Gay convictions to be wiped from the records

[acidhead]

No its a free society but only to those that can cope with freedom.

What is your definition of freedom dude?

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

No I'm saying many have a motive to act unprofessionally.

Everyone has motives to act unprofessionally. Personally, I hate it when my students smirk at me when accused of a misdemeanor they know they can wriggle out of and I'd like nothing more then to give them a detention just to wipe that smirk off their faces. I don't though, because I'm a professional.

[rashore]

Wow, I'm not sure how wiping homosexual consensual sex crimes off the books leads to a notion of they should be barred from any profession.

I find the mention of prison officials interesting- I know of two prison officers that always give gay prisoners a particularly hard time or allowed disturbing inmate on inmate offenses to happen because they are homophobes- In their words (never mine) "they like being on the bottom and treated like b*****s". I also know of a whole handful of officers that are able to do their job right regardless of their sexual orientation or the orientation of the prisoners.

I do have to agree with Chimp that the article was about homosexuals, and he's sticking to that.

But I do disagree with his point of view. If a person that has suffered an ill should be completely barred from a position because of it, I would have to be barred from children and abusive adults because I was an abused child, I would not be allowed around men because I was a battered wife, I would not be allowed around women because I was snubbed by the chic set in high school, I would not be allowed around insects because I've been stung, I would not be allowed around horses because I've been stepped on, I would not be allowed around food because I've had food poisoning (which is extra funny cuz food is my profession), I would not be allowed around trees because I've been poked with a stick, I would not be allowed around fire because I've been burned, I would not be allowed an office job because I've gotten paper cuts and rotten customer calls, and yeah, I wouldn't be allowed any job at all because I've been harassed by opposite sex and same sex bosses and coworkers too...

Geez, some people are perfectly able to overcome their personal life to work in their professional one. Granted, some people are not, but since heterosexuals are able to pull off their jobs most of the time without their sexual orientation being an issue, it's reasonable to assume that homosexuals can do the same thing. Personally, I've seen a lot more heterosexual problems in the workplace than homosexual ones by a long shot.

Edited October 6, 2011 by rashore

[shadowhive]

My position is as follows -

People arrested and convicted for homosexual offences in the past may hold a grudge against the state, society or even people opposed to homosexuality. This is because they did prison time.

As a result of possible grudges I think that the state should apologise to them and annul their crimes with compensation. However I think the list should remain incase any problems arise in the future.

By problems I mean that if one of them was to become a Police Officer their grudge may appear when they have a suspect who strongly opposes homosexuality. Similar things could happen with Judges and Prison Officers. In the interests of justice the list should remain to prevent miscarriages of justice.

While that is worded better, it doesn't cast you in a much better light.

Your reasoning for wanting the list to remain is still deeply flawed and no matter how you try and word it there's no way of escaping that the premise is flawed. (Especially since you've said you want ALL homosexuals to be listed, not just those that were convicted when it was a crime.)

In the 'interests of justice' the list should be removed altogether. At the moment it's listed as a 'sexual offence' which means that it keeps people from jobs where there records are checked for that. As a sexual offence it's in the same catergory as rape and pedophilia, which we can all agree it's not.

Edited October 6, 2011 by shadowhive

[Blackwhite]

I dont think Homosexuals should be allowed in the Police, Prison Service, Justice system or allowed to become solicitors.

Looking at the strength of their overeactions on these forums alone I think many are incapable of behaving professionally should they encounter people accused of hate crimes, discrimination or in fact guilty of them.

I think the state should keep a database of all homosexuals as a screening aid should they apply for a job connected to any of the above. Old records should be added to the new. Those will convictions from a time when homosexual acts were illegal may be more prone to unprofessional behaviour that others.

That makes perfect sense, of course. Of course, every Lefty on this forum has converged onto this thread to spit their vile venom at you. If they see a post that goes against their Lefty viewpoint of the world, no matter how wrong that viewpoint is, they converge upon that poster all at once, like a group of animals hunting in a pack. You are right what you say, though.

Edited October 6, 2011 by Blackwhite

[Blackwhite]

Oh no no no. That doesn't work. You're comparing homosexuality with criminal behavior.

That's because he's referring to a time when homosexuality WAS criminal behaviour.

Edited October 6, 2011 by Blackwhite

[Chimpanzee]

That makes perfect sense, of course. Of course, every Lefty on this forum has converged onto this thread to spit their vile venom at you. If they see a post that goes against their Lefty viewpoint of the world, no matter how wrong that viewpoint is, they converge upon that poster all at once, like a group of animals hunting in a pack. You are right what you say, though.

I've noticed lol

and I noticed unprofessional behaviour such as the pictures of Stalin, Hitler and about persecution.

If these guys were Police Officers and they had a suspect who was aagainst homosexuality I dont think they could cope with it, their heads would explode.

You could imagine that suddenly all the gay police officers converge onto the poor chap in his cell and start harassing him, mocking him and criticising him. Before long one of them says hey this guy hes like Stalin or Hitler. Then the real unprofessional behaviour begins.

[Bracket]

I've noticed lol

and I noticed unprofessional behaviour such as the pictures of Stalin, Hitler and about persecution.

