CRH: 1964/1968 (10 pages)

CRH: 1964/1968 (10 pages)

Published by the Council on Religion and the Homosexual, 1968. Phyllis Lyon & Del Martin Papers.

Repository: GLBT Historical Society

Page 1:
Essays on Homosexuality
Essay Number 3

CRH: 1964/1968
Council on Religion and the Homosexual

Prepared and Published by:
Council on Religion and the Homosexual
330 Ellis Street - San Francisco, California 94102

Page 2:
Many books and articles have been written on the subject of homosexuality. Some of them are very good, but many of them are of little value. Not much of a serious nature has yet been written from the point of view of the homosexual; and little of that has received wide circulation. The homophile organizations of San Francisco have undertaken to publish and distribute a series of "Essays on Homosexuality" which will discuss subjects of interest and importance to the general public as well as the homophile community in a serious, informative, and constructive manner.

Prepared and Published by:
COUNCIL ON RELIGION AND THE HOMOSEXUAL
330 Ellis Street-San Francisco, California 94102

fifty cents per copy
(organizational rates upon request)

CRH: 1964/1968
Council on Religion and the Homosexual

TABLE OF CONTENTS
SOCIAL ATTITUDES
AND THE HOMOPHILE MOVEMENT .... 2
THE FORMATION OF CRH ......... 3
EARLY HISTORY OF CRH . . . . 4
THE PROGRAMS AND GOALS OF CRH .......... 6
THE WORK OF CRH ............. 7
REACHING THE RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY .......... 7
REACHING THE HOMOPHILE COMMUNITY .......... 9
REACHING THE PROFESSIONAL COMMUNITIES . . . . . . 10
REACHING PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND COMMUNITY LEADERS ....... 10
REACHING THE PUBLIC AT LARGE ........ 11
THE IMPACT OF CRH ........ 14
THE FUTURE OF CRH ........... 15
OTHER CRH PUBLICATIONS ....... 16

Page 3:
SOCIAL ATTITUDES AND THE HOMOPHILE MOVEMENT

The homosexual has always been with us, but for the most part he has been considered an outsider, a fit subject for ridicule, denunciation, ostracism, and punishment. Among Christians the Old Testament injunction of death to the offender no longer prevails, but the Pauline strictures against the "sin" of homosexuality still receive wide acceptance. In the last century,
humanitarians and others have argued that homosexuality is a sickness-a questionable view-rather than a sin or crime, but without noticeable change in the social status or treatment of the homosexual. At best, both society and the religious community have preferred to treat homosexuality as an embarrassing problem to be passed over in silence or to be viewed with paternalistic concern.

In the last two decades, however, a number of pastoral clergy, some theologians, and numerous workers in the fields of science, law, and mental health, as well as many of the younger and more educated members of the general public, have concluded that homosexual acts are but one of several forms of sexual expression, that such acts are in themselves neither sick nor
immoral, and that the "problem" facing us is not the existence of the homosexual but an insecure sexual identity within our Judeo-Christian tradition.

Voices are now being raised in protest against such established practices as (1) exclusion of known homosexuals from civil service work, the armed forces, teaching positions, corporate management, and a host of other jobs, (2) issuance of undesirable discharges to homosexuals in the military services followed by denial of veterans' benefits, (3) deportation of homosexual
aliens, ( 4) harassment, enticement, entrapment, arrest, conviction, and punishment of homosexuals by law enforcement agencies, with consequent registration of consenting adults as sex offenders in many cases, (5) exploitation of homosexuals by those who resort to blackmail, robbery, physical attacks, and the like, and (6) the arbitrary classification of all homosexuals as sexual psychopaths.

These same voices are calling for (I) acceptance of the homosexual as a person possessing the same dignity and human rights as others, (2) repeal of present laws forbidding private sexual acts between consenting adults when no harm is involved, (3) employment of homosexuals on the basis of job qualification and retention on the basis of job performance, and (4) criminal
prosecution of persons who prey on homosexuals.

