into men's rooms or stationed behind vent screens. Others may stand at urinals inviting approach. As ministers, we have investigated many of the socalled "set-ups" used to make such arrests, and we can only wonder with what sort of men we are dealing.

It has been suggested that the frequency of arrests and their nature could indicate the existence of a quota system based on the principle that minimum police efficiency demands at least so many arrests of a certain type by certain officers over a period of

time.

A more basic question is: Is solici-

tation with the intent to commit a sexual act of any kind justification for arrest and conviction? Is the discussion of possible sexual acts an adequate ground for considering that a person manifests sexual behavior presently against the law? If conversations about illegal matters are made equivalent to actual violation of law then we would have to incarcerate almost everyone.

This, then, is the fourth great injustice: Enforcement officers use methods of enticement and entrapment to develop grounds for arrest and conviction of persons presumed to be homosexual.

V

It does not end here. We have learned that when a person is arrested he is fingerprinted, photographed, and a record is made of the charges against him. Even if the courts dismiss the case or find him not guilty, this record. of arrest is retained by the police department. It can follow the person throughout his lifetime and be used much later to ruin him, particularly if the charges involve homosexual acts, which many employers consider a risky credit for an employee. It is unfair for employers to subject such persons to severe penalties on the basis of a police record of arrests especially as arrests are made as a means of intimidation when the arresting officers know they

10

cannot make a case in court. It is especially unjust when prolonged unemployment results from less than legal arrests and less than just court proceedings.

But the police do not always stop at reporting the record. In many cases they tell the person's employer of the charges against him, or release this information to the press for publication, which has the same effect. The lawyers arrested at the ball were the victims of such practices by the police department which sent the San Francisco Bar Association a report that these attorneys had been arrested defending homosexuals. Fortunately, the ethics of the Bar Association are quite different from those of the police.

The same might be said, but in another way, in reference to the discriminatory policies adhered to by the military and governmental sectors of our society. Suspected homosexuals are ferreted out and discharged as quickly as possible. For instance, a majority of homosexuals have served honorably in the military services without being detected or demoralizing their companions. The unfortunates who are discovered are discharged on "other than honorable grounds." This becomes all the more lamentable since the younger ones often do not manifest behavior associated with homosexuality until they are in the armed services.

Government employees often are preemptorily discharged after expensive investigations disclose grounds for "suspicion of homosexual behavior." Yet it has never been scientifically established that homosexuals are undesirable in public or military service because of their susceptibility to being blackmailed or because of innate characteristics which affect job perform-

ance.

Returning to the private sector, many private employers discharge homosexual employees on grounds justified by little more than custom, preju-