to think that Freemasonry should not be allowed to exist?

[StickMeToTheMan]

... or that members should declare their membership - especially those in positions of power - police, SS, politicians etc?

I am just flabbergasted that this is allowed in this day and age. Take a look at the JS scandal and the potential involvement of the masons, and surely no-one can dispute that this old boy network is dangerously shady.

Can anyone explain to me what it is really for, and if membership to any secret society is justifiable in this day and age?

AIBU?

(Namechanged as have been discussing on FB)

I don't support ID cards. I might support ID cards for people in public office if they suddenly started to not want to give their names or be identified as being in public office.

we firmly believe that no one should be excluded for their religious choices.

No you don't. If I joined I'd have to say I believed in a Supreme Being.

I don't and so you discriminate against me despite that being my religious choice.

Charbon- you stated earlier some are defending Jimmy Saville, who? All I can see is that some including myself want to see evidence before making a judgement. We live in a country in which you are innocent until proven guilty. Everyone is of course entitled to their opinion but that is not sufficient to start dictating to any group of people how they should conduct themselves. If it is shown to be true then I will have sufficient evidence to hold an opinion on JS. Until then I cannot hold a strong without any fact based evidence.

The Freemasonry issue is only relevant if there was a cover up, and even then, the actions of an isolated group are not enough to condemn the majority. Although JS was a Freemason, he wasn't donating to charity via Freemasonry but via his own charities as far as I have read in the press. If it is shown that there is an ethos of covering up guilt in Freemasonry then of course thats entirely different. However nobody has presented much other then opinions, conspiracy theories and heresay.

I do not hold particularly strong views on Freemasonry but as I have said I take people as I find them and I have found them caring and charitable. If anyone can link to evidence showing that there is an ethos of collusion in Freemasonry (not just isolated incidents) then I would be interested to read such information.

Gosh - semantics - I do not think aetheism is a religious choice as it is not a religion. Religious choices as in choosing which religion you belong to / choose to participate in / believe in. Aetheism is surely an expression of non-belief rather than belief.
The reason why you have to believe in a greater authority than ourselves has already been explained further up the thread.

HellATwork
Do you hold a position in public office OMC?

Not at the moment, unless you count as a volunteer emergency service worker.

Because unless you do I wouldn't expect anyone to have to declare their membership

Is that just Freemasonry, or anything else, and who decides what?

so if you don't hold a position in public office then at least try and be intentionally rude

Is that actually what you meant?

if you want to swear at me because I haven't said anything about requiring anyone who wasn't

no, but you've been very careful not to answer what other organisations and who'd decide which positions...

so the command to swivel

I think you're confusing "you HellATwork" with generic "You officious bastards" ^

(swivel on what btw? I always wonder that when people use that as an insult. Is it supposed to be swivel on my finger or swivel on my penis or swivel on that bar stool over there.)

I think it your (generic) finger.

It wouldn't affect you in any other way other choosing between being a freemason or taking a job in public office?

But why stop at Freemasons?

Are the freemasons a campaigning organisation? Or a church? Or are they politicially motivated?

Not relevant

Do Rotary Club members have a requirement for mutual furtherance?

only peripherally after responsibilities to the law, their family and business do Freemasons.

I am just trying to understand why, if it is just a hobby and a nice relaxing way to spend time, is it morally repugnant to you to consider having to tell people about it.

I tell all my friends about it, workmates and assorted people on web forums. Having some busybody state saying what I can and can't do is anathema to me. (cf the ID card example I've given. Ask me on the street who I am, and I'll say OMC. Demand I produce papers, and I'll ask by what authority.)

Yo invite other people to join don't you? You want friends to know what a great way to spend time it is? But if legislation required you to declare your membership in applying for a role in public office,

You're really not reading what I say, are you...

Make it law... go on. I'll obey the law;

you would tell them to swivel
nope, not if it was the law.

because you consider it as integral a part of your identity as race, religion, political and sexuality that no job should ever require you to declare it.^

Astonishing. I'm sorry, you really have to point out where I said that. Anywhere. The word you are scrabbling for is strawman.

I am just trying to understand why that is.

You really, really aren't.