In England, the homosexual has recently won legal acceptance and some degree of social tolerance. This change, which has resulted from the recommendations and efforts of the Church of England's Moral Welfare Council, Cardinal Griffin's Catholic Advisory Committee, the Wolfenden Commission, the Quaker Report, the Albany Trust, and the Homosexual Law Reform
Society, is the end product of over a decade of public discussion.

In the United States it has been homosexuals themselves more than religious, medical, or legal groups who have called the attention of the public to the need for change. In the early l 950s-though there were earlier groups—homosexuals began to organize into societies dedicated to programs of education, community action, and social activity. Today some forty homophile
organizations are working for an alteration of social and legal attitudes and for an improvement of the status of the homosexual in his own eyes as well as those of the general public. In addition, a number of religious leaders and a few professional groups-most notably the American Law Institute, the Kinsey Institute, and the Playboy Foundation-have publicly urged changes of the type recently made in England.

THE FORMATION OF CRH
It was in San Francisco in the spring of 1964 that the religious community was directly confronted with the reality and variety of man's sexuality. Already existing in the city were four homophile organizations-the Mattachine Society, the Daughters of Bilitis, the League for Civil Education, and the Tavern Guild. Later that year a fifth organization, the Society for Individual
Rights, was formed. Although essentially isolated from each other and the rest of the community as well, and somewhat competitive in their interpersonal relationships, they nevertheless were providing the only demonstrated form of acceptance, education, and stability in the lives of many homosexuals who were confused by their analysts, persecuted by society, and rejected by their churches.

In his work at the Glide Urban Center, a private Methodist foundation, the Reverend Ted McIlvenna discovered how significant a role homosexuality played in the lives of many of San Francisco's young adults and how little attention homosexuals received from church groups. In order to improve the situation, he approached leaders of the homophile organizations mentioned above and a number of Methodist, Protestant Episcopal, United Church of Christ, and Lutheran ministers. The result was the Mill Valley Conference at the White Memorial Retreat Center, across the Golden Gate Bridge from San Francisco. For three days (May 31 - June 2, 1964) sixteen ministers and thirteen homosexuals met in a face to face confrontation. Laying aside previously conceived notions of the religious community and stereotypes of the

Page 4:
homosexual, the participants discovered their common humanity in, with, and under their predisposed sexuality. To be sure, this action was not without pain, but it fostered the growth of the human personalities involved to the extent that they evolved as a community of concerned individuals given to the common purpose of continuing the dialogue which had begun. Thus it
was that in December, 1964, the Council on Religion and the Homosexual was incorporated under the laws of the State of California.

Today CRH includes clergy and laymen from all major Christian faiths. It is governed by a board of twenty-one directors elected by the membership at an annual meeting. Board members serve for three year terms, with one-third of them being elected each year, and choose CRH's officers who serve for one year. Present board members include clergymen from the United Church of Christ, Roman Catholic, Methodist, and Lutheran denominations, several leaders from the homophile movement, and a number of professional persons from such fields as psychiatry, education, and the law.

EARLY HISTORY OF CRH
An initial effort on the part of the San Francisco homophile organizations to provide funds for the newly incorporated Council resulted in a dramatic confrontation with the establishment, and more particularly with the San Francisco Police Department. On the evening of New Year's Day, 1965, a CRH Ministers' Press Conference after the New Year's Ball. private benefit ball was held at a downtown hall. Despite prior assurances that there would be no interference with the dance, severe harassment by the San Francisco Police Department did take place. In addition to paddy wagons parked directly across from the entrance to the hall and squad cars at each end of the block, every person entering or leaving the hall was photographed by plainclothes officers using both still and movie cameras.

After being allowed several times to inspect the premises for possible violations of health, liquor, and fire regulations, the police were denied further entrance to the hall by CRH attorneys on the grounds that the dance was a private function and not open to the public. In the ensuing half hour, four arrests were made: three attorneys and a married woman who was responsible for checking identifications at the door. The charge was "interfering with an officer in the line of duty." What happened was this: three attorneys verbally challenged the right and authority of law enforcement officers to invade a private dance without a search warrant or without suspicion that a felony was being committed on the premises. After the arrests were made, many police officers entered the hall without further challenge. Later that evening two men were arrested for disorderly conduct when they held on to each other as they fell from a chair which collapsed under them as they were watching the floor show.

