# Widows Son MC belt bbelt buckle



## jvarnell (Feb 24, 2014)

I was given a Widows Son MC  Belt buckle by a brother from another State (Not Texas) and was wondering what y'all thought about the Texas edict of the Widows Son MC and me wairing that belt buckle.  I have been having trouble everysince I was a EA about Mosnic Brotherhood and that edict.  When I ride in other states I see patched members of the Widows Son MC.  Here in Texas I don't ever see patches for the FMRC.

Should I ware the Widows Son MC belt buckle when I am in Texas?


----------



## jvarnell (Feb 24, 2014)

I guess I sturded on the title.


----------



## Bill Lins (Feb 24, 2014)

I wouldn't. Remember the first clause of your MM obligation.


----------



## jvarnell (Feb 25, 2014)

(Be identified with, the organization known as "Widows Sons Masonic Motorcycle Riders Association" )

QUOTE=Bill_Lins77488;124796]I wouldn't. Remember the first clause of your MM obligation.[/QUOTE]

The clause above is the part that I am splitting hairs with.  I am not sure that would identify me as a part of that org. If I ware my duerag that has jack dainels on it am I a part of that org.  I would not be bring this up because the friend that gave me that belt buckle keeps asking w hy I don't ware it.  Should I give it back and mybe cause a problem with a masonic brother from kansas?  This a problem for me.  I am not going to belong to this group but a belt buckle that doesn't even have the name on it.  Will that identify me with them or is it just a cool belt buckle.  This is really bothering me and has been for sometime.


----------



## Mike Martin (Feb 25, 2014)

Why would you want to be wearing the "colours" of a bike group with which you are not affilliated?


----------



## Brother JC (Feb 25, 2014)

Tell your friend the truth; you aren't a member of the club, you aren't allowed to become a member, and you rather not risk your standing in lodge by wearing it.
As for your "do-rag," do you drink Jack? That's what people assume when they see it, not that you work there.


----------



## dfreybur (Feb 25, 2014)

jvarnell said:


> I was given a Widows Son MC  Belt buckle by a brother from another State (Not Texas) and was wondering what y'all thought about the Texas edict of the Widows Son MC



I think the vote went against for reasons not related to Masonry.  I think the ruling was a load of nonsense.



> and me wairing that belt buckle.



I may disagree with some rulings but I'm not disobedient about them.  I'd rather work towards reversing a ruling I disagree with than openly defy that ruling.  (If the ruling in question motivates me to action.  Not all points of principle are worth fighting.)

Isn't there another Masonic riding club that is authorized?  A gift exchanged is better than either a gift given or a gift received.  I suggest buying two buckles of the Texas authorized club.  Wear one and give one to your friend.  Then put his gift on your shelf of Masonic memorabilia.  Show your friend a picture of your memorabilia shelf with the buckle on it.  That way it has a place of honor with you but is not openly worn.

I have glasses from several Table Lodge events over the years on my memorabilia shelf.  Same concept during this year.


----------



## jvarnell (Feb 25, 2014)

Mike Martin said:


> Why would you want to be wearing the "colours" of a bike group with which you are not affilliated?


It is not the colors it is a symble any of y'all would ware if it was not put together by the widows son mc.  They are excepted by masons of all states except texas.


----------



## jvarnell (Feb 25, 2014)

trysquare said:


> Tell your friend the truth; you aren't a member of the club, you aren't allowed to become a member, and you rather not risk your standing in lodge by wearing it.
> As for your "do-rag," do you drink Jack? That's what people assume when they see it, not that you work there.


 Yes that is what I have been doing for more than a year and all the time thinking how the words in that edict are on the level, plum or square with masonary?  It could have just stated this org. Is not reconized by the GLOT and not to sit in a lodge that was opened to do business as masons with them.


----------



## jvarnell (Feb 25, 2014)

dfreybur said:


> I think the vote went against for reasons not related to Masonry.  I think the ruling was a load of nonsense.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 I belong to the FMRC so I have done that but I want to ware a gift of a freemason brother from Kansas where the ws mc is recognized.   I the edict was just worded deferent I could have warn the belt buckle and and abided by it.  I see if I need to get it resended and a new edict put in place worded deferent.  I don't mind that it is not excepted to belong but I have to chose between a gift I can ware in other states by freemason that sit in lodges there.


----------



## Mike Martin (Feb 25, 2014)

jvarnell said:


> It is not the colors it is a symble any of y'all would ware if it was not put together by the widows son mc.  They are excepted by masons of all states except texas.


I beg to differ that is (at least) the design of the registered patch of the UK Chapter of Widow's Sons Masonic Riders' Association and I would expect that they took it from their parent Chapter in the US.

If you wanted to wear a Masonic buckle there are hundreds out there that are not linked to this particular group.


