Dear Dr. Baker:

Most of the cry-baby letters that our letter writers have been complaining about seem to deal with misunderstandings and personality difficulties. But this one of the homosexual writing to you in the February issue is a new one to me. Maybe he figures that since everybody is crying about discrimination he should get on the band-wagon too. It could be that he cannot hold a job because he is a homosexual. But he seems to argue against that in saying that he finds it difficult to mix with people.

And Dr. Baker doesn't help much when she offers this consolation: "Of course, it is unfair to discriminate against homosexuals, just as it is unfair to discriminate against Jews, Negroes and other minority groups."

Since this word "discriminate" means "to think through clearly" it would be wise for us to do some straight thinking here. As it is being used by minority groups today the word has become almost equivalent to a complaint about the basic right of every individual to chose for himself his friends, his neighbors, his business etc., etc., etc. A truly discriminate person is one who thinks things out and decides for himself. But these minority groups have made it appear that anyone who goes against them has created an intolerable situation and is guilty of committing the lowest and most despicable crime imaginable.

It would seem that should discrimination be abolished true democratic freedom would take over. But that ain't necessarily so! True freedom can exist only within the framework of truth, law and order. And these pressure groups would have no law at all. Where there is an infraction of the law there is an infraction of freedom. Where the law prevents reasonable conduct of one's life the law must be changed. That is exactly what the homosexual through ONE hopes to do: change the

one

laws so that the homosexual life can be lived without improper restraints. We cannot ask for freedom from the law or above the law. We can only ask for freedom within the law.

The discrimination that Dr. Baker speaks of as being against the Jews, the Negroes and other minority groups has nothing at all to do with law and true freedom. Rather these minority groups attempt through legislation and coercion to gain for themselves rights and privileges that they have no natural claim to. And without entanglements of responsibilities.

It is not an argument for freedom when an all-white community must accept Negro neighbors. It is not freedom that results in the forcing of integration in an all-white school. It is robbing one group of their rights to be given indiscriminately to another. Each employer has the right to hire workers he believes will serve him best. If he wants Chinamen in his laundry then he has a right to hire only Chinamen. It would be a violation of that employer's rights to compel him to hire men he does not want in his business.

Carry the argument to the logical extreme and you must (a) compel the Yale Alumni organizations to admit graduates from other schools. Not to do so would be discrimination. (b) Force Catholic schools to admit Jewish and Protestant children. Not to do so would be discrimination. (c) Stop publishing ONE magazine since it describes itself as a homosexual magazine. It is therefore discriminating against heterosexuals.

No, it is not an argument for freedom that compels any person to act, to think, and to speak contrary to their nature or their wishes. That is what we have been fighting for: the right to live peacefully and within the law as orderly and useful citizens.

I certainly hope that we are not going to make it a matter of policy