Touchy Subject

Discussion in 'General Freemasonry Discussion' started by lilhancock, Nov 28, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. rhitland

    rhitland Founding Member Premium Member

    1,417
    9
    58
    great article Brother
     
  2. peace out

    peace out Premium Member

    226
    0
    36
    And to those who might take the Libertine stance, I quote Albert MacKey.

    Of the Moral Qualifications of Candidates.

    The old charges state, that "a Mason is obliged by his tenure to obey the moral law." It is scarcely necessary to say, that the phrase, "moral law," is a technical expression of theology, and refers to the Ten Commandments, which are so called, because they define the regulations necessary for the government of the morals and manners of men. The habitual violation of any one of these commands would seem, according to the spirit of the Ancient Constitutions, to disqualify a candidate for Masonry.


    The same charges go on to say, in relation to the religious character of a Mason, that he should not be "a stupid atheist, nor an irreligious libertine." A denier of the existence of a Supreme Architect of the Universe cannot, of course, be obligated as a Mason, and, accordingly, there is no landmark more certain than that which excludes every atheist from the Order.


    The word "libertine" has, at this day, a meaning very different from what it bore when the old charges were compiled. It then signified what we now call a "free-thinker," or disbeliever in the divine revelation of the Scriptures. This rule would therefore greatly abridge the universality and tolerance of the Institution, were it not for the following qualifying clause in the same instrument:--
    "Though in ancient times Masons were charged in every country to be of the religion of that country or nation, whatever it was, yet it is now thought more expedient only to oblige them to that religion in which all men agree, leaving their particular opinions to themselves; that is, to be good men and true, or men of honor and honesty, by whatever denominations or persuasions they may be distinguished."
    The construction now given universally to the religious qualification of a candidate, is simply that he shall have a belief in the existence and superintending control of a Supreme Being.


    These old charges from which we derive the whole of our doctrine as to the moral qualifications of a candidate, further prescribe as to the political relations of a Mason, that he is to be "a peaceable subject to the civil powers, wherever he resides or works, and is never to be concerned in plots and conspiracies against the peace and welfare of the nation, nor to behave himself undutifully to inferior magistrates. He is cheerfully to conform to every lawful authority; to uphold on every occasion the interest of the community, and zealously promote the prosperity of his own country."
    S
    uch being the characteristics of a true Mason, the candidate who desires to obtain that title, must show his claim to the possession of these virtues; and hence the same charges declare, in reference to these moral qualifications, that "The persons made Masons, or admitted members of a lodge, must be good and true men--no immoral or scandalous men, but of good report."
     
  3. JohnnyFlotsam

    JohnnyFlotsam Premium Member

    485
    62
    28
    Don't hold your breath. Not that there won't be lots of attempts, just none that qualify as logically sound. I'll spare us the listing of the likely premises that will fail on even a cursory examination. But I'd like to think that we might find a way, as Masons, to avoid even that level of contention.

    A religious proscription, while not logically defensible, is, Masonically, a perfectly valid "rule and guide" for the individual who chooses to embrace such dogma for the purposes of governing his own behavior. It is only when he attempts to apply such proscriptions to others that the friction starts. I don't believe that homosexuality is a sin, but then I don't believe that eating my chicken fried steak with country gravy is a sin either, but if a Brother wants to swear off both because they're proscribed in his Bible, I believe he should. Moreover, I believe that I should do what I can to help him walk the path he has chosen for himself, but he also needs to understand that he does not get to make that choice for anyone but him.
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2010
  4. David Duke

    David Duke Premium Member

    188
    128
    63
    Well said brother.
     
  5. Heirophant

    Heirophant Registered User

    19
    0
    0
    Although Homosexuals are often pleasant people to be around, Homosexuality does not give birth to Humanity. This is Nature's Law brought forth by Nature...not by man. Aside from that, Masonry has been described by many as a sort of "Men's Support Group". Surely by "Men" they mean "Men" that are trying to raise children (of their own). Men that are hoping to make the best of the world around them. Men that have wives. Traditionally, it's obvious to me that Masonry was designed for Heterosexuals.
     
  6. coachn

    coachn Coach John S. Nagy Premium Member

    2,083
    2,075
    133
    Agreed. This makes sense since the issue is both Political and Religious oriented.
    I used to think that too until published research told me otherwise.
    Me too. Until of course, the person in question's behavior shows me differently.
    I believe a Lodge that knew of his orientation before hand should not object to this.
    Open expression of sexuality --Straight of Gay -- in Lodge and Lodge activities should not occur. It's simply not the place for it.
    Not to mention that multiple wife trend started by that guy Tubal...
    Agreed!
    Even if this were possible, Logical Proofs are no guarentee of valid conclusions. Logic can be flawless and still not provide Light other than flawless Logic. They are not one in the same thing.
    Agreed! Rejection or resistance should not be accompanied by uncivil or hostile acts.
     
  7. JohnnyFlotsam

    JohnnyFlotsam Premium Member

    485
    62
    28
    If you are trying to assert that homosexual behavior is unnatural, you are demonstrably wrong. It exists throughout nature.
    Would you please cite your reference for "The Laws of Nature"?

    Fatherhood is neither a requirement nor a stated purpose of membership in our Fraternity.

    How, exactly, is that "obvious"? Again, please cite your references.
     
  8. bullrack33

    bullrack33 Premium Member

    85
    1
    0
    While it may be hard to do at times, I do indeed....even if it takes a minute of quiet time and reflection to make it happen.
     
  9. bullrack33

    bullrack33 Premium Member

    85
    1
    0
    So, does this mean that all of the Brethren who are of the Wiccan faith must demit because they are tolerant of homosexuals?
     
