the Jews are no exception. Despite the practice of homosexuality being so widespread as to be found in nearly every culture and clime, the world seems to be none the worse off because of it.

An urgent consideration, which seems to have been totally overlooked by respondents to ONE, is that the religious outlook of a given time and culture needs to be considered in its historical context-the long perspective. We know that religion and morals may develop independently of one another, but that they both arise out of the mores of the culture-the determining factor of which, as I have said before, is economic and dependent also upon family structure.

What does intrinsically sinful mean? The term 'intrinsic' refers to a property or quality to be found in an object, which is what in part determines the nature of the object. Blueness, for example, is intrinsic to blue paint. If the blueness were not there, then clearly it would not be blue paint we were looking at, but some other color. Intrinsically sinful means that a performed act has in it the quality of sinfulness. In other words it is the sinful nature which determines the act. This seems to me to be a contradiction in terms, inasmuch as we are not dealing here with matter, or physical properties, and an action can have qualities only in so far as we define them. Also, intrinsic means that the quality which is intrinsic is always found in the object. Since this is not possible with actions (whose qualities are determined arbitrarily by definition), no action can be intrinsically sinful.

We could call an act moral if it had good consequences; immoral if it had bad consequences either for individuals or society. If by homosexuality we mean not just the sex act between men, or between women, but also genuine affectionate feelings between beings of the same sex and of

all ages, then clearly, when mankind learns to love man, such affection. could have exceedingly beneficial consequences to society. The homosexual affection and passion can therefore be considered to be moral behavior in specific, non-hurtful circumstances. We might even go so far as to say that those agencies which would prevent a moral act from taking place are themselves immoral, and do not justly deserve the respect or obedience of men. If the consequences of homosexual acts can be shown to be good-even if just occasionally — the intrinsically sinful theory of the nature of homosexuality is thereby refuted.

Homosexuality being a natural development in all animals including man, we are obliged to review our general attitudes. Our orientation has been toward condemning the homosexual and trying to change him by whatever means are at our disposal (even shock treatment!), rather than trying to help him achieve an optimum degree of socialization and development of his talents. It is interesting to note that some of the greatest creators of art in the history of the world have been homosexuals. If we are really interested in our society and in our fellow man, whether he acknowledges his homosexuality or not, then it behooves us to make the requisite changes in our attitudes. Homosexuals must be helped to make the optimum social and individual adjustment, and they can only do this when they are able to acknowledge their affection honestly, without fear of punishment or harassment, and with a high degree of integrity. Some homosexuals manage to do this despite the opprobrium of society. There are millions of homosexuals in this country. To treat them as outcasts because of their affectionate inclinations is to deny them their rights as citizens of a democracy.

James Rogers

25