All very good questions WkdSM. I am thinking about them - because as you point out what are the logical conclusions of such a requirement? (That is kind of what I am getting at with on what grounds is protection from declaration sought)

Is there a rough estimate of how many Freemasons exist in the UK? I will look after dinner.

Say it was declared and stats for numbers of freemasons across members of Parliament, the police, social services and judiciary, entire criminal justice system and it was discovered that over 50%/60%/70% (or more or less) were freemasons despite the number of masons in the population as a whole not matching with the number in the criminal justice system. I wonder how all the non-masons would feel about that. I bet the number of people joining the masons would go up. Would be great for recruitment.

This thread's interesting and it got me reading about it. I found numerous explanations from Masonic societies all saying much the same thing, but this statement grabbed my interest:

Each member also promises to keep confidential the traditional methods of proving that he is a Freemason which he would use when visiting a lodge where he is not known.

One more chap, what are these methods of proof and why are they secret? If it's just to prove membership when visiting another lodge, why don't you have a membership card and photo ID like every other club?

Or is it because these methods of proof are used in other situations by some freemasons, to gain advantage - and the non-masons in the room/dealing with the written tender, wouldn't notice, because those 'methods' are secret only to fellow masons?

Don't know the numbers as the obligation to report masonic membership ended 45 years ago; they used to reckon about 10% of men in East Lancashire where in the Craft.

Incidentally, you'd expect to find more charitable/good works type people involved in Freemasonry...because it's a charitable organisation [e.g I volunteer for a wide range of "good works"]

The right not to have any belief at all - and not to be discriminated against because of that, is covered by law. Why is freemasonry exempt from that?

badinage

One more chap, what are these methods of proof and why are they secret?

It depends.
Usually testimony of a well known brother (i.e Oh, yeah, I met him at Lodge such and such) or knowing details of our ceremonies.

If it's just to prove membership when visiting another lodge, why don't you have a membership card and photo ID like every other club?

Why should we. We prefer it this way...

Or is it because these methods of proof are used in other situations by some freemasons, to gain advantage - and the non-masons in the room/dealing with the written tender, wouldn't notice, because those 'methods' are secret only to fellow masons?

No, and that's silly.
If anyone was trying to get advantage why would disclose it to people not privy to your connection. You'd say "Hey, badinage, give my bid priority" privately.

badinage
The right not to have any belief at all - and not to be discriminated against because of that, is covered by law. Why is freemasonry exempt from that?

Because it's an organisation for people who believe in a Supreme Being?
As a technical point, I believe it's profess a belief in a Supreme Being, and we don't ask questions - which is why we have people in of all religions. (ssh and none)

badinage - that's what I am trying to work out? Say I'm a woman and I am atheist. I'm guessing I can't join my local lodge. I'm not interested in joining a woman's lodge, I want to join the lodge to meet men in the area of business I work in because it is male dominated and it would be a great route of introduction. I also prefer the soft furnishings at my local (men's) temple and the architecture is much more aesthetically pleasing being of great historical significance. The woman's lodge in comparison could be viewed as a pre-fab monstrosity. However, that network and those facilities are closed to me. I am not permitted to be a member. What alternative network can I join that has the potential to connect me to men in positions of power that I wouldn't otherwise have the option of meeting over drinks and dinner?

In law, the basis on which I am refused access to is that the freemason's right to exclude me trumps my right to demand access. On what grounds though? Like I could be refused to join a monastery? Or like I could be refused to join a feminist meeting (not possible in law actually so not a good example)?

But you wouldn't say 'give my bid priority' because you'd be penalised for trying to gain a pecuniary advantage and it would be overt. Whereas if you showed a freemasonry signal or form of words that would only be recognised by a fellow mason - and that person wasn't a mason, you'd have nothing to lose. They wouldn't know you were trying to gain an advantage, so you wouldn't be penalised. You might gain something though, if encountering a freemason who was also corrupt.

Are you saying that there are no signs, signals and forms of words that must be kept secret, that prove you are a freemason?