  10. bullrack33

    bullrack33 Premium Member

    85
    1
    0
    This is yet another good point on the subject. I personally, have never seen proof of this.

    The bottom line is that society determines what is acceptable and what is not. This varies from area to area and from time period to time period. In ancient Greece, Rome and Egypt, homosexuality was a normal practice. It is currently acceptable in Australia, many parts of Europe, North America, Asia and most of South America.
     
  11. Dave in Waco

    Dave in Waco Premium Member

    764
    2
    0
    Really when you look at it there is only one legitimate arguement against homosexuality, and that's would be that it does not promote procreation. So the only real threat of homosexuality is population growth. But considering most say the world is overpopulated as is, that really takes away that threat.

    So if we Masons do stand for tolerance, why should we have any problems with homosexual brothers? Homosexuality's morality is really determined by one's faith, so if each brother's faith is his own business, why do we would we hold only homosexuals to the standards of our faith?
     
  12. cemab4y

    cemab4y Premium Member

    1,137
    255
    103
    I have been a Mason for 28 years, and I have visited lodges in 13 states, Washington DC, and five foreign countries. I have never seen any mention of a person's sexual orientation come up. As far as I am concerned, I would have no problem at all with a gay man petitioning my lodge. One woman once asked me, if I knew any gay masons. I told her the only mason I ever heard of who was gay, was J. Edgar Hoover 33rd, the late FBI director.

    I have heard of an incident, where a mason in California, had sexual-reassignment surgery, and became a woman. She then tried to attend her lodge, dressed as a woman. The lodge refused her entrance, and expelled her.
     
  13. Blake Bowden

    Blake Bowden Administrator Staff Member

    5,682
    1,014
    113
    Just throwing this out....If Freemasonry espouses tolerance, why not open the floodgates and allow women as well?
     
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2010
  14. coachn

    coachn Coach John S. Nagy Premium Member

    2,083
    2,075
    133
    That's been done already. They are referred to as "Co-Masonry" and "Female-Craft Masonry."
     
  15. Bill Lins

    Bill Lins Moderating Staff Staff Member

    4,344
    1,144
    183
    I think Bro. Blake was referring to GLoT, which does not recognize female "Masons" nor any "GL" which does.
     
  16. AhimanBeard

    AhimanBeard Registered User

    29
    0
    0


    That would conflict heavily with many Episcopalian Brethren like myself who have no issue with homosexuality.
    Mind you, good moral standing often reflected upon what was legal. Since, morality, as defined by faith, was something left up to the individual interpreter of a lodge and the faith he practices.

    Were one to not consider the faiithful options of other believers, that would be fairly intollerant and unmasonic.

    If find myself lucky to know many brethren here in Philly who are gay and masons. There is nothing, so long as they act legally and with good virtue and consent (and follow the law) that discredits them from freemasonry.

    Keep in mind, brethren, Bro. Oscar Wilde. Brilliant author, mason and a homosexual.


    I would, have & do. Because that's what we do.



    I can say, and will give a better biboliography, that the UGLE issued a book called "So You Want To Be A Freemason" wherein a spouse was refereed to as "wife or partner".
    This is how it should be, in my humble opinion. Remember, again, there are many brethren of more liberal christian or jewish denominations which have no issue with homosexuality so long as it is consensual.

    I tell people that since there's nothing explicitly against it, then yes, homosexuals can (and have) become freemasons.
     
  17. AhimanBeard

    AhimanBeard Registered User

    29
    0
    0
    I should also point out, again in my opinion, has no one learnt from either our sense of tolerance, respect or from the controversy which still surrounds us from the racial discrimination which lead to prince hall?

    Ehhh, see, here's an issue. It's been proven quite often to not be a choice.

    I should say that we, as an order, face enough controversy (unneeded mind you) as is and it would be detrimental to it for discrimination to become a legitimate policy.

    I would, personally, reconsider my membership were it the case.
     
    Last edited: Nov 22, 2010
  18. Bill Lins

    Bill Lins Moderating Staff Staff Member

    4,344
    1,144
    183
    "Tolerance" can be taken too far & "discrimination" is not always bad. I have no tolerance for and discriminate against thieves, murderers, pedophiles, and the like, and would not allow such to be admitted into Masonry. There's a great difference between such, which relates to morality & behavior, and discrimination against, or lack of tolerance of, someone strictly due to his skin color or other attribute over which he has no say or control.
     
  19. Bill Lins

    Bill Lins Moderating Staff Staff Member

    4,344
    1,144
    183
    Proven how? Has a homosexual gene been discovered?

    I think that, to most people, the jury's still out on that question and, lacking scientific evidence one way or the other, will be for quite some time to come.
     
  20. ddreader

    ddreader Premium Member Premium Member

    62
    0
    0
    When did Homosexuality become a race. I thought it was a choice? I CAN PROMISE YOU THAT I AM NOT A RACIEST!! ( Now then If perception is reality) When your perception of reality leads you to believe that my opinions are unmasonic. Would it be unmasonic of me if felt the same way about yours as you do about mine? I THINK I WILL TAKE THE HIGH ROAD ON THIS ONE. As for our Wiccan brothers who may or may not have a problem with homosexuality. How that fits in to the original question that was asked. I have not a clue. My believes are mine. I will be judged one day for them. By my GOD. I am good with that and am willing to accept it. You are more than welcome to disagree with what i think. I only ask that you try to respect my opinions as much as you want me to respect yours. May GOD bless you. In what ever you choose to do in life. Fraternally Dennis.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share My Freemasonry