----------



## jvarnell (Feb 25, 2014)

Mike Martin said:


> I beg to differ that is (at least) the design of the registered patch of the UK Chapter of Widow's Sons Masonic Riders' Association and I would expect that they took it from their parent Chapter in the US.
> 
> If you wanted to wear a Masonic buckle there are hundreds out there that are not linked to this particular group.


Aus. Is deferent it is against the law to have a patch at all no mater if it was masonic or not.... NO MOTORCYCLE GROUPS AT ALL..........


----------



## jvarnell (Feb 25, 2014)

Mike Martin said:


> I beg to differ that is (at least) the design of the registered patch of the UK Chapter of Widow's Sons Masonic Riders' Association and I would expect that they took it from their parent Chapter in the US.
> 
> If you wanted to wear a Masonic buckle there are hundreds out there that are not linked to this particular group.


I have many other masonic belt buckles but it is not the buckle it is it was givn as a gift from one masonic brother to another and the brotherhood as a whole.


----------



## Mike Martin (Feb 25, 2014)

Fair enough, seems to be a storm in a T-cup to me.


----------



## scribe1384pm (Feb 26, 2014)

Get some grey or silver tape and put over "Widows Sons" and wear the buckle. Btw I think the edict is bs. Good looking buckle.


Sent From My Freemasonry Pro App


----------



## Companion Joe (Feb 26, 2014)

I know just enough about the Widows Sons situation in Texas to fall between ignorant and ill-informed. Would someone please enlighten me? From my perspective, unless the organization is meeting AS Masons (tiled meetings, degree work, etc.), it seems this is a case of a GM overstepping his bounds. What would be the difference in outlawing a fishing club that just happened to be Masons, all of whom were proud and put S&C stickers on their boats? If you aren't purporting to be a Masonic group, rather, just a group of like-minded individuals who all happen to be Masons, I don't see where a GL has such authority. What happens next, does someone get a burr under his saddle and threaten to expel members if they also happen to belong to the Moose or Elks?

I know there are some chapters of the Widows Sons in Tennessee, but none around here. There is another group, Three Degrees MC, which has a link on our GL web site.


----------



## eXillmatic (Feb 26, 2014)

Companion Joe said:


> I know just enough about the Widows Sons situation in Texas to fall between ignorant and ill-informed. Would someone please enlighten me? From my perspective, unless the organization is meeting AS Masons (tiled meetings, degree work, etc.), it seems this is a case of a GM overstepping his bounds. What would be the difference in outlawing a fishing club that just happened to be Masons, all of whom were proud and put S&C stickers on their boats? If you aren't purporting to be a Masonic group, rather, just a group of like-minded individuals who all happen to be Masons, I don't see where a GL has such authority. What happens next, does someone get a burr under his saddle and threaten to expel members if they also happen to belong to the Moose or Elks?
> 
> I know there are some chapters of the Widows Sons in Tennessee, but none around here. There is another group, Three Degrees MC, which has a link on our GL web site.



This is indeed a slippery slope, and akin to doing exactly what churches have done to Masonry in the past. A member should be judged on the merit of his own actions, not on the clubs/groups outside of blue lodge he is a member of. Unless it's seen in some way as a clandestine lodge or one promoting acts against the tenets of Freemasonry, I don't see how the GL of Texas can justify this kind of edict.


----------



## jvarnell (Feb 26, 2014)

I just lost all I typed I will try again.


----------



## jvarnell (Feb 26, 2014)

jvarnell said:


> I just lost all I typed I will try again.


The problem about the WS started when a disorgnized group petition the GLOT for reconiction. A Florida group has this as there back patch http://www.mastermason.com/lodge58/WidowsSons.htm which the GLOTsaw, but most patches look like this. http://www.widowssonskc.org/index.htm.  The GLOT did not like the optics of the Florida and reject the petition and wrote the edict.  They could have just rejected the petition I could have wore the belt buckle that a Kansas friend and brother gave me when I was raised a MM.  I have not wore that belt buckle for more than a year and a half because of the edict and decided that I wanted to enter into an open discussion about that.  In the previous post I showed my vest and were I added my square and compus patch and I will not change that no mater what org's I belong too.

The centerpatch I ware is a family emblem that is on some european tumbstones.


----------



## rfuller (Feb 26, 2014)

Here's the exact wording of the edict:


> Texas Masons are not permitted to belong to, or be identified with, the organization known as â€œWidows Sons Masonic Motorcycle Riders Associationâ€ unless and until such organization is recognized by the Grand Lodge of Texas, and to do so constitutes a Masonic Disciplinary Violation. This Edict is effective immediately. Acts contrary to this edict will result in Masonic Disciplinary action against the violator.



I had to look it up because honestly I glossed over it.  I'm not a motorcycle kind of guy.  

