|
Which part of "being a man, free born, of good report and well-recommended" does that cancel out? I'm drawing a blank here.
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 07:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 20:54 |
|
|
COOL CORN posted:Which part of "being a man, free born, of good report and well-recommended" does that cancel out? I'm drawing a blank here. I'm sure he's going to argue the "being a man" part.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 07:24
|
|
|
Solvent posted:Secretary cowan can sniff around all he likes. What possible reason can you have for forbidding gay men from Masonry?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 08:56
|
|
|
"I deeply believe in personal liberty, unless you're gay, then please hide yourself in a closet."
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 12:55
|
|
|
COOL CORN posted:Which part of "being a man, free born, of good report and well-recommended" does that cancel out? I'm drawing a blank here. This.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 14:21
|
|
|
Solvent posted:I do not believe that openly gay men should be allowed into blue lodge masonry.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 14:22
|
|
|
There is literally no part in the writings that sexual preference violates. No part.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 17:28
|
|
|
I thought gay sex was the biggest fringe benefit of joining.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 17:39
|
|
|
Going back to SR, it's fairly common to join here in America. As mentioned, it's an appendant body. A lot of places will advance you to the 32nd degree on joining, with the understanding that you will go back and see the rest performed. The 33rd is an honorary degree, so while it grants you no authority, people tend to respect it, as it shows you are an extremely dedicated member.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 17:51
|
|
|
Emron posted:Going back to SR, it's fairly common to join here in America. As mentioned, it's an appendant body. A lot of places will advance you to the 32nd degree on joining, with the understanding that you will go back and see the rest performed. The 33rd is an honorary degree, so while it grants you no authority, people tend to respect it, as it shows you are an extremely dedicated member. I must give 33° more weight than it's due. I was told it is the "Nobel Prize of Freemasonry."  I'm not in the Scottish Rite and don't plan on joining anytime soon.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 17:58
|
|
|
Lovable Luciferian posted:I must give 33° more weight than it's due. I was told it is the "Nobel Prize of Freemasonry." It is a huge deal to get it, for sure (my dad is one, and I'm super proud of him for it). An extremely small number of members receive the honor. I'm just saying it grants you no inherent authority.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 18:01
|
|
|
How very temperate a few of your responses are. I am disappointed in some of you. See, that's the thing about voting someone in. It's a secret ballot. It doesn't matter if it's me, or anyone else in the lodge that feels that way. Nobody has to give a reason, and I have heard this opinion from several in the past. For the record, has anybody ever met an openly gay blue lodge mason?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 19:35
|
|
|
I guess what I'm confused about is how a person would even know at the balloting phase to blackball someone. I guess if you're in the investigating committee, and you added that question for some reason? But that seems to be in bad faith. I just don't see a scenario where a new candidate would be balloted down based on their sexual orientation, because I can't imagine where the question would come up during the investigation process, or why, if not out of bad faith. You're of course free to cast your ballot according to your own conscience. That is a right of any Master Mason. But it should be done in good faith and based on wise and reasonable council.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 19:49
|
|
|
You're also advised to not let personal feelings inform your vote. You still have yet to explain why you feel sexual preference limits a man from joining. If anything, it ensures he won't violate part of the MM oath
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 19:55
|
|
|
Solvent posted:How very temperate a few of your responses are. Yes, our secretary, a past master and stalwart for the lodge.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 19:58
|
|
|
Solvent posted:How very temperate a few of your responses are. Because it's temperate to think gays shouldn't be allowed in a lodge? And to state so in this thread? You're welcome to your opinion, Brother, and we're welcome to dislike you for it. Don't bring up your backwards way of thinking if you're not willing to get called on it.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 20:12
