Just doing something like Vatican said sorry to Joan of Arc for her death. All it needs is a statement from UK government said "we are sorry for forcing Alan Turing to commit suicide. And we are sorry for cutting short his potential contributions to human being."
Maybe ask Morrissey to hold a memorial concert and play some Derek Jarman's movies.
I like the idea of a spoken apology, but I would prefer that someone non-gay be involved as a figure head. I'm not gay, but I feel very strongly that the treatment of Turing was despicable.
Someone straight needs to be a figure head so that people can't easily dismiss any apology as somehow tied to the agenda of a gay rights group.
No problem for this. And I know a straight figure head is much better for this purpose.
At the other hand. The UK government can always say those standard lame excuses such as "because of cold war, we have to prevent Turing to be used by communists spies".
At the other hand, I wonder why gay right activists ignore Turing's story for a long time. I learned Turing's story pretty early on (I am just always curious of private lives of great minds since I was a kid)
I wonder why gay right activists ignore Turing's story for a long time.
That is fortunate. I wouldn't like Turing to become another archetypal wicked scientist in tv shows puppetry inventory. Compulsive schizophrenic Nash seducing boys, autistic Newton, insane Cantor crawling on the floor whispering "infinty, infinty" are enough for me already.
It'd be far more effective if they funded Bletchley Park, one of the best memorials to Turing (worth a visit, although the information there is woefully light on him if you've read his biography).
It costs a lot to operate and won't be able to run past the next few years without funding, but the Government rejected a petition on the subject (http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/BletchleyPark/)
Support for the National Museum of Computing wouldn't go amiss either.
By saying "we're sorry" and then handing over taxpayer dollars to interest groups. It's amazing that people don't know a racket when they see one. The same crap is happening in the US. Here are some members of congress opposing an apology for slavery:
Those caucus members say the disclaimer is an attempt to stave off reparations claims from the descendants of slaves. "Putting in a disclaimer takes away from the meaning of an apology," said Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss.
Yes, the "meaning" of the apology is step 1 in a mass larceny underway. This garbage needs to end. Everyone who actually owns slaves, I really do believe, should apologize for it. Everyone who doesn't own slaves should put their collective middle fingers in the air concerning the matter.
If my parents owned slaves, and I'd benefited from it, I'd like the disclaimer.
If my parents were slaves, and I'd had trouble because of that, I'd like the reparation.
I don't think either would be a racket. Ultimately it's unlikely a court would extend reparations inmto the present for an event so far in the past, although this does occasionally happen.
