Turing law

[Owlswing]

They have an amendment in the latest police bill proposed but it needs people to apply to get the prosecutions wiped off. The sensible way would have been to pass the bill and look at changing it in committee but politics got in way

They always do!

[jeremyp]

Bill talked out by Govt that had promised support and no tricks

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

The word I'm thinking of is an anagram of cntus

[Gordon]

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

The word I'm thinking of is an anagram of cntus

I don't often quote poetry, and following a very eloquent piece from one Ayrshireman today (Jim, in the Aberfan thread) here's another from earlier times.

Many and sharp the num'rous ills
Inwoven with our frame!
More pointed still we make ourselves
Regret, remorse, and shame!
And man, whose heav'n-erected face
The smiles of love adorn, –
Man's inhumanity to man
Makes countless thousands mourn!

What those bastards did today was inhuman.

[Humph Warden Bennett]

What those bastards did today was inhuman.

That is a bit OTT, what they did was to exploit the rule book to suit themselves. It's not just the government who do this, I can remember at my trade union conference in 1983, there were two motions regarding AIDS which were "buried" at the bottom of the Agenda because neither the then National Executive Committee, nor the Standing Orders Committee, had any great interest in the matter. One year later, after the original movers had given up trying to go it alone & had taken their interest to the unofficial conference of the union "Broad Left", there was a huge composite of fifty motions on the order paper & the NEC behaved as if they had suffered ten years sleepless nights over the issue.

[Hope]

My point is that this does not constitute rewriting history.

Whereas I'd suggest that it is.

[Hope]

It is criminal that engaging in homosexual activity was ever illegal!

Why, Floo?

[Nearly Sane]

Whereas I'd suggest that it is.

in what way is a pardon a rewriting of history? Just so as we are clear here, any Christians who are 'martyrs' are simply by your view criminal?

[Hope]

Is this situation, as it stands today, proof that God does indeed hate fags? Or is it that fag-haters just like to think that he does?

Or is it proof that its only humans who have either 'hated' or 'loved' so-called fags, Owl?  Does your using the term 'fags' simply reinforce the prejudice?

[Nearly Sane]

Or is it proof that its only humans who have either 'hated' or 'loved' so-called fags, Owl?  Does your using the term 'fags' simply reinforce the prejudice?

you don't think gay people should have equal rights, you take your own hatred here

[Hope]

in what way is a pardon a rewriting of history? Just so as we are clear here, any Christians who are 'martyrs' are simply by your view criminal?

Not necessarily, NS.  Many persecuted groups have been persecuted despite legal protections and/or legal disinterest.  Very often, it is one section of society persecuting another one.

[Nearly Sane]

Not necessarily, NS.  Many persecuted groups have been persecuted despite legal protections and/or legal disinterest.  Very often, it is one section of society persecuting another one.

and you want to persecute gay people.

[Gordon]

Not necessarily, NS.  Many persecuted groups have been persecuted despite legal protections and/or legal disinterest.  Very often, it is one section of society persecuting another one.

This reads like another of your bizarre tu quoque suggestions: that there has been, or is, persecution of some groups is a matter of regret and does not justify the continued persecution of other groups.

[Owlswing]

Or is it proof that its only humans who have either 'hated' or 'loved' so-called fags, Owl?  Does your using the term 'fags' simply reinforce the prejudice?

Don't make yourself look stupier than you already have! I am bi, my current girlfriend is transgender - I took the term from Christians who object to gays being treated as human beings who are capable of loving one another unlike some Christians who refuse love to anyone who is not willing to accept the rules of Christianity as defined by the particular sect of Christianty that the Christian speaking belongs to.

You do not recognise my right to love whomsoever I choose - I do not recognise your right to impose that non-recogition on me. In fact, from my formative years as a Christian I do not recognise you as a Christian as I was taught what it is to be a Christian.

[Owlswing]

Not necessarily, NS.  Many persecuted groups have been persecuted despite legal protections and/or legal disinterest.  Very often, it is one section of society persecuting another one.

Yeah - Christians persecuting gays!

This is just another demonstration of how out of touch with modern values the Christian church is.

[Owlswing]

This reads like another of your bizarre tu quoque suggestions: that there has been, or is, persecution of some groups is a matter of regret and does not justify the continued persecution of other groups.

Well said!

[jeremyp]

Whereas I'd suggest that it is.

And you'd be wrong.

Have we forgotten the slave trade now it's abolished? No. Have we forgotten capital punishment now it is abolished? No.

Making and repealing laws does not change history. It changes the future.

[Owlswing]

And you'd be wrong.

Have we forgotten the slave trade now it's abolished? No. Have we forgotten capital punishment now it is abolished? No.

Making and repealing laws does not change history. It changes the future.

Well said

[floo]

Why, Floo?

Because there is nothing wrong in being homosexual; only nasty bigots would disagree!

It would have been great if Jesus has been gay and in a sexual relationship with the disciple whom he loved!

[Owlswing]

It would have been great if Jesus has been gay and in a sexual relationship with the disciple whom he loved!

Jesus, supposedly, loved all men . . . . slaaaaaaaaag!

[Brownie]

Oy there, I've 'loved' more than one or two in my time, I ain't no slapper!  Well not now at any rate, chance would be a fine thing.
I like to think Jesus had 'bromances'.

[floo]

I have only had one boyfriend, the guy I married.

[Brownie]

You were a nice girl, floo.  (I wasn't boasting btw, just being flip.)

[floo]

You were a nice girl, floo.  (I wasn't boasting btw, just being flip.)

I boasted when I was 13 that I was never going to have  a boyfriend or get married, have kids etc. Two years later I met my husband, we seemed to get on, I still have no idea why. We conducted our 'courtship', if you can call it that, by letter or telephone calls as he lived in the UK. We saw each other during school and university hols, we married four years later. I would never want another relationship, if something  happened to him, one is more than enough.

[Brownie]

Agree with that.

[Owlswing]

Oy there, I've 'loved' more than one or two in my time, I ain't no slapper!  Well not now at any rate, chance would be a fine thing.
I like to think Jesus had 'bromances'.

One or two? Those who have had less are the luckiy ones who have hit the jackpot first time!

I am talking ALL men - that is downright greedy.