|
|
|
Solvent posted:
At least two, one famous commando turned opera singer and this old dude who collects anti masonic writings. Both good men made better with the craft. There is likely more but the first I had a conversation with about his husband and the second was pointed out because of how he completely wrecked the guy who shared your opinion.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 21:07
|
|
|
"Look, all I'm saying is that black men should only join Prince Hall, and I will vote as such." --you, had you been born 20 years earlier
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 21:37
|
|
|
Solvent posted:How very temperate a few of your responses are. I think most responses were indeed temperate. One member asking you to demit and the avatar of shame are a bit much but you knew there would be a negative reaction to your opinion before you stated it. That said there is no reason to keep dog-piling on Solvent, we made our point clear.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 23:47
|
|
|
Well look at that. How prudent to recycle an avatar I've seen here before. How just for it to include hate speech I never used here, nor ever use. How temperate to name and shame. Really, I thought SA was a place that didn't appreciate hate speech. I guess this is ironic, mmm? As for the Followed by a wave of assumptions... Let me address those who have spoken as Masons among you, when you have spoken as such, and ignore those statements that are very heavy handed : Paramemetic posted:I guess what I'm confused about is how a person would even know at the balloting phase to blackball someone. I guess if you're in the investigating committee, and you added that question for some reason? But that seems to be in bad faith. I used the term "openly" to address the investigation issue, as it would be reported to the lodge before the vote. I agree, that outside from Loveable's mention of our goat riding sex parties, sexuality in general should not be made an issue of at all in the lodge, as there is no place for it. I agree wholeheartedly with your last line, yet I know some Masons who would drop the black ball, based on good faith and wise and reasonable council. For example, there are people who believe that it is still a choice, or mortal sin, or both and no amount of progressive thinking would make it otherwise. Keetron posted:At least two, one famous commando turned opera singer and this old dude who collects anti masonic writings. Both good men made better with the craft. There is likely more but the first I had a conversation with about his husband and the second was pointed out because of how he completely wrecked the guy who shared your opinion. Would you care to paraphrase how he was wrecked? In the interest of changing the mind of a brother who may have that opinion based on ill advice? Perhaps even whisper good council in your brothers ear ? Emron posted:You're also advised to not let personal feelings inform your vote. You still have yet to explain why you feel sexual preference limits a man from joining. If anything, it ensures he won't violate part of the MM oath I was going to wait for some realistic responses, but instead all I saw was a suggestion to demit, and go gently caress myself. As is, now my reasons seem somewhat irrelevant. If that was said in person as a response, to what I had stated (really go re-read it), in the manner I stated it, do you think your brother's knee jerk reaction would have been any less than to clam up and drop a black ball? Colonial Air Force posted:Because it's temperate to think gays shouldn't be allowed in a lodge? And to state so in this thread? Go look up the word temperate. Tell me who in this thread is being intemperate and you win a cookie. Go ahead, I'll wait. Ahh, the witch hunt. Brother, I've seen it before, regarding an upcoming master's use of marijuana in private. Regarding a brother's differing religion too. Good men, good Masons. Where do all the things we swear to go, when someone says something we disagree with. Human nature I suppose. Solvent fucked around with this message at 00:05 on May 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 23:54
|
|
|
Lovable Luciferian posted:
It's really not even that deeply held of an opinion brother. I'll bring cookies for you to the next orgy.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 23:55
|
|
|
Are there any other OES members here? I always enjoy meeting other goonettes/honorary goonettes in OES.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 00:16
|
|
|
legsarerequired posted:Are there any other OES members here? I always enjoy meeting other goonettes/honorary goonettes in OES. I wish I could talk my wife into joining. 