Sorry, I don't believe it's just because of personal preference that you don't have a membersip card like any other organisation. I'd be surprised if anyone did.

i know a mason who is apsolutly dead against any type of religon describes himself as atheist his supreme being is in his words 'queen and country'

YABU. My Dad is a Freemason, he's not secretive over the fact, and they are very supportive of each other, and when one person has fallen on hard times, helped him out. In my opinion his freemason friends are all very nice.

" I want to join the lodge to meet men in the area of business I work in because it is male dominated and it would be a great route of introduction"

You would not even be admitted into the women's Order if that is the reason why you want in.

OneMoreChap,you are the head of a lodge.
Who do you have to answer to?

"If it's just to prove membership when visiting another lodge, why don't you have a membership card and photo ID like every other club?"

Tradition. You need to remember that Freemasonry dates back to actual masons (builders) of the Middle Ages who were free to travel and had other privileges because of their skills, and who had no membership card and photo ID, of course.

I don't believe that it's tradition, any more than I believe it's because of a preference not to have a membership card like everywhere else. If people believe these nonsensical explanations, more fool them.

If the freemasonry movement wanted people to believe that these methods of proof regarding membership are personal preference or because of an attachment to tradition, they would state openly what those methods of proof are. Because no-one with a functioning brain would believe the explanations being given on this thread.

It is precisely because there have been allegations about handshakes and phrases being used in order to make gains, that the public are suspicious about freemasons. If they wanted to stop the speculation, they wouldn't bind their members to strict confidentiality about them and they would be public knowledge.

Totally agree with Cote - if you approached our Ladies Lodge (which incidentally is held in the same room in the same building as the men's meetings) and said it was to meet business people and improve your network you would be told in no uncertain terms that we would not be a suitable place for you to do that.

Join a business networking club (of which there are many) which are specifically set up to help people network and get more work. Try the breakfast clubs, learn golf - join the ladies section and then go to all the socials, and volunteer to play in the mixed matches. Research your targets and join clubs they belong to if that is what you want to do. of learn which churches they attend and track them down there. Or what charities they support and volunteer when you know they will be there.

Your local lodge is not really the place to try and get work - as far as I know, we have the CEO of a bank, a bus driver, a supermarket shelf stacker, a camera salesman, a man who runs a coach company, a haulage specialist, in one of DH's lodge - and an awful lot of retired people! That does seem to have skipped notice that a lot of masons are older and have retired and therefore would have limited influence re granting contracts.

One chap did ask DH if he had any jobs going as his wife was starting back to work after having 2 kids and he knows that DH really supports flexible working. DH told him to ask her to send in a CV and he would pass it on to the relevant department - no more or less than you would do for anyone you knew who asked the same question.

But why the segregation of men and women? I disapprove of all single sex institutions. Why if I shared the same aims as male freemasons and wasn't trying to profit from my association, can I not join just because I'm a woman? I can lie about my atheism and it sounds as though some of these Upstanding Men of Repute do just that - lie. I can't lie about my sex though, can I?

you can join the womans freemasons

if you disapprove then why would you want to join?

lots of people are more comfortable in single sex enviroments for certain things why should you get to make that choice for them?

what makes your disapproval more valid than my approval?

badinage - Believe it or not, nobody is trying to convince you. People ask questions, others answer them. That is all. If you want to believe conspiracy theories instead, nobody will try to stop you.

You need to consider the institution as a 'child of it's time' - when it started (many differing opinions on exactly when / how but a long time ago!!) - women did not have the vote, did not own property for the most part in their own right and did not work outside the home.

Just as the Church of England is slowly accepting women as ministers etc things will probably gradualy change, but it will not happen quickly.

They are considered as two separate entities (again PGA and women's PGA) and there have been great strides to gain an acceptance and understanding of women within freemasonry. That our Lodges are now invited to meet at the men's lodges is a great step forward.

I would note that DH belonged to Round Table (one of whose aims and objects is 'to develop the acquaintance of young men' and which was specifically set up as a business networking group) and I belonged to Ladies Circle. I could not join Table as I was not in possession of a penis, but he could not join Ladies Circle as he was. However, both institutions work together and separately to have fun and raise money for charities. No one is howling for them to carry identity cards and produce them or declare their membership.

I accept that you may not like the fact that there are separate groups for men and women - but that is the way of it today - it may change in the future.