Non affiliated members with tattoos

Discussion in 'Frequently Asked Questions' started by TRACY GREY, Jun 1, 2018.

  1. TRACY GREY

    TRACY GREY Registered User

    2
    0
    1
    Question ? Since there tends to be a great debate over non affiliated members wearing rings and charms of the Mason symbol ,what is the rule in us non affiliated members that have tattoos? Some say a non affiliated member shouldn't continue to wear rings and charms ,but what is the great answer to the tattoo?
     
  2. Keith C

    Keith C Registered User

    474
    555
    93
    They symbols used in Freemasonry are ancient and have been used by other groups / organizations, etc over the years. There is no copyright or trademark on the symbols as far as I am aware.

    People, affiliated or not, can choose to use these symbols as they see fit. No one has a right to demand that anyone not wear them or have them inscribed into their flesh.

    That being said, I do not understand why someone would WANT to wear in any way, removable or indelible, the symbols of an organization they do not belong to. If someone were to approach me regarding the desire to petition, I would have serious questions as to why they would have a symbol that does not apply to them. IMO you should not have the symbol of a Master Mason on or about your person if you have not been Raised to that Sublime Degree.
     
  3. Bro Book

    Bro Book Registered User

    11
    3
    3
    Anyone ever heard of the Englewood Boys ? It was a fictional gang off of a police drama, they went old school, behind someone wearing their tat. But in the real World there is nothing that can be done but be sure people know that the person is perpetrating a fraud.

    Sent from my RCT6973W43 using My Freemasonry mobile app
     
  4. Glen Cook

    Glen Cook G A Cook Site Benefactor

    2,484
    2,725
    183
    I missed the debate on non affiliated members wearing rings.
     
    MarkR likes this.
  5. ej6267

    ej6267 Registered User

    50
    5
    8
    There are actually legal statutes on the books making it a crime to misrepresent one’s self as a member, for instance in my home state of Wisconsin: “132.17  Certain badges; penalty for unauthorized wearing. Any person who shall willfully wear the insignia, rosette, or badge or any imitation thereof, of the military order of the Loyal Legion of the United States, the Grand Army of the Republic, the United Spanish War Veterans, Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, the Military Order of Foreign Wars, the American Legion, the Disabled American Veterans, the Thirty-second Division Veteran Association, the American Veterans of World War II (AMVETS), or of the Benevolent and Protective Order of the Elks of the United States, Knights of Columbus, Odd Fellows, Free Masons, Knights of Pythias, or of any other society, order or organization, operating under the lodge system, of 10 years' standing in this state, or of any duly incorporated fraternal, social, or service organization, or of the division of emergency management in the department of military affairs or shall willfully use the same to obtain aid or assistance thereby within this state, or shall willfully use the name of such society, order or organization, the titles of its officers, or its insignia, unless entitled to use or wear the same under the constitution, bylaws, rules and regulations thereof, shall be imprisoned not more than 30 days or fined not exceeding $20, or both.”
    I almost had occasion to arrest a young man for it when he was brought into our jail waving a masonic ring as if it was a “get out of jail free” card (and I was almost cheesed off enough to do it!)
     
    dfreybur likes this.
  6. Glen Cook

    Glen Cook G A Cook Site Benefactor

    2,484
    2,725
    183
    Ah, yes, a number of jurisdictions have those. Such statutes are of doubtful validity after Alvarez.
     
    MarkR likes this.
  7. TRACY GREY

    TRACY GREY Registered User

    2
    0
    1
    The question pertains to former member having tattoos bc the debate has been if people who are no longer " in good standing " that they shouldn't wear rings any longer ,so if one shouldn't wear rings what the rule on those who have tats
     
  8. Glen Cook

    Glen Cook G A Cook Site Benefactor

    2,484
    2,725
    183
    Ahh. Thanks
     
  9. Warrior1256

    Warrior1256 Site Benefactor

    6,096
    2,536
    183
    What he said!
     
  10. Matt L

    Matt L Site Benefactor

    306
    352
    113
    There are many antiquated statues on the books in almost all jurisdictions. As Brother Glen wrote, Alvarez certainly makes it a moot point. I can't stand wasting my time arresting some idiot for failure to appear for not having a floatation device. I'd be really pissed if it was for wearing an improper ring.
     
    Warrior1256, MarkR and Bill Lins like this.
  11. Rifleman1776

    Rifleman1776 Registered User

    195
    105
    43
    Except for the mentioned Wisconsin laws, I think wearing a ring from an organization one does not belong to is just plain silly. And pointless. A total non-issue, IMHO.
     
    Keith C likes this.
  12. Warrior1256

    Warrior1256 Site Benefactor

    6,096
    2,536
    183
    The only issue I have with this subject is when someone threatens to take another persons ring unless the one wearing the ring can prove that he is "entitled" to wear it. If someone would try to take my personal property from me he would have a bad day.
     
    Glen Cook and Keith C like this.
  13. Keith C

    Keith C Registered User

    474
    555
    93
    I agree with you 100% Warrior1256! While I think it silly and pointless to wear symbols that do not pertain to you, there is no way I would support taking anyone's property. We are supposed to be an organization of good and honorable men.
     
    bupton52 and Warrior1256 like this.
  14. Warrior1256

    Warrior1256 Site Benefactor

    6,096
    2,536
    183
    Absolutely Brother!
     
  15. dfreybur

    dfreybur Premium Member

    3,691
    2,086
    133
    Wearing a ring of a degree/order on your finger implies you earned that degree. Wearing one on a chain does not.

    Having a tattoo of a degree/order on your body implies you earned that degree. Adding "In loving memory" does not.

    The question is about MEMBERS. Being not affiliated does not mean such members did not earn it.

    This is in addition to issues of enforce-ability from not being trademarked. Outsiders can and do wear symbols they have not earned.
     
    Warrior1256 likes this.
  16. Warrior1256

    Warrior1256 Site Benefactor

    6,096
    2,536
    183
    Had not looked at it this way before Brother. Thank you.
    Very true.
     
  17. Rifleman1776

    Rifleman1776 Registered User

    195
    105
    43
    This whole thread is silly. The term "non-affiliated member" is an oxymoron. It is a total non-issue.
     
  18. Glen Cook

    Glen Cook G A Cook Site Benefactor

    2,484
    2,725
    183
    Actually, Utah uses the term “non-affiliated” Mason. We even have a procedure for Masonic trials for a non-affiliated or even sojourning Mason. Section 201(b).
     
  19. Bill Lins

    Bill Lins Moderating Staff Staff Member

    4,218
    968
    183
    Likewise under GLoTX- Sections 494 & 495.
     

Share My Freemasonry