It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Persecution of Freemasonry

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 15 2004 @ 04:17 AM
link   
In Scotland where I live Freemasons are being given a hard time by certain extreme politicians. They would like to see all Freemasons who hold public office being forced to declare their membership in Freemasonry. This would mean that if you are a MP, Councillor, Judge or hold any public office then you would have to declare this interest in a public register. At the moment this idea is on the back burner but you can never tell when it may be introduced again. I know of one Judge who will not attend Masonic meetings because he is afraid that this will hinder his career development.

Brother Gerard

[edit on 15-6-2004 by Gerard]

[edit on 15-6-2004 by Gerard]




posted on Jun, 15 2004 @ 04:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gerard
They would like to see all Freemasons who hold public office being forced to declare therir membership in Freemasonary. Brother Gerard


Well, I guess that everyone then would have to put in a registry of ANY society, club, or membership that they have. Wouldn`t you like to know if a judge is giving special treatment to their poker buddies? Or people at their tennis club... Or thir political party ... church... BTW... should know what schools, clubs etc that all their family members belong to as well. Wow, where has personal privacy gone?



posted on Jun, 15 2004 @ 06:10 AM
link   


They would like to see all Freemasons who hold public office being forced to declare therir membership in Freemasonary. Brother Gerard


Brother Gerard, every member of secret society has to declare their membership not just freemasons.



posted on Jun, 15 2004 @ 06:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by infinite
Brother Gerard, every member of secret society has to declare their membership not just freemasons.


Then they wouldn't be secret anymore, the "Secret Societies Forum" would become a "Lost Civilization", we would be... rudderless... posting on the "Weaponry Forum", my, how the mighty have fallen.



posted on Jun, 15 2004 @ 06:27 AM
link   
How will they not be a secret? the members are only declaring their membership, not the secrets of how the group works,etc.



posted on Jun, 15 2004 @ 08:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mirthful Me

Originally posted by infinite
Brother Gerard, every member of secret society has to declare their membership not just freemasons.


Then they wouldn't be secret anymore, the "Secret Societies Forum" would become a "Lost Civilization", we would be... rudderless... posting on the "Weaponry Forum", my, how the mighty have fallen.


I would contend that Freemasonry is not a secret society and because we are not a secret society we should not be asked to declare our memebrship. If the day comes when we have to do so it will be a gross breach of our human rights
.


Brother Gerard

[edit on 17-6-2004 by Gerard]



posted on Jun, 15 2004 @ 08:33 AM
link   
Gerard, that's kinda scary. Are folks having to confess to belonging to the Knights of Columbus, the Rotary Club, the Elks and Joe's Poker Night, too? Or is Freemasonry being singled out?



posted on Jun, 15 2004 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by DontTreadOnMe
Gerard, that's kinda scary. Are folks having to confess to belonging to the Knights of Columbus, the Rotary Club, the Elks and Joe's Poker Night, too? Or is Freemasonry being singled out?




[edit on 15-6-2004 by Gerard]



posted on Jun, 15 2004 @ 08:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gerard

Originally posted by DontTreadOnMe
Gerard, that's kinda scary. Are folks having to confess to belonging to the Knights of Columbus, the Rotary Club, the Elks and Joe's Poker Night, too? Or is Freemasonry being singled out?




[edit on 15-6-2004 by Gerard]



posted on Jun, 15 2004 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gerard

Originally posted by DontTreadOnMe
Gerard, that's kinda scary. Are folks having to confess to belonging to the Knights of Columbus, the Rotary Club, the Elks and Joe's Poker Night, too? Or is Freemasonry being singled out?


Only the Freemasons were being singled oyr for this treatment.No other goup were mentioned. This was a propsal by very extreme politicians in Scotland.

Gerard



posted on Jun, 15 2004 @ 09:09 AM
link   
I know there are conspiracies that have been circulating for years on the masons and other groups, but having read numerous posts here, it seems that most of the masons are proud to be a part of the group and very strongly proclaim that here.

If there is nothing wrong with being a mason, then merely disclosing you are part of that group should not be a problem at all and I would think they would be proud to admit it.

I mean it's not like they are requiring the people to disclose what happens behind closed doors of their meetings.

IMHO, your post merely adds to the doubts some have about your group.

Now if the law refers only to the masons then I would agree that it would need to include any memberships in other non-masonic groups as well to make it a fair playing field.

