However, ONE likewise holds that many statutes now upon the books in various States are not truly "law" and believes that time, along with calm and merciless exposure of the facts will gradually bring about the needed reforms. But does this give license for individual homophiles to violate codes of honesty and fair-dealing? Obviously not, though it would seem from their behavior that some of them believe otherwise. Such persons ONE never has and does not intend either to protect or to condone in their conduct. It is a fundamental tenet of ONE's position that the homophile is a worthy part of society and that as such he must merit and be accorded the same position and respect, the same Constitutional guarantees, as any other citizen.

But let it not be forgotten that he must merit and earn this freedom and this respect. Homophiles who play fast and loose with honesty and fair-dealing need not look for ONE's sympathy in their misconduct. In this broad and general sense ONE stands very much on the side of society as a whole but it at the same time believes that society is going to have to be taught many hard, unwelcome lessons concerning its attitudes toward and treatment of homophiles. We believe that thinking homophiles will join ONE in its self-appointed mission to help bring about these changes.

Richard Conger, Editor

AS TRUE NOW AS IT WAS THEN

by a former Editor

(Reprinted from ONE Magazine, July 1963)

The other evening at a meeting as I sat listening to a speaker who had been stirringly introduced as a champion of the homosexual cause, I became increasingly disturbed by his repeated use of the pronoun "I." I have done this; I have done that; I shall do this; I shall do that; I promise this, and so on. As I sat listening, I found myself playing a game with the speaker: I calculated what he would say next from what he had said previously. It was easy. We had both read the same book. He followed the formula transparently.

·

Actually much of what this self-appointed apostle had to say was not true; nor was it new. But it sounded beautiful. As the popular speaker concluded, the audience rose to a standing ovation-hungry listeners pressed around him. I heard somebody whisper, "This is a dangerous man. The people are applauding him not his ideas, not his platform, not his principles." I was reminded of the wisdom of the fathers of the Mattachine moement. They abided by a rule not to ever back a person or a candidate for a job or office. Instead they supported a man's platform or the issue he stood for. A nice distinction, this. The founders of Mattachine knew that men frequently change their positions became of one persuasion or another. It is especially true where the homosexual cause is concerned.

5