------------Each GL of which I am aware already does declare a Mason's rights. In Utah, it includes the right to object to a visitor. It appears you wish to abrogate the right of the brethren. That is in derogation of their rights, not in support of their rights.
Further, for a WM to have the final say in who visits a Lodge is contrary to Utah Masonic law and, again, is in derogation of the rights of the breh.thren.
There is also a certain arrogance in declaring what one thinks best for another jurisdiction.
If you think that each GL in the USA declares a Mason's rights, then you are wrong, wrong, wrong. There are GL's all overt the USA, which regularly abuse the membership.
I am not an expert on the regulations of the GL of Utah. In KY, where I am a member, any Mason can object to a visitor, if there is reasonable cause that the visitor may not be a MM in good standing. Of course, all Masons should be on guard to ensure that all present are MM's in good standing. The tyler is charged with this responsibility, but all MMs share it.
... any Mason can object to a visitor ...
That's why it can't be a right. Every brother has the right to attend his own lodge. No other member may object. That's why the ballot should be unanimous. Every brother has the privilege to attend other lodges. A member there is allowed to object.
It blows to be the WM when you have to approach a brother at the tiler's door and tell him he may not attend because a member objects. It blows even when the reason is known to all and not objectionable. Consider a destitute brother. The lodge arranged transportation to his lodge so they can take care of him. Instead of going home he becomes a hanger-on locally. Several months later he can wear out his welcome if there's more to the story than that, but that part of the story is a valid reason.
You are not stating the entirety of my comment. I said quote - any Mason can object to a visitor, if there is reasonable cause that the visitor may not be a MM in good standing.- end quote.
If a Mason is attending a lodge, and he has a reasonable cause to believe that a man attempting to visit the lodge is not a MM in good standing, then he has the duty to stand up and object. No mason can exclude a visitor, without just cause. Although the Tyler is charged with warding off all cowans and eavesdroppers, and the WM has the final say on who can visit his lodge, ALL masons assembled must be satisfied that all attendees, whether members of the lodge, or visitors, are true and lawful brother MMs in good standing. So mote it be.
You mean that there truly are actual genuine secrets, missing core knowledge and actual interest?It has always struck me as peculiar that Grand Lodges have not set up working groups to go in search of the genuine secrets.
How can an institution exist forever waiting for some future day that may restore its core knowledge?
Surely there will be a generation that will say: We have waited long enough! Perhaps this is that generation.
Well, there is this one huge institution that promises that it will reveal all knowledge to you after you are dead, and they seem to be doing OK. (I guess the secret that I am going to hell was revealed pretty well by that comment)How can an institution exist forever waiting for some future day that may restore its core knowledge?
Well, If you consider Masonry to be, at the very least, a classroom for character building or, at the very most, a pathway to spiritual enlightenment then, yes, the core knowledge seems to be missing from the Lodgeroom.You mean that there truly are actual genuine secrets, missing core knowledge and actual interest?
The ad was a promo for Freemasonry, and it went on to say that many famous men were Masons, and that YOU should consider membership.
I see you list three states, TX,IL,CA. Do any of these states permit open recruiting and advertising?
They do? Citation?Most Grand Lodges either forbid any advertising or open solicitation of new members. I have been told, by men I respect, that The GL of Kentucky "doesn't like" the "2 B 1 ASK1" bumper sticker, and it should not be used. I believe that openly advertising on radio (and other media), is a major development (at least in some jurisdictions). I see you list three states, TX,IL,CA. Do any of these states permit open recruiting and advertising?