If the law is inclusive of all groups, then by all means Stand Up and Proudly Say....."Yes....I am a Mason"


df1

posted on Jun, 15 2004 @ 09:29 AM
link   
Copied from this thread Yet another Mason question
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Khonsu
For every enemy and every battle there are many ways to secure victory but only one correct one. The most direct and overt often is not the wisest decision, one should move and act unseen and with motives unknown until there is no other choice but direct, open and immediate action, at that time one should strike swiftly without hesitation and with a strength second only to God, this is the way of victory.



Does this represent the ways of freemasonry or are these merely the views of one freemason?
.



posted on Jun, 15 2004 @ 09:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by JacKatMtn
I know there are conspiracies that have been circulating for years on the masons and other groups, but having read numerous posts here, it seems that most of the masons are proud to be a part of the group and very strongly proclaim that here.

If there is nothing wrong with being a mason, then merely disclosing you are part of that group should not be a problem at all and I would think they would be proud to admit it.


The problem that you don't seem to recognise, JacKatMtn, is that some employers and other people in positions of power will persecute Masons if they know who they are. If you look at other threads in this board, you will see just what kind of lies are spread about Masonry, and what kind of trouble a person can get into if he's publicly known to be a Freemason.

Just as an example, at a Baptist Church in the States, a flower garden which was a gift from a Mason was ripped apart, his memorial stones destroyed (he had died several years earlier), and his family refused access to retrieve some mementos of the garden, all because the person who donated the money was a Mason. You can find a much longer cersion of the facts here.

The metaphor I always use for being a Freemason (and it's not entirely accurate at all, so please don't write angry replies) is that being a Freemason is a bit like being gay -- there are many people in the world who will hate you simply because of what you are, and so many people choose to remain "in the closet" as it were. I myself am a completely open Freemason, but even I don't tell it to everyone I meet on the street, or casual business acquaintances.

To express what it's like, I recently told my landlord and landlady I am a Mason. Despite the fact that they are decent people, and despite the fact that this is a fairly tolerant country, I was quite afraid. There are lots of otherwise sensible people all over the world who believe we are devil worshippers, or child molesters, or other horrible things.

Finally, I don't see how having to disclose your membership in a society could possibly be considered fair by an American... aren't you the folks who believe in radical freedom of assembly, radical free speech, etc.? Isn't it fairly tyrranical for a government to require IDs on groups that it doesn't like?



posted on Jun, 15 2004 @ 10:50 AM
link   
Alex Kennedy

I believe that this thread referred to people who "Hold Public Office", and that would mean a "representative" of the public.

I think that the voters would want to know what types of groups the candidates are associated with, that comes with the territory.

There are very polarizing viewpoints about your group that have a long history,
what side represents the truth?, that's a matter of debate which I am not trying
to bring up, there are plenty of threads already on that.

I do think the voters should have full disclosure from their representatives especially if being a mason is one area which could help them decide who they want to place in office.

By not revealing what groups the candidates are associated with takes away the voters' freedom of choice.

While I take no particular side on this issue, I am sure that there are proponents on both sides who would vote accordingly and for them this would be an important part of their decision on who they vote for.


df1

posted on Jun, 15 2004 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by AlexKennedyI don't see how having to disclose your membership in a society could possibly be considered fair by an American.


If freemasonry is operating covertly to shape the american government via the political process (I dont know that this is true), the american people have the right to know what that agenda is and who is putting forth the agenda. This in no way would infringe on freedom assembly or the freedom of speech as you imply.


Originally posted by df1
Copied from this thread Yet another Mason question
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Khonsu
For every enemy and every battle there are many ways to secure victory but only one correct one. The most direct and overt often is not the wisest decision, one should move and act unseen and with motives unknown until there is no other choice but direct, open and immediate action, at that time one should strike swiftly without hesitation and with a strength second only to God, this is the way of victory.

Does this represent the ways of freemasonry or are these merely the views of one freemason?

Do freemasons have a secret political agenda which influences the lives of non-freemasons? If so, an open society must demand to know.

I understand that a freemason is always required to come to the aide of another freemason. Does a freemason judge give lighter sentences to freemasons arrested for drunken driving (or other crimes)? If so, it is non-freemasons that are being persecuted and an open society must demand to know.

Are elected freemasons surrounding themselves with other freemasons? If so, an open society must insist on knowing who they are being governed by.

Freemasons being persecuted, I think not...
.



posted on Jun, 15 2004 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by df1
Do freemasons have a secret political agenda which influences the lives of non-freemasons? If so, an open society must demand to know.