The following day, shocked by such a naked display of force and antagonism, as well as by a violation of trust, the clergymen of the Board of CRH called a press conference at which they charged the police with having broken faith with the Council. in addition, they protested police intimidation, harassment, and interference with an unpopular minority group, a direct violation
of the civil rights afforded to every citizen under the Fourteenth Amendment to the American Constitution. Having been witness to the action of the police, the ministers were able to assess the damage to human lives which uniformed, uninformed, prejudiced men with power can perpetrate. For the first time the homophile community and a segment of the religious community stood as one, formed out of the matrix of unjustified harassment and bound together by their common humanity.

In the court trials which followed, the three attorneys and the married woman were acquitted by the jury upon instruction from the judge that the prosecution had made no case, but the two men were found guilty.

In still another way, therefore, the newly elected Board of CRH was reminded of the power structure which is designed to prevent the kind of education, dialogue, and change so badly needed in our understanding of human sexuality. As a result, the Board entered the Council on Religion and the Homosexual as a plaintiff in a civil suit of more than a million dollars filed against the city of San Francisco, the police department, certain named officers, and a number of John Doe policemen. The matter is still in the courts.

The effect of this event and the actions taken pertaining to it have been beneficial although some of the issues remain unresolved. Thorough coverage of the event by the news media brought out into the open society's unsatisfactory treatment of the homosexual. In the last three years police relations with the homophile community in San Francisco have improved markedly. On the national scene, voices were raised in defense of the homosexual, and

Page 5:
the basis for an intelligent and constructive discussion of homosexuality has been laid.

THE PROGRAM AND GOALS OF CRH
The Council on Religion and the Homosexual has addressed itself to two major problems confronting homosexuals as a group and society as a whole; the first, isolation; and the second, education. Accordingly, we have considered it our task to develop a program which will break down the isolation of the homosexual from the rest of society through the long and difficult
process of educating the community. The first step has been to initiate a dialogue between the religious community and the homosexual. On this matter significant progress has been made. The second step is to work for a more inclusive understanding of human sexuality. Success here will occur as we encourage both laity and clergy to participate in a theological discussion
leading to a rethinking of traditional Christian positions which have been outmoded by recent discoveries in other disciplines, The third step involves convincing society to accept the homosexual as a human being who should be judged on his own merits rather than on his sexual orientation or practices. This means attacking the homosexual stereotype which has led to discrimination and rejection. Steps two and three, on which progress is being made, must be
undertaken simultaneously since they impinge upon and inform one another.

As social isolation recedes and education progresses, all groups in society will have to direct attention to the correction of present official discriminatory policies and practices directed against homosexuals wholly because of their sexual orientation.

To aid in the accomplishment of its tasks, the Council:
1 seeks to acquaint the religious community with the reality of homosexuality not only as it is conceptualized by research specialists and theorists but also as it is known and practiced by homosexuals.
2 suggests the study of all human relationships, of which the sexual is only one, from both theological and scientific points of view.
3 urges research on homosexuality within the framework of human sexuality rather than as a separate entity.
4 requests more accurate, comprehensive, and objective coverage of homosexuality by all communications media.
5 favors more rational laws and policies on the matter of adult sexual behavior in general and of adult homosexual behavior in particular.
6 encourages counselors and others working in the field of mental health to deal frankly and realistically with all facets of human sexuality.
7 supports educators, both public and religious, in their efforts to communicate the whole realm of sexual response, including the homosexual, through audio-visual, written, and other instructional methods.
8 offers help to any group interested in forming organizations similar to CRH in their own communities.

THE WORK OF CRH
To accomplish these goals, CRH seeks to contact and influence the religious community, the homophile community, the professional communities, public officials and community leaders, and the public at large.

Reaching the Religious Community
In the past three years CRH has seriously attempted to confront the religious community at every level with the variety of human sexual experience, particularly in reference to the homosexual aspect, as the following examples show.

