IN ITS LATEST RESPONSE to a recent proposal by the Gay Students Association (GSA), Harvard has continued its year-long stifling of the voices of its gay students with gags of red tape.

When GSA members returned in September, they found a new, restrictive postering policy--limiting outdoor postering to seven new kiosks. Suspecting the policy stemmed from administrative disapproval of the GSA's extensive postering last April, they quizzed administrators--who denied the charges. But GSA officials remain unconvinced, arguing that the kiosks and postering rules merely were designed to relegate GSA notices to unobstrusive parts of campus, where impressionable visitors--like alumni--would be less likely to see them.

Three months later, Harvard acted again to silence gay voices. Administrators turned down a GSA request to include information about the group in spring term registration packets--suddenly discovering a policy forbidding student groups from distributing information in the packets.

Now, GSA has made another legitimate demand of Harvard, but seems likely to be foiled again. A GSA official went before the Faculty Council shortly before vacation to call for a University-wide policy forbidding discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

The policy, which the Committee on Houses and Undergraduate Life approved over-whelmingly in January, would force the College to affirm that it does not discriminate against gay students, a policy already on the books at nine of Harvard's 11 schools. It would not require Harvard to spend a penny--the University would merely add the statement to existing codes forbidding discrimination on the basis of race and sex.

But council members greeted the GSA official presenting the policy with sharp questions about the need for Harvard to affirm explicity the nondiscrimination they considered so obvious. And, they noted, Harvard only lists the groups that federal law requires them to enumerate. Their explanation for this "policy:" If Harvard were to begin listing groups not mandated by law, people would assume it discriminated against all unlisted groups--like fat people, people who wear glasses, and other oppressed groups.

If the Council rejects the GSA's request, it would continue Harvard's all-too-frequently demonstrated tradition of ignoring the spirit of federal codes aimed at securing the rights of minority groups, a trend shown all too clearly in its lackadaisical compliance with affirmative action codes regarding racial minorities and women.

And it would ignore the GSA's potent arguments why it--more than fat students or similar groups--deserves the protection of an explicit nondiscrimination policy. Unlike minority applicants for admission to the College, gay students may feel reluctant to enumerate their gay-related activities on an application. A policy forbidding discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation would help allay this fear--along with the physical fear many gay students say they feel on campus.

Harvard can deny GSA's request. That would be legal; it would not be right. The University should affirm its commitment to all students by adopting a policy of nondiscrimination on the basis of sexual orientation--and now.