The only political agenda Freemasons have is to prevent tyrrany. Plain and simple... Freemasons believe in freedom of religion and conscience.

Beside that, however, everyone has a "political agenda" if you choose to take it that way. Do you insist that every politician disclose their religion? How about their sexual preference? How about what kind of food they like to eat? Where does it stop?



I understand that a freemason is always required to come to the aide of another freemason. Does a freemason judge give lighter sentences to freemasons arrested for drunken driving (or other crimes)? If so, it is non-freemasons that are being persecuted and an open society must demand to know.


Well, what you understand is BS. A Freemason is by no means required to "always" come to the aid of another Freemason. If a Freemason is breaking a just law, then other Freemasons are duty- and honour-bound to prevent him from so doing. You think you know a lot more about Masonry than you know.

It is absolutely not the case that a Freemason who rightly understood the craft would give "a lighter sentence" to another Mason.



Are elected freemasons surrounding themselves with other freemasons? If so, an open society must insist on knowing who they are being governed by.

Freemasons being persecuted, I think not...


Really? You think not? Maybe you should try it once in a while! Try having many people believe, just by virtue of you belonging to a group, that you are child molester. Try having everyone feel that you have the power to influence society, and therefore have everyone treat you worse than others. Try having to bloody well explain yourself to just about everyone. Try having to repeat the fact that Freemasonry is not a religion so many times that you can do it in your sleep. Try having the society that you love, and that is important to you, constantly maligned not only by fringe lunatics, but also by insinuating and insulting articles in the public press. Try knowing that if another Hitler or Stalin comes along, you're right up there on the list of people to be sent off to camps.

How DARE you presume to say that Freemasons aren't persecuted, at the same time that you're practically calling out for us to bloody well be tatooed, or to have our pictures posted in the post office or something.

I'm far to bloody angry at your ignorance to continue typing. If your comments are an example of what people have to put up with in the states, I'm not surprised that there are so few Masons using the internet.


df1

posted on Jun, 15 2004 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by AlexKennedy
The only political agenda Freemasons have is to prevent tyrrany. Plain and simple... Freemasons believe in freedom of religion and conscience.


If this is the agenda of freemasons, I share this belief.


Do you insist that every politician disclose their religion?

In America every politician wears his christianity on his sleeve, no need exists to make disclosure a requirement.


How about their sexual preference?

The news media keeps us completely abreast of not only sexual preference, but includes sexual frequency and the names of partners.


How about what kind of food they like to eat?

Former president clinton liked pork rinds and current president bush has a fondness for pretzels.

A freemason (grand potentate of ohio) bragged to me, with pride, about the number of drunken driving prosecutions that he and his wife avoided by virtue of a having a freemason as the judge. Perhaps freemasons in the UK have a greater sense of honor, but my observations demonstrate that this is not true of those in the US. The above mentioned freemason is also part of the motorcycle patrol that appears in parades and other public events. Never have I seen any evidence of him being harassed or otherwise persecuted.

Perhaps my opinion is colored by the deeds of a few and perhaps this is uniquely an american manifestation of freemasonry. None the less I fail to see any freemason I know to be the victim of persecution because of being a freemason.

Secrecy and special preference is a serious issue in america. The current president is the member of a secret organization known as the "skull & bones" as are numerous members of his administration. The opposition candidate in the coming election is also a member of the same organization. The secrets and intentions of this organization are unknown, but judging by the actions of the bush administration, serious reasons to be fearful exist in the US.

It is in this light that I believe the light of day should be shown on secret organizations in the US, freemasons and otherwise. Perhaps freemasons in the UK have reason to fear persecution, but I do not believe this is the case in the US.

BTW should freemasons be taken to the gulag, I will be one of the rifles on the roof top coming to set you free. I am not your enemy.
.






[edit on 15-6-2004 by df1]



posted on Jun, 15 2004 @ 05:53 PM
link   
Need I point out that the last government that required folks to register their affiliations was Nazi Germany with the Jewish population, and we all KNOW what happened to them as a result.

There is only one reason for requiring Masons to register the fact that they are masons, and it has nothing to do with the issues you are raising.

Further, in the United States at least, there is a presumption of innocence, or should be, so affiliation with Masonry should be nunayer bizness... I am free in this country to belong to the communist party, if I was so warped as to want to belong to that group, without needing to register, why should a Mason be required to do so?