Members of the board, as well as others from the general membership of CRH, have met with influential denomination personnel and decision-making bodies of the United Church of Christ, the Protestant Episcopal Church, the Lutheran Church in America, and the Methodist Church. As a result, the United Church of Christ was the first denomination to officially, publicly, and financially announce its commitment to CRH.

CRH was instrumental in influencing Bishop James Pike of the Protestant Episcopal Church to appoint in March of 1965 a Joint Committee on Homosexuality for the Episcopal Diocese of California. Members of the committee included individuals from the homophile community, Episcopal priests, and professional persons associated directly with CRH, as well as other clergymen and professional persons from the San Francisco area. After discussing the legal, medical, and moral issues of homosexuality, the committee recommended:
1 that present state laws should be changed so that any sex behavior between consenting adults in private is free of state control and criminal sanctions.
2 that police departments and public officials should do all in their power to bring an end to procedures leading to entrapment, such as suggestive dress and remarks on the part of plainclothes officers.
3 that the facts in the matter of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Department [regarding discrimination against homosexual bars] should be established and the procedure changed if they bear out the suspicions of the committee.
4 that frank discussions should be initiated and maintained with law enforcement officers and agencies to ensure fair and equitable treatment of homosexuals when they are arrested or held in custody.
5 that a broad sex education program, including the area of homosexuality, should be initiated in the Diocese of California (and hopefully in other dioceses as well) for both clergy and laity.

Page 6:
6 - that theological seminaries should be urged to include in their curriculum courses of study of human sexuality, including homosexuality, taking into account homosexual testimony and scientific data.

These recommendations were officially adopted by the Diocesan Council on February 24, 1967. In addition, the Diocesan Council has promised financial support to CRH.

In August, 1966, in association with the Second National Planning Conference of Homophile Organizations held in San Francisco, CRH and the Glide Urban Center co-sponsored a three day theological conference devoted exclusively to homosexuality. Some forty clergy and laity, both professional and non-professional, from as far away as Missouri, Nebraska, Illinois, Connecticut, and Massachusetts, participated in the consultation.

Continued efforts on the part of CRH to reach the religious and intellectual community have resulted in numerous panel discussions, conferences, retreats, and seminars with both youth and adult groups in congregations of the United Presbyterian Church, the Protestant Episcopal Church, the Methodist Church, the United Church of Christ, and the Lutheran Church in
America. Useful discussions have been held with Roman Catholic priests and lay leaders. In addition, speakers from CRH have discussed homosexuality and the problems of homosexuals with denominationally connected student groups and seminary student bodies. CRH considers its program of orientation and confrontation among its most effective activities.

The CRH Board participated directly in the formation of the Southern California Council on Religion and the Homophile. Representatives of CRH repeatedly went to Los Angeles to confer at length with interested ministers and homophile leaders. Today the Southern California Council stands in its own right as a highly productive body in the homophile movement while the two councils remain in close and friendly contact. As a result of the consultation of a group of Dallas clergymen with the Board of CRH, the Dallas Council on Religion and the Homosexual was established. The clergy, upon their return to Texas, contacted homosexuals in Dallas, encouraged them to form their own organization, and convinced them to join in setting up a local CRH.

In August, 1966, two members of the Board of CRH traveled to London to participate and speak at "The Consultation on the Church, Society, and the Homosexual." This international conference was attended by representatives from all major Christian denominations of the United States and Great Britain, and also by a number of research specialists and several members of Parliament.

Last summer three members of CRH testified at a criminal trial in the Minneapolis Federal District Court which resulted in the acquittal of a firm which had been charged with violating obscenity statutes by sending through the mail magazines containing material allegedly appealing to the "prurient" interest of homosexuals. After the trial, a Council on Religion and the New Morality was established by interested ministers and laymen.

