|
Emron posted:I have a tendency to try to connect things, so I already have a billion ideas, and I just didn't know how frowned upon drawing your own conclusions from it is. Any such frowning hasn't done much to stop other people from drawing their own conclusions. Why should it stop you? Emron posted:Edit: my mouth to ear experience was going over the work with my dad while chipping golf balls in the backyard. It was really great. My mentor and I ran errands and worked on plumbing. Those are some of my most treasured memories.
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 16:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 05:10 |
|
|
patentmagus posted:My mentor and I ran errands and worked on plumbing. Those are some of my most treasured memories. I had two mentors, one of which was the most magnetic, jovial, kind, wonderfully people I've ever met, and the other was a certified lecturer and a North Carolina AF&AM Treasurer of Distinction (some honor I'd never seen in other states) who was just the coolest dude ever. I remember looking forward to our meetups so much, there's just nothing like connecting with your coach.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 16:26
|
|
|
The key thing was freedom of association in groups that have some sort of.membership. Not sure about the exact rules in your country but here is pretty firm in the law.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 16:32
|
|
|
I was taught by a brother who signed my petition after I was referred to him by a colleague. He taught me all three degrees in his auto shop, which he owned. He had a PhD in cellular microbiology and cellular anatomy or somesuch, had taught at a university for years, and quit when he decided he didn't care for the politics of education, so he opened this shop. He was also a big fan of Scotch whisky, as was I, so I went by after his business day was over a few times a week after work and we'd go over the work and occasionally have a taste. A few months after I was raised, he asked me to accompany him to the UK for a 3 week vacation. His regular travel companion, a brother, was caring for his sick wife, but my friend was afraid it would be his last trip round the bend. I grudgingly traveled with him, visiting several Lodges where he'd been well known, and enjoying a taste of the countryside in England, Wales, and Scotland. These constitute the only fond memories I have of the time I spent living in that part of the country, and sorely tempt me to make the 7 hour drive to visit sometime. I still hold membership at my old mother lodge, and call back from time to time despite living in a better state with better economy and better opportunities. I hope sorely to see my old brother and mentor again, and hope I can make another trip with him sometime. Edit: Only problem is I don't drink anymore, but I may make an exception for that man just because I wouldn't want to cause him the suffering.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 16:58
|
|
|
KittyEmpress posted:If such a law a truly passed (unlikely to actually happen, as the only reason it seems to be so supported is that most lazy rednecks in the area aren't actively going against it) what would the response of the Masons be? Or to take it a step farther, if at some point this is put into effect in a whole state, or perhaps all of the United States, what would be the implications. Response would vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, within each lodge and the heart of each individual Mason. There would be debate, contention, compromise, schism, protest and acceptance. In some places the new laws would be complied with and a co-ed organization would be created. In others lodges would cease to operate out of protest. In still others there might possibly be a return to regular lodges meeting in secrecy. There would be a great debate about regularity, the ancient landmarks and other issues. Friendships would be strained and all other manner of drama and unpleasantness would ensue. All this is to say that the response would be varied, Freemasonry is not a monolithic organization, nor one with a single strong centralized power structure. KittyEmpress posted:Edit: I ask mostly because I do see a future where sexism and gender based 'clubs' will not be allowed, if not soon then at some point, and I wonder if this is a thing that is discussed. It is certainly something that's discussed among Masons; a wide range of opinions about the matter are held. My own reaction to a new set of laws radically altering the legal ability of private organizations formed by voluntary and elective association to set their membership requirements would be dismay. For the state to do so without the compelling interest of ensuring universal access to a public good, service or right would seem to me to be an overreach. I'm not a legal scholar though and I'd listen to arguments made for and against such a law before drawing a conclusion. Its certainly possible that Masonry, as I'm obligated to practice it, might be incompatible with the law of the land. At that point I would probably cease to be an active Mason in the sense of belong to and participating lodge activities, rather than violate my oath or break the law. When this subject comes up I'm often interested in learning where people personally draw the line for what is or isn't an acceptable reason for an organization to restrict its membership or exclude individuals from joining. If gender/sex isn't a valid affinity, is political or religious belief, ethnicity, heritage, nationality, profession or sexual orientation a valid basis for voluntary but exclusive association? Why or why not? I don't want to derail the thread, but questions of this nature come up fairly often and seem to come down what each individual believes is or isn't a valid basis for voluntary association. I favor allowing private organizations to restrict their membership; I'm not going to campaign to force the Humanist Society to accept my membership application, try to join an Norwegian heritage association, a Christian church or the alumni association of a university I didn't attend. I don't meet their membership requirements and I don't believe that there is a compelling reason for the state to force them to revise their rules to allow me to join.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 17:59
|
|
|
