day. This is no different than if he had robbed a liquor store, but that was later declared legal. He still would have been breaking the law at the time making him a criminal by definition.

Very interesting how people commonly twist my words to suit what they would have WANTED me to say so they can villify me.

JB3 · #37 02-09-2012, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LarryBible

In the case of the person mentioned in the original post, I don't think that he was treated fairly at the time he was breaking the law. Castration is not exactly punishment that matches the crime.

What I WROTE was that he broke the law of the day. By definition, he was a criminal because he broke the law. Had he been a law abiding citizen, he would NOT have broken the law of the day. This is no different than if he had robbed a liquor store, but that was later declared legal. He still would have been breaking the law at the time making him a criminal by definition.

Very interesting how people commonly twist my words to suit what they would have WANTED me to say so they can villify me.

I posted what I believe, and I asked you a question, which you answered, show me how my post villifies you. The other question that I asked remains though, which I will answer.

Personally, if it were illegal to be a heterosexual, I would find it very difficult to follow that law. If I found that difficult, I would not place an unrealistic bar on someone who was different from me in sexual orientation, especially if the only thing that is challenged is my sense of whats proper. Between two consenting adults, I could care less what happens, man or woman, man and man, and woman and woman.

Can you really say that if I told you it was illegal to sleep with a woman, that you would blindly follow the law and never be tempted? I find that hard to believe.

Basically, it was an illegal and immoral law, and was repealed and recognized as such, so if the law was recognized as wrong, it stands to reason that everyone convicted under that law should no longer be regarded as criminals, up to and including a pardon.

Air&Road · #38 02-09-2012, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dropnosky

I posted what I believe, and I asked you a question, which you answered, show me how my post villifies you. The other question that I asked remains though, which I will answer.

Personally, if it were illegal to be a heterosexual, I would find it very difficult to follow that law. If I found that difficult, I would not place an unrealistic bar on someone who was different from me in sexual orientation, especially if the only thing that is challenged is my sense of whats proper. Between two consenting adults, I could care less what happens, man or woman, man and man, and woman and woman.

Can you really say that if I told you it was illegal to sleep with a woman, that you would blindly follow the law and never be tempted? I find that hard to believe.

Basically, it was an illegal and immoral law, and was repealed and recognized as such, so if the law was recognized as wrong, it stands to reason that everyone convicted under that law should no longer be regarded as criminals, up to and including a pardon.

Drop,

I was not implying that YOU were twisting my words. It was all the crap laid out by others trying to summarize all my responses in their own words.

As far as how we see the criminality issue of a law broken, then the law removed, I think we just need to agree to disagree agreeably. I see it as the person being a criminal by definition. They broke the law, that makes them a criminal. You state your case very well too. We just disagree.

JB3 · #39 02-09-2012, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LarryBible

Drop,

I was not implying that YOU were twisting my words. It was all the crap laid out by others trying to summarize all my responses in their own words.

As far as how we see the criminality issue of a law broken, then the law removed, I think we just need to agree to disagree agreeably. I see it as the person being a criminal by definition. They broke the law, that makes them a criminal. You state your case very well too. We just disagree.

fair enough, this is one of those topics where people are decided before hand, I agree. You are correct in there is no sense in arguing about it.

Jim B. · #40 02-09-2012, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jplinville

Do you, of anyone on this board, actually have room to make comments on this subject? I could easily bring up many instances where you directly insulted members here, as well as other fora, for their personal sexual lives. Calling people Fags is one of your favorites...

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Clk Man

To keep your stress level down jp, yes, I have called people those names.

It is certainly to your credit that you did not accuse them - when old and in nursing homes - of wearing designer denim colostomy bags.

cmbdiesel · #41 02-09-2012, 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kerry

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/08/world/europe/britain-no-pardon-for-alan-turing-in-1952-case.html

To a man to whom we owe so much, a simple pardon would have been a nice gesture.

Where' Haley Barbour when you need him....

kerry · #42 02-09-2012, 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmbdiesel

Where' Haley Barbour when you need him....

Can't Know · #43 02-09-2012, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim B.

It is certainly to your credit that you did not accuse them - when old and in nursing homes - of wearing designer denim colostomy bags.

Which ...

brings to mind a Friends episode (a reference that will probably get me called names) in which Ross appeared to express concern that his young son (being mostly raised by a lesbian couple) was carrying around a Barbie doll; his ex-wife's partner said, "What's wrong with him carrying around a Barbie -- unless you're concerned he's going to grow up to be -- in SHOW BUSINESS?"

cmbdiesel · #44 02-09-2012, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LarryBible

Most of the above is DAVID's perception, after framing different questions in different ways.

To answer the question as to whether I believe it is a choice:

YES, I believe that it is a choice.

I believe you may be mistaken.

cmbdiesel · #45 02-09-2012, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Clk Man

To keep your stress level down jp, yes, I have called people those names.

Bad CLK Man... Bad...

In your defense, I believe that almost all of those comments were directed at Aklim... I think he can handle it... After all, he knows how to toss a salad...