I firmly believe that Masons DO rule the world. The real question of importance here isn't whether Masons rule the world, but rather WHAT the definition of "ruling" is.

A ruler - as a simple noun - is an instrument of measure which, regardless of circumstance, remains unchanged. It is governed by a universal principle against which everything else may rationally be compared. In such a manner, Masons ARE rulers. They are constrained to conduct themselves in a regular manner, working to build the unfinished work of Civilization both personally and abroad.

Masons are not some sort of superhuman, supernatural, almighty and omnipresent assembly; but they are committed to the work of striving to build and maintain Civilization, and that makes them special. Society changes, but the fundamentals of Freemasonry remain constant in spite of the chaos.

It was a Freemasonic principle which suggested that a Nation could be governed not by powerful men but by powerful principles which led to the founding of the United States. While our Nation may not be ruled by Freemasons as some conspiracy theorists seem to insist, it isn't irrational to suggest that the United States is fundamentally a Masonic invention, based on Masonic principles.

If many people are all following the northward facing point of a magnetic compass, they will all reach the same destination in the end. Because their rule is the same, their conclusion will be the same. They need no central leadership to be united in purpose, because a higher law - an all-seeing eye of providence - governs their movements.

Originally posted by JHoward88
If many people are all following the northward facing point of a magnetic compass, they will all reach the same destination in the end.

Darkness? They're travelling in the wrong direction!

poor masons

theres no such thing as bad publicity.

like every pyramid scheme it just gives you another chance to recruit more.

---

Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

---

Originally posted by JHoward88
A ruler - as a simple noun - is an instrument of measure which, regardless of circumstance, remains unchanged. It is governed by a universal principle against which everything else may rationally be compared. In such a manner, Masons ARE rulers. They are constrained to conduct themselves in a regular manner, working to build the unfinished work of Civilization both personally and abroad.

Would you find it interesting that I got this in my Illuminati Membership Kit?

Originally posted by Fitzgibbon
First off, Freemasonry is a fraternity. Fraternities are for men. Sororities are for women. Any adult past a certain age recgonises that men and women do things, feel things and appreciate things differently and trying to force a square peg into a round hole yields happiness to neither the peg nor the hole.

First off, [The Clan] is a [supremecy]. [Supremecies] are for [white people]. [Slaveries] are for [black people]. Any adult past a certain age recgonises that [white people] and [black people] do things, feel things and appreciate things differently and trying to force a square peg into a round hole yields happiness to neither the peg nor the hole.

Nice way to justify mysogeny and sexism with empty words there. How about a lesbian woman? She might feel she would fit right into your fraternity. What about a gay man? Are gays excluded from your club too because they are square pegs?

Originally posted by Crayfish
Nice way to justify mysogeny and sexism with empty words there. How about a lesbian woman? She might feel she would fit right into your fraternity. What about a gay man? Are gays excluded from your club too because they are square pegs?

Gay men are welcome in my lodge. We have a few gay members. It's not a big deal.

I'd say about half of my lesbian friends are practicing pagans and are part of an all-women coven of witches. So they wouldn't let me participate in magickal ritual with them, and likewise, they aren't interested in Masonic ritual, other than from an academic standpoint.

I also know a lesbian who joined the Oddfellows and seems quite happy with that group.

Originally posted by Crayfish
First off, [The Clan] is a [supremecy]. [Supremecies] are for [white people]. [Slaveries] are for [black people]. Any adult past a certain age recgonises that [white people] and [black people] do things, feel things and appreciate things differently and trying to force a square peg into a round hole yields happiness to neither the peg nor the hole.

So what you're suggesting is that race and sex are entirely the same thing sociologically and biologically. I think you'll recognize that's ridiculous. Comparisons between non-membership and slavery are even more so, and asinine as well.

Nice way to justify mysogeny and sexism with empty words there.

By your logic, misogyny and sexism are present in every civilization since the beginning of time. You might not want to call others out concerning empty words.

How about a lesbian woman? She might feel she would fit right into your fraternity.

Right, because lesbians are she-hulks who don't connect with boyish sensibilities. Who's misogynist, again?

What about a gay man? Are gays excluded from your club too because they are square pegs?

Though I don't know them personally (and I don't ask), I've heard from gay Masons who have had no problem getting along in Freemasonry. Should we consider a gay man any less a man? The answer seems to tell us more about you than them.

Originally posted by emsed1

ATS is so similar to Freemasonry in so many ways I don't even think folks realize it.

Some do. People say S&F all the time and think they are saying "Star and Flag" but what they are actually saying is "Sincerely and Fraternally".

Masonry and Gender Equality are topics which are treated, at least in my experience, as simply non-related in Masonic circles.

The moral ideals and socio-cultural values which are at the core of Masonry tend not to attract people who participate in alternative lifestyles. Undisputably, at the core of Masonry is the general assumption - usually held as self-evident - that each gender must necessarily play a different (though that is not to say unequal) role in the construction of civilized society.

By design, there is no sexual element in a lodge of Masons as there would be in mixed company. If there were any risk whatsoever of "Brotherly love" being interpreted as having a sexual connotation, that would disrupt the harmony of the lodge.

In the end, there is no precise rule against gay men becoming Masons. I am certain that if such a man were a Mason, an attitude of "don't ask, don't tell" would in such case be strongly encouraged.

This site is owned and controlled by Masons. You people control every piece of info you can.

Originally posted by realitycheckmate
This site is owned and controlled by Masons. You people control every piece of info you can.

Owned and controlled? No. There are at least a half-dozen mods who are Masons, but not the top brass.

Thank you for the analogy on Freemasonry. I never had much interest and/or knowlege in Freemasonry until I began to study A. Hays Town. Also, I had a friend who was a Mason (not that I know the difference) who gave me the same sort of analogy once.

I suppose the descriptions of Freemasonry that I have had have been so vague that it never sparked an interest in me. So what difference does it make if this sight is owned and/or even controlled by Masons?

Originally posted by realitycheckmate
This site is owned and controlled by Masons. You people control every piece of info you can.