Well, I am not sure if I should talk about the above in here, but I personally have the belief that no association should be capable of keeping someone out by virtue of birth, but can by deed. Which is to say, no kicking people out for being female/male or being black/asian/blue. Though the whole Norwegian heritage thing is interesting because there is a large difference between stopping people due to discrimination and between stopping people because they do not qualify for what it stands for. While it does sound good when I say to disallow people from banning middle Eastern people due to wide spread racism, it sounds bad to force an organization for something like Chinese heritage to allow people who aren't Chinese and have no heritage with them. It is actually interesting to think about fully because I never considered that gender exclusion isn't just for (sexist or not) old boys clubs, but also for things like victimized women, with the 'sexism' being for protection of the members, instead of because of any archaic beliefs. As a non member, nor ever capable of being one, and someone who has been disallowed from entry into local charity organizations and the like due to my gender, I would say that I do think that if legislation was put out preventing gender based exclusion, I would not find the general answer given of 'this is how it has been for hundreds of years' to be sufficient to change my mind, but the effects on other organizations likely would. It is interesting that I never considered the fact that such laws would also affect organizations with non discriminatory reasons. Edit: also, thank you for the reply in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 23:25
|
|
|
KittyEmpress posted:If such a law a truly passed what would the response of the Masons be?
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 00:36
|
|
|
Sub Rosa posted:Women would then be welcome to apply and get unanimously blackballed. So then clearly they aren't being excluded because of their gender, but rather because the organization requires all prospective members to be voted on and members are free to vote their consciences. This as well; there would be quite a bit of this, though I don't think if would be a universal phenomena. KittyEmpress posted:Edit: also, thank you for the reply in the first place. Sure, it's a bit silly to have an A/T thread and not answer questions. While I have some other thoughts I need some time to collect them and they might be best suited to another thread or PM in any case.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 01:41
|
|
|
Glorified Scrivener posted:This as well; there would be quite a bit of this, though I don't think if would be a universal phenomena. Universal, no, but in the American South, definitely. Some of the older men here are very staunch on the matter of no women in the fraternity. For example, lately a matter has come up with our Grand Master over a Past Master who is in his late 60s and has decided to... well, let's just say he'll be Frederica from now on. Personally, I have no problem with this. I'm only obligated not to be at the raising of a woman. If a man is raised and later becomes a woman, there's nothing in my obligation keeping him or her from sitting in meetings. Nevertheless, while I was listening to this conversation, I heard two other brothers discussing which "caliber" would be best to deal with the situation. One argued 22, one argued 45.  Freemasonry is a beautiful and progressive thing, and by and large Freemasons are some of the most genuine, kind, progressive men I've men. But I must admit that people in general (especially in the American south) can be hateful and ignorant, and some of those people become Freemasons.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 13:26
|
|
|
Glorified Scrivener posted:When this subject comes up I'm often interested in learning where people personally draw the line for what is or isn't an acceptable reason for an organization to restrict its membership or exclude individuals from joining. I'll be completely non-PC here and admit that I'd black ball every female applicant. There are already plenty of coed organizations in the world. You want coed? Join one. There's no need to homogenize everything into the same PC utopia. I can certainly be swayed, but fraternity has value and I don't want to give that up. patentmagus fucked around with this message at 16:43 on Sep 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 18:41
|
|
|
Uh, I'm a new brother and all that, but I'm totally not cool with what you just said. It's one thing to point to the obligation, but what you're saying is something else entirely.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 21:27
|
|
|
I'm not a new Brother and I think that's bullshit, so you're not alone.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 21:29
|
|
|
patentmagus posted:I'll be completely non-PC here and admit that I'd black ball every female applicant. I don't think this would be a good way of handling the issue. Were I in a lodge faced with this situation I'd propose a motion that all new petitions for membership be declined until the issue was resolved. I find value in belonging to a Fraternity and I don't believe that the membership requirements should be changed in this way. But I also think it would be dishonest for a lodge to accept a petition that stood no chance of passing. To be clear, I know that this happens - I don't approve of it. No petition should reach the point of a ballot if it is known that Brother has objections to the petition. Concerns about a petition should be brought either to the investigative committee or the Master, and addressed before it is brought to a ballot. In the case of a conflict between membership requirements and a legal mandate, not accepting petitions until a resolution to the conflict is the only valid course of action, in my opinion. I take my the portions of my obligation requiring me to be a just citizen as seriously as I take the ones concerning whom I can grant consent to be made a Mason.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 22:19
|
|
|