Because of its varied activities in the religious community, CRH has become the subject of numerous articles and editorials in religious publications. Significant references to CRH and its work can be found in CHRISTIANITY TODAY, CHRISTIAN CENTURY, AVE MARIA, THE LIVING CHURCH, THE LUTHERAN, SOCIAL ACTION, and SOCIAL PROGRESS. Further, H. Kimball Jones in his book TOWARD A CHRISTIAN UNDERSTANDING OF THE HOMOSEXUAL commends CRH's program and suggests it as a model for churches in other cities to follow.

Reaching the Homophile Community
From the beginning, leaders of such homophile organizations as the Daughters of Bilitis, the Tavern Guild, the Mattachine Society, and the Society for Individual Rights have served on the Board of Directors of CRH. Additional leadership has also been provided by the California Motor Club and the Coits. Furthermore, many homosexual individuals have joined CRH and attend its open meetings.

CRH has maintained ties with Vanguard, a San Francisco organization of street youths, many of whom are homosexual or engage extensively in homosexual activity, has contributed financially to Hospitality House which seeks to provide a comfortable and friendly meeting place for these youths, and has offered its counseling services for those who wish to talk about their problems.

CRH has also contributed to the National Legal Defense Fund, a permanent, national, non-profit, non-partisan corporation devoted primarily to protecting and defending the homosexual's right to privacy and freedom of choice in his private life and related constitutionally protected rights. This organization's work has been discussed in our NEWSLETTER, and members of CRH have been alerted to watch for cases of particular concern to NLDF so that proper referral can be made.

CRH is a member of the National (now North American) Homophile Clearing House. Through this media it receives copies of publications distributed by the homophile organizations and keeps in contact with what is happening in the homophile movement.

In the past two years, CRH has participated in three national homophile planning conferences-at Kansas City, February 1966; San Francisco, August 1966; Washington D.C., July 1967. At the first two conferences the President of CRH was elected conference chairman, while the third meeting was chaired by one of the original board members of CRH. Delegates have also been sent to Western Regional Homophile Planning Conferences held in Los Angeles in April, 1967, and in Seattle in December, 1967.

Page 7:
Reaching the Professional Communities
Contacts with various professional groups in San Francisco have been initiated. CRH belongs to the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California and the American Friends Service Committee. A member of the CRH Board is a physician and former director of the San Francisco Center for Special Problems (a unit of the Department of Mental Health) which, among other services, provides specialized counseling of homosexuals. Several other board members are lawyers and educators.

In 1965 CRH sent delegates to participate in the ACLU meetings in Los Angeles which resulted in a statement of policy by the Southern California Civil Liberties Union that private sexual acts between consenting adults should be of no concern to the law. This statement was adopted in August, 1967, as the national policy of ACLU.

More and more faculty members and graduate students in the fields of medicine, sociology, anthropology, theology, psychology, psychiatry, and law are doing research on homosexuality. CRH has cooperated with these researchers by distributing information concerning their studies and by helping find homosexuals willing to serve as subjects. Contacts have also been made
with the Kinsey Institute at Indiana University. CRH has been happy to cooperate with their researchers and looks forward to further work with them.

Reaching Public Officials And Community Leaders
Reaching public officials and community leaders has proved to be our most difficult task. Although a few officials express some sympathy and interest privately in homosexuality and the plight of the homosexual in a hostile society, most of them consider the subject so inflammable or distasteful that they resort to evasive actions and comments.

Attempted contacts with chaplains in the armed services have been totally unproductive. Contacts with local naval authorities have led to an expression of some interest in the condition of homosexuals awaiting discharge, especially in matters of legal, religious, psychiatric, and vocational counseling.

Letters to the United States Civil Service Commission and the Defense Department have been invariably answered with the assurance that homosexuals are not eligible for federal employment without evidence of rehabilitation and are not permitted in the armed forces. Reasons to justify present policy are sometimes given, and statements are usually added that no change in policy is contemplated. Attempts to suggest that the time has come for a
reconsideration of federal policies which call for undesirable discharge of homosexuals and denial of employment have so far failed completely. In order to dramatize disapproval of these policies, especially as they apply to the armed services, members of CRH and its Board of Directors participated in the National Protest Day demonstration held in front of the Federal Building in San Francisco in May, 1966.

