country's security.

The simple facts are that the homosexual is little different from the heterosexual material for the armed services. He is no more nor no less vulnerable to blackmail. He is just as brave as his brothers, taking the group as a whole. He is certainly no less patriotic. About the most that can possibly be said by anyone, unless he is utterly a simpleton, is that there are good and bad homosexuals, just as there are good and bad heterosexuals. The bad ones of both groups ought to be kicked out, but blanket rulings such as all of the services now enforce do our country a distinct disservice.

Every American knows, or should know, that it is entirely unconstitutional to make rulings which apply to only one class of citizens. I flatly charge that the services have got to stop this insane an un-American discrimination that they practice against homosexuals. Or else they must set up rulings for Jews, for negroes, for Catholics and other classes of citizens.

Any officer in the armed forces, from the Pentagon on down, flagrantly violates the Constitution of the United States of America, which he has sworn to uphold, whenever he signs a blue discharge or takes any part in proceedings directed at a member of the armed forces because he or she is homosexual. Such an officer thereby proves himself entirely unfit to serve his country any further and should be court-martialed without delay. These are times that are testing the very fundamentals of our national structure. There must be absolute adherence to sound principles or we shall end by discovering national morality to have flown out the window and American ideals as dead as dead as the dodo.

Some of the greatest armies in military history have won their victories by glorifying and dignifying the ideal

of comradely love. A military historian who is honest will have to admit that this is true. He knows it was on this ideal and practice that Xenophon held together his men during their great campaign; that Alexander practised this ideal himself and encouraged it among his men. Julius Caesar, and great generals in every age have well understood that the highest bravery can come because a man is defending the life and honor of the loved comrade who stands beside him. Great generals in every age have despised as soldiers the men with sweethearts and wives at home waiting for them, knowing well that such men would be longing for the soft embraces of the women and the comforts of home. How then expect them to possess the sterner qualities for the good military man?

Even Hitler started out with strong battalions of homosexual lovers, who fought side by side for love and for what they thought was honor. The result? He almost succeeded in beating the combined forces led by the world's brainless brass who hadn't yet caught on to this great truth. In the end some of those around him managed to bring this military homosexuality into disfavor and it was suppressed. Then, he began to lose his battles.

These days our newspapers are filled with cries of alarm about the dangers confronting United States. Let us not for a moment minimize these dangers. Yet, what does the brass do about this? Why they just go right on, in season and out, rejecting vast numbers of the most courageous, patriotic and intelligent young men and women in our country because they are homosexual. The number they reject at induction time and those who are kicked out later for such cause is unbelievably large. So that Pentagon muddle-headedness is seriously endangering our military strength right at the time when it is

21