Are the Masons evil?

[KSigMason]

Bill was never a Freemason. His life story is filled with lies and contradictions. And no Freemasonry doesn't go to 90 or 99. That is the Rite of Memphis and Mizraim which is not recognized by any true Masonic body and in fact, joining one Rite of MM can get you expelled from the fraternity. I love how he was somehow a Mormon, Catholic, Satanist, Wiccan, Freemason, and blah blah blah.

[KSigMason]

Originally Posted by BlueAngel

What is so GOD awful about the Rite of Memphis and Mizraim that can get you expelled from the oh so wonderful Freemason fraternity?

Irregular Freemasonry don't follow the same rules, they don't have the same requirements, they refuse to follow the traditions and charges that every Grand Lodge follows, they allow atheists into their movements, but are slowly dying away.

[KSigMason]

The Ancient and Primitive Rites of Memphis and Mizraim are groups for fringe "Freemasons". They were considered a degree mill of clandestine degrees and never received recognition. In fact, Yarker was expelled from Freemasonry as he became belligerent in trying to push his new order.

[Dangermouse]

Originally Posted by BlueAngel

OMG!

How awful!

They don't follow the same rules and don't have the same requirements and refuse to follow the traditions and allow atheists into their movements.

I say off with their heads!

Doesn't have to be off with their heads, just means they aren't freely accepted as part of the organization. If they don't fallow the same rules, regulations, requirements, and adhere to the traditions, are they really part of the organization at all, or just another group using a catchy name to get attention?

[KSigMason]

Originally Posted by BlueAngel

OMG!

How awful!

They don't follow the same rules and don't have the same requirements and refuse to follow the traditions and allow atheists into their movements.

I say off with their heads!

That's a little extreme, I am content with them no receiving recognition, but to each his own I guess.

[JBoy]

baby mason boy:
Is PIKE a liar ??
Manly ???
BESANT....CROWLEY....Manson????? HITLER.....Son of sam ???

all evil as hell, as u are. a nobody no nothing gutter rat
i suppose i can gather ALL the names and ...and ofcourse, to u all liars, never was in the masons. how bizarres ur ???

[KSigMason]

Originally Posted by JBoy

baby mason boy:
Is PIKE a liar ??
Manly ???
BESANT....CROWLEY....Manson????? HITLER.....Son of sam ???

all evil as hell, as u are. a nobody no nothing gutter rat
i suppose i can gather ALL the names and ...and ofcourse, to u all liars, never was in the masons. how bizarres ur ???

Manly P Hall and Pike were Masons, but the rest you named are not. Sorry little boy.

[JBoy]

November 2, 2007

SAN FRANCISCO -- The LAPD and the Boy Scouts of America may not be held liable for alleged sexual abuse of teenage boys by a former police chief, the California Supreme Court ruled unanimously Thursday. The state high court said the alleged victims had failed to show that the LAPD and the scouting group knew or should have known that retired Deputy Police Chief David Kalish had committed sexual misconduct with other minors before he was accused by the teenagers. The decision clarified a law that permits victims of child abuse older than 26 to sue a molester's employer or organization if they can show the employer "knew or had reason to know or was otherwise on notice" of any sexual misconduct by the employee or volunteer. Without such evidence, a victim older than 26 is barred from suing by legal time limits.

[KSigMason]

Originally Posted by JBoy

November 2, 2007

SAN FRANCISCO -- The LAPD and the Boy Scouts of America may not be held liable for alleged sexual abuse of teenage boys by a former police chief, the California Supreme Court ruled unanimously Thursday. The state high court said the alleged victims had failed to show that the LAPD and the scouting group knew or should have known that retired Deputy Police Chief David Kalish had committed sexual misconduct with other minors before he was accused by the teenagers. The decision clarified a law that permits victims of child abuse older than 26 to sue a molester's employer or organization if they can show the employer "knew or had reason to know or was otherwise on notice" of any sexual misconduct by the employee or volunteer. Without such evidence, a victim older than 26 is barred from suing by legal time limits.

And what does this have to do with the Masons?

[JBoy]

Brain Dead !!!!