BILL OF RIGHTS FOR HOMOSEXUALS ? OR !

-

The attorney inquired if the title of the Institute might not have been a "Bill of Rights for Homosexuals"ending with a question mark or an exclamation point. We do have a Bill of Rights, he said, but added that the homosexual is not given a fair shake in many instances. Ho pointed out ONE's victory in the U.S. Supreme Court as a victory under the Bill of Rights, since banning of inf or mation regarding homosexuality would be a violation of right s accruing under the Constitution. He added that other groups have had their rights violated too.

There is no law against homosexuality per se, and the American Law Institute has okayed the idea that consenting adults, where there is no force or violence, have a right to their own sexual preferences in private. He added that this point of view seems to be growing in popularity.

Education of all people seems to be the answer to the problem of the homosexual. In religion, for instance, only work of homosexuals within their own churches will really help to educate the congregati ons.

The attorney onded with the observation that a really good end towards which to work would be the application of the Bill of Rights and other documents of freedom to all people, regardless of whether they are homosexual or heterosexual.

RESEARCHER ASKS WHY?

Dr. Evelyn Hooker of UCLA, psychologist and researcher in the field of homosexuality for several years, attendod the two-day meeting, listening in on the various groups as they were discussing their specific topic. In rising to speak as the last of the commentators, she questioned "why hold such a meeting", and why did so few attend this Institute in comparison to other meetings of homophile organizations? One interpretation of this is timidity or fearfulness of the homophile to discuss such rights. And she added that one of the stereotyped pictures

22