posted on Dec, 7 2004 @ 09:10 AM
I think your all going about this discussion the wrong way. I am not a mason, although I am interested in it. Firstly, I can see why Gaf would be
saying what he is saying, and it is because most of what the masons on the board are rebutting. He happens to be a much better debater than most of
the masons, and hence is winning this arguement. What you have to do is agree to disagree. There are somethings that need to be cleared up. As for
women in the Masons, your right they aren't allowed. But I did find in my research that women are allowed to join the Order of the Eastern Star,
From what I can tell it is the sister of the Masons.
Secondly to dispell some of what you said gaf, and I don't want to take sides here, but by saying that at one point in time masons ruled the country,
that very allegation is rediculious. And not because I know it isn't true, but because by that very same assertation, when a christian president is
in power, the Christians are ruling the country, or the catholics or so on. You could also say that since Bush is a Lawyer(he is a lawyer right, i'm
from Canada, so i'm not 100%) that Lawyers rule the country right now. Basically being a Mason is no diffrent than any other "club". You are a
Christian, a Catholic, a member of your local 4H, a member of a college fraternity, a CAA member, a member of your local legion etc. But you are a
Mason as well. It doesn't replace, it adds to.
Being a mason there are certain rituals that need to be preformed, and they date back before anyof us were even a twinkle in our parents eyes. And it
is these rituals that they hold very dear. Now taking a ritual that was created thousands of years ago, and saying it still holds true word for
word, is not true. They just hold the same belief structure they did then, which is the betterment of their minds, and the furtherment of their
education. That being said in todays world, they may want to start slowly changing some of the wording, and the structure, but they probably won't.
That is because the traditions they have date back many moons, and as you know most people try to resist change. I would agree that some of what is
said is probably pretty offensive taken litterally now, but we can't take things at face value and hold them as fact with regards to anything.
So the question now becomes, who do you beleive. And i would have to say I can see both sides of the arguement. Some accusations are baseless,
others are not. To say that most of the influential people of our time were masons so they should be beleived, I can't agree with that. To say that
because the oaths and ceremonys are Bias, and evil, I can't agree with that. What I can say. is that from what I see it never did anyone harm to
become a mason.