That's the whole point! Homosexuality was illegal, now it isn't. That battle was won and those previously convicted have been pardoned. Thus, history has been revisited.

If it can be done in one direction, why not the other?

I am not arguing it should be. I am only pointing out the hypocrisy involved. It would only be relevant to meat eating, or driving a petrol car, if they became illegal.

None of this discussion is about politics, social power or compensation. It's about the possible hypocrisy involved in accepting the removal of some historical artefacts, but not others.

That's the whole point! Homosexuality was illegal, now it isn't. That battle was won and those previously convicted have been pardoned. Thus, history has been revisited.

If it can be done in one direction, why not the other?

I am not arguing it should be. I am only pointing out the hypocrisy involved. It would only be relevant to meat eating, or driving a petrol car, if they became illegal.

None of this discussion is about politics, social power or compensation. It's about the possible hypocrisy involved in accepting the removal of some historical artefacts, but not others.

But it's not, so why introduce that into the conversation?

If you wander about town being bothered by statues looking down at you, then I would suggest that it is you that have the problem

You know full well that statue bashing is just a symptom of a bigger issue. Its name is mass immigration and the erosion of British culture.

Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (04 Apr 2022 8.57am)

All I am trying to do is to get this "woke" idea put in its rightful context. It isn't quite as simple as some seem to want it to be.

Slavery wasn't just illegal, or simply immoral, by any standards. A strong argument could be made that it was even worse than paedophilia, though both are horrible. Slavers regarded their captives as less than human. Thousands died being transported, including many children. Savile was an evil man, but, so far as I know, he didn't kill anyone.

Using the passage of time to ameliorate this behaviour is not acceptable. It should be remembered, but in the right way, so that we never forget.

A spokesperson from the Glasgow City Council said that despite the council leader's apology on behalf of the local authority, that they are not proposing to remove any statues as a result of the audit yet.

I suspect the ‘yet’ was inserted by The Daily Mail

I also expect that if any statue were removed it would be someone other than livingstone.

There is no sign at all that any statue is targeted for removal. This is nonsense written by two media sources that just love to enrage people that enjoy getting enraged

So get a life, not mindlessly angry.

Edited by Mapletree (04 Apr 2022 4.43pm)