Glorified Scrivener posted:In the case of a conflict between membership requirements and a legal mandate, not accepting petitions until a resolution to the conflict is the only valid course of action, in my opinion. I take my the portions of my obligation requiring me to be a just citizen as seriously as I take the ones concerning whom I can grant consent to be made a Mason. It is a very good point, as I'd be between a rough ashlar and a perfect ashlar in that decision. A rock and a hard place for you non masons. My obligation requires me to follow the laws of the land, yet as a worshipful master I was obligated to never allow someone not fit to be a mason to be initiated. Truthfully, hand on my heart kind of truthful, I'd let female applicants join. Because just maybe, one of them would be a harder working, more supportive secretary than the rear end in a top hat I currently have in the job. Freaking notice papers are always going out late and nothing gets done because of him. If you don't want to do the job, don't take the job you prick. Sorry guys, I really hate my secretary at the moment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 00:50
|
|
|
I'm getting a kind of 'only females should be secretaries' kinda vibe from that, but maybe it's just because of the tone of the whole topic at the moment. I'd cast my vote in the school of no applicants until it's figured out, but I also do agree that there are separate avenues for men and women alike when it comes to social clubs or frat/sorr gatherings.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 01:30
|
|
|
SaNChEzZ posted:I'm getting a kind of 'only females should be secretaries' kinda vibe from that, but maybe it's just because of the tone of the whole topic at the moment. It's hard for non masons to understand what the job of the Secretary entitles. If you think Mad Men style, then they're there to take notes and look pretty. In reality, the Secretary is the most important role in the Lodge. The Worshipful Master may lead the lodge, but the secretary is the one that organizes everything. All petitions, all formal work, all communications from the lodge to the outside work, are handled by the secretary. The WM may look good, and make decisions, but the secretary actually does the bits to make it happen.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 11:19
|
|
|
TemetNosceXVIcubus posted:It's hard for non masons to understand what the job of the Secretary entitles. If you think Mad Men style, then they're there to take notes and look pretty. Personally, I think the Secretary of the lodge is just a glorified scrivener.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 13:16
|
|
|
TemetNosceXVIcubus posted:It's hard for non masons to understand what the job of the Secretary entitles. If you think Mad Men style, then they're there to take notes and look pretty. This is true of all associated Masonic bodies as well, which is why you'll have OES Secretaries who've had the job for decades and know the by-laws inside and out. Getting elected Secretary may be the hardest work a brother does for a lodge.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 13:28
|
|
|
QPZIL posted:Personally, I think the Secretary of the lodge is just a glorified scrivener. Thus The Scribe Ezra.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 14:20
|
|
|
Mr. Maltose posted:This is true of all associated Masonic bodies as well, which is why you'll have OES Secretaries who've had the job for decades and know the by-laws inside and out. Getting elected Secretary may be the hardest work a brother does for a lodge. Seconding this. Our current secretary is a past master of our lodge, current master of another local area lodge, former District Director of Work, and current District Deputy Grand Master. On top of his day job as a VP for a bank. Dude works HARD for the craft.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 15:07
|
|
|
TemetNosceXVIcubus posted:Because just maybe, one of them would be a harder working, more supportive secretary than the rear end in a top hat I currently have in the job. I'd be hard pressed not to vote favorably on a petition from the devil if it meant they'd be taking over as lodge secretary. Every Master I've worked with, including myself during my year in the east, seems to think the Secretary is William Riker and that "Make it so." is a sufficient command to move mountains. But I kid, its a rewarding position that can be a lot of fun, but it is a lot work.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 15:19
|
|
|
TemetNosceXVIcubus posted:It's hard for non masons to understand what the job of the Secretary entitles. If you think Mad Men style, then they're there to take notes and look pretty. This I know, brother. Just saying your post came off a little...off
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 16:40
|
|
|
QPZIL posted:Personally, I think the Secretary of the lodge is just a glorified scrivener. Kind of like a tyler that can't be trusted with sharp objects. The rest of the progression is: WM -> tyler because after a year in the east he gets to leave first. Tyler -> secretary because he's gotten in the habit of wandering off and needs to be watched.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 16:51
|
|
|
I'm going to transition from two years in the East to Secretary and while I would have preferred to take a year "off" (go back to coaching candidates, maybe do a stint as officers' coach, whatever), it will be good to help curb the bureaucratic inertia that's been building over the past two decades with our current and past secretary. I don't mean shorting on our bylaws or the California Masonic Code, but all the little extra complexities the Secretary has made to ensure his office runs not the most efficiently, but with the most authority. I want to make sure the guys coming up behind me have a smooth-running Lodge, and not a needlessly (over)bureaucratic nightmare to get even the simplest thing done. All that said though, I really have to thank the Secretary and our former one for the job they've done these past years. Though they and I have butted heads on multiple occasions, they genuinely care about the Lodge and want it to succeed, in their own way.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 18:20
|
|
|
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...l#ixzz2di5tjuoK Obviously these guys didn't get the proper dispensation for this ritual work.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 10:09
|
|
|
quote:The Battle Creek Freemasons refused to comment on camera for the TV station, but insisted that the orgy was part of the secret society's rituals. They said the party was not sponsored by their group at all.Instead, they say, a party promoter paid $900 to rent the space for the night. Slight of hand bs article headline and quite the accidental? typo. Or are we really believing somebody insisted that the orgy *was* part of the ritual yet also was pointing out the party was not sponsored by the group at all?