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 00:17
|
|
|
I was in OES till recently, I had joined because I wanted to see the what I considered to be Masonry's "better half". I made the decision to come back after I was married, or at least when I was a bit less borderline diabetic, since they liked to serve tea and cakes really often. Lovely bunch of people.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 01:07
|
|
|
legsarerequired posted:Are there any other OES members here? I always enjoy meeting other goonettes/honorary goonettes in OES. OES is great fun, even if my state is in a bit of a downswing compared to the last decade or two. I feel that's an issue with many Masonic bodies, however.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 01:32
|
|
|
Solvent posted:Ahh, the witch hunt. "Don't call a fellow brother of this degree a dick" isn't something we swear to. It's just something you're making up to feel victimized. You are actively seeking to discriminate against an entire population based on factors never mentioned in any of our ritual, and somehow, the ones that are saying you're a dick are the mean bad guys here? Come on, man. I don't buy that. Look, as many--including you--have pointed out, no one can stop you from dropping a black ball on anyone, even though we are strictly informed not to let personal prejudices affect our votes. It's your prerogative. But I deeply, deeply feel that excluding a potential member due to his sexual preferences runs directly counter to multiple facets of our principles, and is incredibly detrimental to the future of our fraternity. It might have seemed like hyperbole, but I see no difference in excluding a member for that vs. excluding a member for his race. Ours is a brotherhood built on acceptance and harmony. I can't stop you from blackballing members due to their preferences, but I do at least encourage you to make it known in the lodge why you intend to blackball them. I feel anything less is cowardice.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 01:42
|
|
|
(Just to clarify for anyone reading--I'm a goonette/OES member, not a mason that also joined OES) I was kind of fast tracked into being a starpoint for my OES chapter--like, two months after I joined, haha. The chapter I joined definitely has mostly older, traditional people who don't have much in common with me, but I've met a few people that I added on Facebook and definitely want to stay in touch with. I kind of wish there were more people in their thirties at my city's chapters, but it is fun meeting other people who share this weird tradition with me.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 01:45
|
|
|
legsarerequired posted:(Just to clarify for anyone reading--I'm a goonette/OES member, not a mason that also joined OES) This is, sadly, an all too common experience in any masonic body. I'm currently struggling with trying to figure out how to deal with a member in our lodge who is very active, a very nice guy, and who thinks that the best way to handle black applicants is to point them toward Prince Hall.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 01:47
|
|
|
Emron posted:"Don't call a fellow brother of this degree a dick" isn't something we swear to. It's just something you're making up to feel victimized. You are actively seeking to discriminate against an entire population based on factors never mentioned in any of our ritual, and somehow, the ones that are saying you're a dick are the mean bad guys here? Come on, man. I don't buy that. I think when our ritual was written, how ever long ago, gay people were not an issue, as they were not yet considered, or spoken of at all. Some people here jumped the gun. Including you. I don't consider making a donation to a website that I use to change my avatar back to bee that much of a problem, if I even do. I think it's funny actually, that someone would change my avatar (same person who used it last time I'm guessing?), and that another compare me to a racist because I expressed a differing opinion. Frankly, I don't even know how it would compare. What would you call it? Casual homophobi- wait, I made it clear that I was not afraid, nor against any group of people, just because I have some (now private) opinion on the matter. Did you catch my other implied opinion? Here, let me spell it out: Such opinions fester in the dark, and a mob response to to said opinions keep them there. Nobody of character will ever be bullied into changing their opinion. Emron posted:This is, sadly, an all too common experience in any masonic body. I'm currently struggling with trying to figure out how to deal with a member in our lodge who is very active, a very nice guy, and who thinks that the best way to handle black applicants is to point them toward Prince Hall. Don't start by calling him a dick. Maybe he want's black people to know about the linage of Prince Hall Masonry. My understanding is that people who join Prince Hall lodges, do so to celebrate a pioneer. Edit: If you have any further opinions on the matter, please feel free to PM me, as we don't need to be doing this here anymore, I didn't expect it to get so nasty so fast. Solvent fucked around with this message at 02:14 on May 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 02:06
|
|
|