Unsubstantiated fears are no reason. As for your allegation about a past grand master's statements, you will forgive me if I don't believe you. Anyone can make any claims to fit their agenda, and it looks to me as if you have an agenda.

you also stated:

Secrecy and special preference is a serious issue in america.

Actually, no its not an issue, at least not for people that aren't paranoid.

The current president is the member of a secret organization known as the "skull & bones" as are numerous members of his administration.

Actually, President Bush is the ONLY member of his administration that is a Skull and Bones member. If you have evidence to the contrary, I would be very interested in seeing it.

The opposition candidate in the coming election is also a member of the same organization. The secrets and intentions of this organization are unknown, but judging by the actions of the bush administration, serious reasons to be fearful exist in the US.

Did you actually WRITE that? Secret intentions? Without a shred of evidence, you assert some kind of nefarious intention... that in itself is kind of scary.

It is in this light that I believe the light of day should be shown on secret organizations in the US, freemasons and otherwise. Perhaps freemasons in the UK have reason to fear persecution, but I do not believe this is the case in the US.

Personally, I think that ANYTIME the force of the government is used to force people to reveal memberships in ANY organizations we, the people, have reason to fear. Persecution is the only reason you would ask police officers, city councilmen, etc to reveal they were masons. In fact, a judge just recently lost a position in the UK government BECAUSE he was a mason, and because he had revealed it. That is persecution.

BTW should freemasons be taken to the gulag, I will be one of the rifles on the roof top coming to set you free. I am not your enemy.

From what you have written, you would be one of the guards marching us along.



posted on Jun, 15 2004 @ 06:00 PM
link   
this is a typo see below, my apologies.

[edit on 6/15/04 by Khonsu]



posted on Jun, 15 2004 @ 06:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by df1
Copied from this thread Yet another Mason question
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Khonsu
For every enemy and every battle there are many ways to secure victory but only one correct one. The most direct and overt often is not the wisest decision, one should move and act unseen and with motives unknown until there is no other choice but direct, open and immediate action, at that time one should strike swiftly without hesitation and with a strength second only to God, this is the way of victory.


Does this represent the ways of freemasonry or are these merely the views of one freemason?
.


The quote above was simply my opinion based upon a question that was raised by an individual, a question with had nothing to do with Freemasonry, and therefore I answered it as best as I could providing my own wisdom and insight, not that of Freemasonry. Just for continuity the entire post is displayed below:


Originally posted by Khonsu
For every enemy and every battle there are many ways to secure victory but only one correct one. The most direct and overt often is not the wisest decision, one should move and act unseen and with motives unknown until there is no other choice but direct, open and immediate action, at that time one should strike swiftly without hesitation and with a strength second only to God, this is the way of victory.

Overt action, violence and revolution is not the solution to the Bush regime, in fact many would argue that that is exactly what they want, after all what better excuse to swiftly and indefinitely infringe on the liberties of Americans than to declare martial law because of civil unrest?

Life is much like Chess, plot your moves wisely.


If you see in the second paragraph I address his question directly, and concretely. The post itself and my reply to it was in regards to war, specifically that of revolution, which the poster advocated as the solution to the Bush regime. The post itself was warranted by the claims of this individual in which he questioned the motives and principles of Masonry by assuming that 1. there are many Masons holding seats in the US governemnt. 2. Bush must be viewed as eveil by Masons as he acts against the principles Masonry advocates. 3. Based on assumption 2, he further assumed that Masons would naturally oppose Bush. 4. That they would work within the system, or oust him from office one way or another. 5. That Masons hold such power in the U.S. that they have the ability to remove the U.S. president from office
6. Since the Masons are not working to get Bush out of office they must be in aligned with him.

First and foremost politics has no place in the Lodge, a Masons political view and opinion is never asked, discussed nor questioned in a Masonic Lodge. Masonry entertains nothing of the topic of politics in any country. Secondly a Masons opinion on Bush is his individual opinon, there is no unified Masonic view of Bush, as this would be impossible to achieve and violate Masonic law as once again politics are nor discussed.

I didn't think this ^ reply was needed to answer that individuals question as his suggestions regarding course of action were flawed anyway, so those are what I chose to deal with. If he was indeed feeling the need for revolution in hopes of getting rid of Bush, I simply gave him another strategy to contemplate and a different outlook on the entire situation, my personal outlook, not a Masonic outlook as one does not exist.

I don't know, maybe i've read the art of war too many times in my life or something.


I hope this has cleared up any and all confusion.

HOTEP



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join