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 17:40
|
|
|
TemetNosceXVIcubus posted:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...l#ixzz2di5tjuoK That proper dispensation being one granted by the police in the police headquarters across the street. patentmagus fucked around with this message at 23:48 on Sep 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 19:26
|
|
|
just got an email inviting me to breakfast at the lodge this Saturday. They feed me, then they vote on if they want me after I leave. wish me luck
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 18:25
|
|
|
Colton posted:just got an email inviting me to breakfast at the lodge this Saturday. They feed me, then they vote on if they want me after I leave. wish me luck Best of luck - ask sensible questions if the need arises, but above all just enjoy the time you're going to spend with potentially-probably future brethren. Previous goons who have had a meal-invite have reported back on a great time. I think one goon went to a bbq and had a brilliant day, they could probably chime in themselves. Can't remember who it was.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 18:31
|
|
|
Colton posted:just got an email inviting me to breakfast at the lodge this Saturday. They feed me, then they vote on if they want me after I leave. wish me luck For the love of God, use the correct fork! There is no correct fork, it's a  trick.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2013 15:35
|
|
|
KillianLett posted:For the love of God, use the correct fork! The trick is to not use a fork at all. They'll be impressed that you can eat spaghetti with a spoon.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 06:57
|
|
|
Lovable Luciferian posted:The trick is to not use a fork at all. They'll be impressed that you can eat spaghetti with a spoon. Without going into the secret details here, but the food is not the thing the "fork" is needed with most.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 07:18
|
|
|
Looks like I'm going to be the tiler at Grand Lodge in a couple weeks  I'm not looking forward to having to take the pass and dues cards from like 1000 guys 
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 13:07
|
|
|
QPZIL posted:Looks like I'm going to be the tiler at Grand Lodge in a couple weeks They usually have a bunch of tylers, 8 or 9, posted at the several entrances. You won't have to work too too hard. Sounds like you're on your way to the "inner circle". 
Cholmondeley fucked around with this message at 01:55 on Sep 7, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2013 01:48
|
|
|
So i just left a breakfast at the lodge. They're in session now voting on whether to accept me. Other guys closer to my age showed up too.. apparently more men my age are petitioning the lodge. I had a great time socializing with these guys. I'm even more excited about joining now, mostly if that means being able to hang out with these guys again Edit: and i just got invited into the conspiracy. Hello brothers! Colton fucked around with this message at 21:40 on Sep 7, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2013 18:18
|
|
|
Well we're not brothers yet  We had our York Rite conferrals today, and I got to be on the teams for the Order of Malta and the Order of the Temple. Very fun times.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 03:35
|
|
|
got invited to be a Mason, I didn't really give it a lot of thought because whatever but I don't believe in god, so guess that whole thing is out.. after reading this thread a bit, I am the last person that should ever be a Mason redeyes fucked around with this message at 16:01 on Sep 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 15:57
|
|
|
redeyes posted:got invited to be a Mason That's unusual.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 16:38
|
|
|
Lovable Luciferian posted:That's unusual. Yes well.. invited by a head Mason or whatever you call them. Not officially, just that is the wording I used.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 17:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 05:10 |
|
|
So i have 17 days to ruminate over my initiation, how was it for the masons in here? I hear it's unforgettable. I asked if i had to wear anything special for my initiation and they said they already have a costume for me. Two questions: is it a fur suit and do they clean it between uses?
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2013 08:16
|
|