Visits with members of Congress have evinced some concern and resulted in many requests to be kept informed. But for the most part visitors are reminded that the legal aspects of homosexuality fall under the jurisdiction of the individual states. Members of Congress do not yet seem concerned about present discriminatory policies of the federal government as they apply to homosexuals.

Officials of the San Francisco office of the Veterans Administration have met with a delegation from CRH and have spoken at one of CRH's public meetings. They have said that, although "in general" persons who have received undesirable discharge because of homosexuality are not eligible for veterans' benefits, each application for benefits will be carefully considered. CRH intends to pursue the issue of veterans' benefits further.

On the state and local level, CRH has explained its purpose and program to elected and appointed officials and has discussed problems and issues with the police department and agents of the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. CRH will make known its views to the California Legislature when that body considers the penal law reforms which are now being prepared by a special state commission. For three years, CRH has held a "candidates' night"
at which aspirants for public office may present their views and be asked questions. Active support has also been given to voter registration drives. The result of these activities has been that public officials are expressing an awareness of the voting power of the homophile community, an interest in its problems, and support for law reform.

In order to promote greater justice for all, CRH supports the efforts of Citizens Alert, a non-profit corporation consisting of concerned citizens organized to investigate reported cases of police harassment and brutality, and urges its members to participate in police-community relations activities.

In its regard for the well-being of the inhabitants of the central city area of San Francisco, many of whom are homosexual and some of whom are involved in drug addiction and prostitution, CRH supported the creation of a special program relating to these matters which has been funded by the Office for Economic Opportunity under the federal poverty program.

To encourage the employment of homosexuals on the basis of job qualifications and job performance, the Board of CRH has passed a resolution endorsing the efforts of the Glide Methodist Church Task Force for Fair Employment Practices for Homosexuals.

Reaching the Public at Large
The work of CRH has helped to make homosexuality an increasingly acceptable part of American society and has aided in promoting more open

Page 8:
discussion of the subject by the various mass media. Articles containing significant references to CRH and its work have appeared in NEWSWEEK, TIME, LOOK, SEXOLOGY, NATION, the WALL STREET JOURNAL, the SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE, the SAN FRANCISCO EXAMINER, and the LOS ANGELES TIMES, as well as in the religious journals mentioned above. Officials of CRH have frequently appeared on radio and television programs, have been interviewed by reporters for feature articles on homosexuality, and have spoken before such varied audiences as high school and college classes, university seminars, Y.M.C.A. and Y.W.C.A. groups, a Junior Chamber of Commerce, and several women's clubs.

The Council's work has been extensively covered in local newspapers which gave headline coverage to the New Year's ball incident, the National Planning Conference of August, 1966, and the theology consultation which preceded it. Additional coverage was granted during the summer of 1966 after the California State Fair Committee turned down the application of CRH and various homophile organizations for a booth at the fair from which they might distribute informational literature. CRH's lawyers sought unsuccessfully to have the decision overturned by the courts. The matter has not yet been resolved, however.

Meetings open to the public sponsored by CRH have included speeches by Father Eugene Schallert, sociologist from the University of San Francisco; Rabbi Elliot Grafman, panel member on radio station KGO's "Clergy on the Line;" Mr. Anson Mount of the Playboy Foundation; Dr. John Gagnon of the Institute for Sex Research; and Mr. Anthony Grey of the Albany Trust and
Homosexual Law Reform Society of London: Discussion sessions have dealt with the homosexual and family relations, the report of the President's Crime Commission, the international conference on homosexuality held in London in the summer of 1966, and the homosexual and veterans' benefits.

CRH considers its publications program an especially effective way to reach and influence the general public. So far pamphlets have been written and distributed on such subjects as the consultation which led to the formation of CRH, society's unfair treatment of the homosexual, theology and the homosexual, and homosexual law reform. Additional essays on employment and the views of doctors and social scientists are in preparation. (Publications currently available are listed on page 16 of this pamphlet.)