Well figured someone said something controversial when I saw a slew of new posts but wasn't expecting this. Anyway... I disagree with you Solvent. I see nothing in our landmarks that has any bearing in gay men and I see no reason to imagine motivations in the men that wrote them that would then lead to excluding gay men. I would be very disappointed if you were to drop a black cube on a man because he was gay and would counsel you to reconsider your motivations.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 02:14
|
|
|
Aureus posted:Well figured someone said something controversial when I saw a slew of new posts but wasn't expecting this. Anyway... Fair enough. It's actually never come up, so I brought it up here. Given my votes regarding people(NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS) I had contrary feelings towards, not in harmony with what I knew to be the majority of the lodge, I have chosen to abstain.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 02:40
|
|
|
Well I definitely got a lot more info (at least what I could understand) from your guys' discussion. Honestly it's sort of discouraging. As a gay, irreligious man it seems like my chances of being rejected as a prospective Mason are substantially higher. Is that more of a regional issue (i.e., the South)? If an aspiring Mason is blackballed from a lodge, then is that individual forever barred from applying to that lodge again? Or even other lodges?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 03:37
|
|
|
Zeno-25 posted:Well I definitely got a lot more info (at least what I could understand) from your guys' discussion. Honestly it's sort of discouraging. As a gay, irreligious man it seems like my chances of being rejected as a prospective Mason are substantially higher. Is that more of a regional issue (i.e., the South)? The gay thing isn't a problem. The irreligious thing is a deal breaker though. Do you believe in a higher power -at all- ? In California if you're blackballed it's either for six months or a year, I forgot which.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 03:40
|
|
|
Lovable Luciferian posted:The gay thing isn't a problem. The irreligious thing is a deal breaker though. Do you believe in a higher power -at all- ? I don't consider myself an atheist, but I don't believe in any specific god I've ever heard of if that makes sense. I believe the universe is big enough for a higher power. I was raised Protestant, but gave up on my religion as a teenager because it caused far more confusion and anxiety than any sense of spiritual satisfaction or mission.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 03:45
|
|
|
Zeno-25 posted:Well I definitely got a lot more info (at least what I could understand) from your guys' discussion. Honestly it's sort of discouraging. As a gay, irreligious man it seems like my chances of being rejected as a prospective Mason are substantially higher. Is that more of a regional issue (i.e., the South)? Certainly in the South I'd expect it to be a more serious issue, the gay thing. Being irreligious isn't neccesarily issue if you retain an honest belief in a higher power. quote:If an aspiring Mason is blackballed from a lodge, then is that individual forever barred from applying to that lodge again? Or even other lodges? Most jurisdictions only have a time limit, and a question on a form asking if you've ever been rejected by a lodge before.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 03:46
|
|
|
Zeno-25 posted:I don't consider myself an atheist, but I don't believe in any specific god I've ever heard of if that makes sense. I believe the universe is big enough for a higher power. It depends on how your state words it. What state are you in so I can look it up,
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 03:46
|
|
|
Zeno-25 posted:Well I definitely got a lot more info (at least what I could understand) from your guys' discussion. Honestly it's sort of discouraging. As a gay, irreligious man it seems like my chances of being rejected as a prospective Mason are substantially higher. Is that more of a regional issue (i.e., the South)? Ignore Solvent. The gay thing shouldn't be a problem. The religious thing could be - you have to believe in a higher power, not just the potential existence of one.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 03:46
|
|
|
Aureus posted:Certainly in the South I'd expect it to be a more serious issue, the gay thing.... Really? I figured if he didn't make a thing out of it then the brothers likely wouldn't.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 03:48
|
|
|
Lovable Luciferian posted:Really? I figured if he didn't make a thing out of it then the brothers likely wouldn't. My experience with the south is probably biased by it being in mostly Louisiana, but there I'd expect if the brothers 'sniffed' gay they'd be very likely to black ball. Atlanta for instance no problem. Shreveport? Yeah.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 03:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 20:54 |
|
|
Aureus posted:My experience with the south is probably biased by it being in mostly Louisiana, but there I'd expect if the brothers 'sniffed' gay they'd be very likely to black ball. Atlanta for instance no problem. Shreveport? Yeah. That makes sense. Thanks for the enlightenment Brother.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 03:50
|
|