It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Police rethink on membership order

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Nov, 14 2004 @ 10:19 PM

Originally posted by MrNECROS
Hey why should it matter?
According to you guys ALL Freemasons walk about wearing Masonic Jewelry and have "Kiss Me I'm a Freemason" bumperstickers on their cars.
Its not like the Freemasons are a secret society or something sinister...

Hey, the Twilight Zone is heard from... I was wondering when you would chime in, there, necros... they let you at the computer again? I guess since its Sunday, they might...

I have absolutely no problem proclaiming my membership, WHEN ITS MY CHOICE. It is were a law that I had to declare it, I would cease wearing my ring and take the badges off my vehicles... there is only one reason to demand a man declare his affiliation, and that is to keep him from working, holding a job, renting, owning property etc. Otherwise, there is no reason to even ask.

You know, if you replace Mason with Jew or Arab or Catholic, or ex looney inmate or Muslim, would you still be as willing to demand registration? its really no different... masons have committed no crimes, so, in the United States at least (g-d bless America!!) this will NEVER happen. And it appears that the tide is turning in the UK too, thank g-d.

After all its just paranoid nutbars like myself that say the majority of Freemasons won't even tell their wives of their affiliation until they get them into OES or some other similar "Stepford Wives" group.

Oh you are so confused. In the US, the man's wife must be asked if she has any objections before a man can join... not for her permission, but to ensure that she does not object... Stepford Wive's Indeed...
try telling the Worthy Matron of Star that she is a stepford wife...

BTW I'm very much of the opinion this "Intrepid" guy is a Mason - maybe he'd like to give an honest answer to this?

i can assure you, for whatever it is worth that Intrepid is NOT a brother.

If he is and he isn't revealing his affiliation then don't you think his position as a 'moderator' in this forum is at odds - very much like a policeman who won't admit his affiliation?

Not at all... there is no rule here or anywhere that a mason declare his affiliation... not even those guys that we have following you around....

posted on Nov, 14 2004 @ 10:27 PM
1.) Intrepd has already declared that he is NOT a Mason. That's good enough for me.

2.) In Canada (and the U.S.) a prospective Mason's spouse MUST be asked about whether she would approve of her husband's membership in Masonry. That is regulation, and it must be followed.

This has only been mentioned about 1000 times already.

posted on Nov, 15 2004 @ 08:11 PM
Yep. My wife was asked if she had any objection...

And if asked again, the only one he'd have now is that she gets left as a "Masonic widow" once or twice a month. I'd like her to join OES just so she' get out of the house (other than to shop) once in a while...

As for forced disclosure of membership in a private group,... as a lawyer,... Unconstitutional. Violates the freedom of association clause of the 1st Amendment (It's not just for religion and press, ya know). Not that I would have any problem admitting I was a Freemason in Court... [McCarthyism was Unconstitutional, ... It's just that nobody DID anything about it.] It's just that it's unconstitutional in the USA to compell people to disclose their relationships this way, except if it were relevant for some other reason (i.e.: "I was in the building next to where the car accident took place because I am a Freemason and a member of that Lodge." ). But to compell their relationships in organizations so that they could be used in some form of "witch hunt," blatently Unconstitutional. The ACLU would have a field day if any State in the USA passed a law like the Brits passed...

new topics
<< 1   >>

log in