If these guys were Police Officers and they had a suspect who was aagainst homosexuality I dont think they could cope with it, their heads would explode.

You could imagine that suddenly all the gay police officers converge onto the poor chap in his cell and start harassing him, mocking him and criticising him. Before long one of them says hey this guy hes like Stalin or Hitler. Then the real unprofessional behaviour begins.

What if the officer was black and the suspect was racist? Would he be able to take it any better?

Edited October 6, 2011 by Bracket

[Chimpanzee]

What if the officer was black and the suspect was racist? Would he be able to take it any better?

There could be a serious conflict of interest there.

[Bracket]

There could be a serious conflict of interest there.

So, if it was a gay cop, he wouldn't be able to cope with homophobic comments and will attack the suspect in his cell, but a black cop hearing racist remarks may possibly have a conflict of interest?

[Chimpanzee]

So, if it was a gay cop, he wouldn't be able to cope with homophobic comments and will attack the suspect in his cell, but a black cop hearing racist remarks may possibly have a conflict of interest?

No if a similar situation arose they too would attack the suspect in the cell.

The only way out if this is if all people have a file on them with all their biases and conflicts of interest. Then in the case of Police Officers they can be deployed onto cases where a conflict of interest is low risk for them.

Edited October 6, 2011 by Chimpanzee

[Bracket]

No if a similar situation arose they too would attack the suspect in the cell.

The only way out if this is if all people have a file on them with all their biases and conflicts of interest. Then in the case of Police Officers they can be deployed onto cases where a conflict of interest is low risk for them.

Are you talking about officers in general?

[Chimpanzee]

Are you talking about officers in general?

It might sound like Authoritarism but no the whole state

Edited October 6, 2011 by Chimpanzee

[Bracket]

It might sound like Authoritarism but no the whole state

Ten, why did you post that in this thread?

[Chimpanzee]

Ten, why did you post that in this thread?

Why shouldnt I?

People can have conflicts of interest which in this debate includes homosexuals. Not ordinary homosexuals ones who got locked up for it.

[GreatFenris]

That makes perfect sense, of course. Of course, every Lefty on this forum has converged onto this thread to spit their vile venom at you. If they see a post that goes against their Lefty viewpoint of the world, no matter how wrong that viewpoint is, they converge upon that poster all at once, like a group of animals hunting in a pack. You are right what you say, though.

*pats your head*Of course.

Everyone who's a decent human being and appalled by homosexual people being bunched up with pedophiles and rapists are of course Lefty's.

Tell me, is it nice to live inside that particular world of yours?

As for the current part of this thread, of course people will disagree with Chimp. Not only is he targeting homosexuals without admitting it. He's also advocating a state that Earlier Mentioned Men with Mustaches would have been proud of. And last i check not many people want to live in a totalitarian dictatorship. You and Chimp might be some of the only ones?

[Space Commander Travis]

is it worth trying to plough through this thread, or are most of the eight pages taken up with the usual nasty spite from the usual one or two nasty spiteful people? What are the prejudices that have been brought out this time? All the usual nonsense about how if they were allowed to continue unrestricted, Humanity would die out and all the usual rubbish?

[Space Commander Travis]

I do like they way, incidentally, that anyone who doesn't like bigotry is automatically a "Lefty"; so can we draw the implication from that that the people saying this are unconsciously saying that Right-wing people do hold these bigotries and are quite unashamed of it?

[Chimpanzee]

I do like they way, incidentally, that anyone who doesn't like bigotry is automatically a "Lefty"; so can we draw the implication from that that the people saying this are unconsciously saying that Right-wing people do hold these bigotries and are quite unashamed of it?

One person said lefty and it wasnt me.

I'm central.

[aquatus1]

I'm ambidextrous. I hate everyone.

[Chimpanzee]

I'm ambidextrous. I hate everyone.

lol

[Verneph]

I'm ambidextrous. I hate everyone.

Okay, that's awesome.

I don't see how everyone who questioned Chimp is automatically a "lefty" because of it, especially considering I'm far right-wing.

Chimp, seriously, I do see what you're trying to say but what you are suggesting just doesn't work in practice. It's been proven time and time again to be far too abusable and ultimately will just make tensions between the groups involved even worse. It wouldn't help anybody.

[Chimpanzee]

Okay, that's awesome.

I don't see how everyone who questioned Chimp is automatically a "lefty" because of it, especially considering I'm far right-wing.

Chimp, seriously, I do see what you're trying to say but what you are suggesting just doesn't work in practice. It's been proven time and time again to be far too abusable and ultimately will just make tensions between the groups involved even worse. It wouldn't help anybody.

Maybe Police Stations should be completely covered in CCTV cameras including in the cells and toilets?

Same in prisons and in Courts?

[Verneph]

Maybe Police Stations should be completely covered in CCTV cameras including in the cells and toilets?

Same in prisons and in Courts?

Because that wouldn't be an invasion of privacy at all.

If a system requires that much surveillance to work, it is not a good system.

Edited October 6, 2011 by Verneph

[Chimpanzee]

Because that wouldn't be an invasion of privacy at all.

If a system requires that much surveillance to work, it is not a good system.

Just inside Police Stations isnt to much work.