Page 9:
THE IMPACT OF CRH
In its three and one-half years of operation, CRH may not have effected a revolution in the attitudes and action patterns of American society or the American religious community on the subject of homosexuality, but it has been a pioneer. It saw a problem that needed to be faced and dared to face it. It began the construction of bridges between the homosexual and the socio-religious body politic-bridges which must be completed in the years ahead.

Through its educational program the Council has helped to focus public attention on homosexuality in a responsible way. By its openness and support it has given much needed encouragement to the homophile community. With its deep concern for justice, it has brought to the surface, especially in religious circles, an interest in a subject too long ignored.

Members of the Council have found in their travels across the country, in their correspondence with people of all professions, and in their conversations with visitors to the Council's office that CRH has become a symbol of something which is basically good and worthwhile and that it is looked to for leadership in its field. Many people consider CRH a model for others to emulate, if not in its structure and program, at least in its concern. And even at this youthful stage it has begun to gain the confidence of the religious community as well as the homophile community as being a key agent for change, making the world just a little more human. Thus do we attempt to fulfill the will of God and to make his love known.

Significant results have been realized, most important of which have been:
1 - the part played by CRH in bringing about the appointment of the Episcopal Diocese of California's committee on homosexuality whose recommendations in favor of homosexual law reform, etc. were officially adopted by the diocese and will serve as a model for other
denominations.
2 - the role played by CRH in bringing into being similar councils in Los Angeles and Dallas.
3 - the confrontations CRH entered into with the religious community and with the police and liquor authorities which have improved the state of the homosexual in San Francisco Bay area.

What CRH has done could never have been realized without the financial support and unqualified confidence which have come from a variety of sources. CRH is especially grateful to the United Church of Christ's Board of Homeland Ministry, the Northern California Conference of the United Church of Christ, the California Board of Christian Social Concerns of the
Methodist Church, the Glide Urban Center, the Episcopal Diocese of California, and the leaders and members of the various homophile organizations of San Francisco. Additional thanks are warranted for the moral support and interest in our work expressed by numerous religious and professional groups, including the National Council of Churches, and for political endorsement of our program by the Young Democrats of San Francisco.

THE FUTURE OF CRH
The work of CRH has only begun. In each area to which CRH has directed its attention, its program must be continued and expanded. Specifically:
(I) CRH must step up its program of counseling, orientation, and publication;
(2) CRH must involve additional ministers and church groups, and especially
chaplains in the armed forces, in concern for the well being of the homosexual;
(3) CRH must call the attention of the public and responsible government officials to such unjust practices as:
a - discrimination against homosexuals in employment, especially by federal agencies,
b - exclusion of homosexuals from military service under present draft and defense policies,
c separation of overt homosexuals from the armed forces with undesirable discharge and denial of veterans' benefits,
d - harassment of homosexuals by the police and exploitation of them by unscrupulous persons,
e - arrest procedures which rely on the use of such unsavory tactics as clandestine observation or enticement and entrapment by vice squad decoys and liquor agents and which result in registration of consenting adult homosexuals as sex offenders,
f - labelling homosexuals sex psychopaths solely on the basis of their homosexuality, and
g - using homosexuality as a political weapon or as the basis for witchhunts;
(4) CRH must make the public aware of criminal law reform, an issue which will come before the legislatures of many states in the next several years as they consider the redesign of penal codes; and
(5) CRH must appeal to professional groups in such fields as medicine, the law, education, and the social sciences to deal scientifically with the study of homosexuality and to offer the contributions of their disciplines so that constructive, practical, and fair solutions may be found to the problems facing society and the homosexual.

The challenge is here and now. The crucial issue is how we respond.

Page 10:
CRH PUBLICATIONS CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
A Brief of Injustices-An Indictment of our Society in its Treatment of the Homosexual $1.00
The Challenge and Progress of Homosexual Law Reform $1.00
The Church and the Homosexual by the Rev. Donald Kuhn $1.00
Churchmen Speak Out on Homosexual Law Reform .25
Homosexuality: A Contemporary View of the Biblical Perspective by the Rev. Dr. Robert L. Treese .60
(Organizational rates upon request.)