Shots Fired!

Discussion in 'General Freemasonry Discussion' started by coachn, Mar 8, 2016.

  1. coachn

    coachn Coach John S. Nagy Premium Member

    2,103
    2,090
    133
    You did not ask for an answer that you would accept. You asked a question. I provided to you an answer. It did not have to be a good one.
     
    relapse98, CLewey44 and MRichard like this.
  2. MRichard

    MRichard Mark A. Ri'chard Premium Member

    846
    610
    113
    Wouldn't it be nice if all freemasons were just and upright men and judged potential candidates on the internal and not external? We don't always see the same undesirables.
     
    coachn and CLewey44 like this.
  3. Brother JC

    Brother JC Vigilant Staff Member

    3,228
    2,041
    183
    One thing everyone seems to be forgetting; this whole debacle came about, not because an applicant was turned down, but because of the expulsion of two Brothers. Two Brothers who had been regularly Initiated, Passed, and Raised and had sat in Lodge for years with the men who suddenly turned their backs on them.
    None of us knows what every Brother in our lodge does every minute of his day. Nor should we.
     
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2016
  4. CLewey44

    CLewey44 Registered User

    1,652
    1,556
    113
    I assume the undesirables are gay guys? I don't recall at any point during my Masonic journey, from the petition to being raised, being asked if I currently was or ever had been a gay man. I don't know the qualifications your talking about either. If it's a matter of "living in sin" then anyone that smokes, dips, drinks, over-eats, looks at porn, looks at other women sexually at all, divorced and any other endless sort of sins one can commit, would be considered "living in sin". Masonic law is not just Christian law or Islamic law or whatever, it's all religions in Masonry. All of them... It's subjective from person to person. Not every gay guy is walking around with flowers in their hair or cross dressing either. Some you may never know it. If you want to black ball someone, however, because you assume they are gay, you have that right. But just consider not judging someone because they are different than you.

    As for social change, black men weren't always allowed in lodges. Allowing them has turned out completely fine. Eventually, gay men will be joining as well. Btw, I don't think 90% of lodges have a bunch of young, effeminate gay men beating down the doors to join and hang out with some middle to older age guys. Just saying, it's really not a big problem I don't imagine and like I said, you can always blackball someone if you want to do so if you don't feel they'd be a good addition to your lodge.

    The only reason I'm saying this is because we are supposed to be open minded to others and not judging them in any way. If someone is hurting others? I say they don't get to join. If they own some business that rips people off or they are just joining to get business connections, then they don't deserve to get in. If they were gay and not in it for the right reasons, they don't get in I say. But if they are growing spiritually and philosophically, I don't see a problem. If someone is minding their own business and not bothering others, I don't have a problem with others lifestyles.

    Respectfully
     
    Bloke and Warrior1256 like this.
  5. Ressam

    Ressam Registered User

    291
    29
    18
    Sir!
    IMHO -- nobody is judging gays!
    The issue is just simple here!
    LGBT-relationships are just -- NOT wihin The Harmony of The Universe. That's all & simple.
    But everyone have to tolerate them! They are also Children of God! And our Brothers&Sisters.
     
    Randy81 likes this.
  6. Warrior1256

    Warrior1256 Site Benefactor

    7,340
    3,333
    183
    VERY well said brother.
     
    The Undertaker likes this.
  7. MRichard

    MRichard Mark A. Ri'chard Premium Member

    846
    610
    113
    Just love it when the non-freemasons tell us the error of our ways. Bravo
     
  8. Warrior1256

    Warrior1256 Site Benefactor

    7,340
    3,333
    183
    True.
     
    Ressam likes this.
  9. coachn

    coachn Coach John S. Nagy Premium Member

    2,103
    2,090
    133
    Who's the non-freemason?
     
  10. Ressam

    Ressam Registered User

    291
    29
    18
    Excuse me! It's just the -- "outside point of view"! :):)
    Objective criticism. For the improvement.
     
  11. MRichard

    MRichard Mark A. Ri'chard Premium Member

    846
    610
    113
    Ressam
     
    coachn likes this.
  12. coachn

    coachn Coach John S. Nagy Premium Member

    2,103
    2,090
    133
    Ah! That explains it. Thanks.
     
    Ressam likes this.
  13. Ressam

    Ressam Registered User

    291
    29
    18
    Yo! Coach!
    Is it possible for me to be -- The "Mason Without An Apron"!? :):):rolleyes:
    Does that -- "statue" exists? :)
     
  14. dfreybur

    dfreybur Premium Member

    3,935
    2,393
    133
    The function of lodge as sanctuary from religious oppression has *absolutely* been from the beginning. Lodge is and always has been a place that a man may go to be free from religious judgment by oppressors.

    Your asserting this is a matter of political correctness does not make it so. How do you defend your stance? The stance I've heard so far is a judgment that practicing homosexuals are morally bad. That's a matter for the ballot box not an excuse to abandon the religious sanctuary function of lodge. That's a judgment that comes from exactly one family of religions so it is inherently sectarian.

    That's what the ballot box is for. That's what Masonic trials are for.

    The topic is absolutely about judging gays. If gays were not judged by some as immoral in action this would never have happened.
     
    Warrior1256 and CLewey44 like this.
  15. MRichard

    MRichard Mark A. Ri'chard Premium Member

    846
    610
    113
    I can't answer for Coach but I don't think so. Lol
     
    Ressam likes this.
  16. The Undertaker

    The Undertaker Premium Member

    20
    9
    23
    Read your interpretation "types" of Love, number one: every heterosexual relationship falls within that "type," ergo akin to hour opinion about LGBT relationships. Pigeon-holing, it seems, and off-course for the discussion.
     
  17. The Undertaker

    The Undertaker Premium Member

    20
    9
    23
    Agreed.
     
  18. Ressam

    Ressam Registered User

    291
    29
    18
    [1. Natural Love: Sexual Love between man & a woman. It's more related with instincts. And posterity.]
    How Sir?!
    If a man will have sex with another man -- there will be no child!
     
  19. CLewey44

    CLewey44 Registered User

    1,652
    1,556
    113
    Every time you've had sex with a woman in your life (whether you loved them or not), you were doing it strictly to create a baby, Ressam-abi?
     
    Ressam likes this.
  20. CLewey44

    CLewey44 Registered User

    1,652
    1,556
    113
    So where's the double-like button? :)
     

Share My Freemasonry