So, all that being said, here's my 2 cents: If this thread is a simple question of whether or not you should wear it in Texas, then the answer would be "Not right now, under current edicts."  If this thread is a debate of the edict, then, from what I've read, it's dumb edict.  Given, I wasn't there for the discussion, but if they really did have a problem with it because of a patch in Florida, then I think they made the wrong decision.  

I think there are a few places where the grand lodge could stand to look at things with fresh eyes (like outlawing a part of the wages of a Fellowcraft in our lodges, or our waiting for the MWPHGLoTx to make the change for visitation).  I think I would add this to the list of things that need to be reconsidered.  


I'm sorry you are in this position.  I understand that buckle carries a great deal of meaning for you, and I hope you are able to freely wear it one day.  To echo what Bro. Freyburger said,  I think the best way to go about making that happen is to make a change at the Grand Lodge.


----------



## jvarnell (Feb 26, 2014)

rfuller said:


> Here's the exact wording of the edict:
> 
> 
> I had to look it up because honestly I glossed over it.  I'm not a motorcycle kind of guy.
> ...



Thank you for the kind words and understanding why I brought it up again so the discussion could happen.  As someone that is 54 and only been a MM for a couple of years I don't ever want to go against any edict but I don't know how to go about asking for it to be rewriten to say that the WS are not a excepted org. in Texas and to be aware of the optice of all outward apperances even though it is not the outer but the internal.


----------



## jvarnell (Feb 26, 2014)

eXillmatic,
I really like your signature where did you get it and would I be violating copy rights it I had a patch made from it?


----------



## dfreybur (Feb 26, 2014)

rfuller said:


> Here's the exact wording of the edict ...



A question about this - Was it ratified by a vote from the floor during an Annual Communication?  Such questions of recognition usually do get voted on.  I've been present for many such votes the times I've attended GL in my other jurisdictions.  Widow's Sons was approved without discussion in Illinois during one of the years I attended there.

If it did not go to a vote on the floor, it's my understanding that a sitting GM can issue edicts and that those edicts are in effect during his tenure.  To become permanent they have to be ratified by a vote from the floor to be included in the rules.  It is not unusual for GMs to assert some or all of the edicts of their predecessors so there can be rolling edicts of a sort.

If the edict did go to the floor and it was approved should it still be called an edict?  It would be a part of the permanent record.


----------



## jvarnell (Feb 26, 2014)

dfreybur said:


> A question about this - Was it ratified by a vote from the floor during an Annual Communication?  Such questions of recognition usually do get voted on.  I've been present for many such votes the times I've attended GL in my other jurisdictions.  Widow's Sons was approved without discussion in Illinois during one of the years I attended there.
> 
> If it did not go to a vote on the floor, it's my understanding that a sitting GM can issue edicts and that those edicts are in effect during his tenure.  To become permanent they have to be ratified by a vote from the floor to be included in the rules.  It is not unusual for GMs to assert some or all of the edicts of their predecessors so there can be rolling edicts of a sort.
> 
> If the edict did go to the floor and it was approved should it still be called an edict?  It would be a part of the permanent record.



How  can I see if it went to the floor or which record of the GL should I look at.  Bill Lins how can I figure this out?


----------



## JD Price (Feb 26, 2014)

Quick response to this, 2007 a resolution was proposed to recognize WS it passed then a brother from the Houston area got and said he had voted for but now wanted to have it reexamined, he and  his group opposed the recogntion and proceed to outline his reasons (patch with Widow), they wanting the northern version of patch, the resolution was then voted down.  Later there was a WS chapter in East Texas who was still wearing patches etc so the GM then issued his edict prohibiting Texas masons from belonging or displaying any WS patches, pins etc. 
simple case of poltics some group not getting their way.


----------



## rfuller (Feb 26, 2014)

dfreybur said:


> A question about this - Was it ratified by a vote from the floor during an Annual Communication?  Such questions of recognition usually do get voted on.  I've been present for many such votes the times I've attended GL in my other jurisdictions.  Widow's Sons was approved without discussion in Illinois during one of the years I attended there.If it did not go to a vote on the floor, it's my understanding that a sitting GM can issue edicts and that those edicts are in effect during his tenure.  To become permanent they have to be ratified by a vote from the floor to be included in the rules.  It is not unusual for GMs to assert some or all of the edicts of their predecessors so there can be rolling edicts of a sort.If the edict did go to the floor and it was approved should it still be called an edict?  It would be a part of the permanent record.


JD already gave a better explination, but I wanted to include the full text of the edict as well:





> January 6, 2011
> 
> To the Masons of Texas:
> 
> ...


----------



## jvarnell (Feb 26, 2014)

rfuller said:


> JD already gave a better explination, but I wanted to include the full text of the edict as well:


 So there was a vote to reconize that did not pass.  So they are not cernoized.  But the edict only only stands for that GL term?  This is like when in cort no real defined T&C's.


----------



## jvarnell (Feb 26, 2014)

As I research this I see the GM edict like the rules of congress they only stand tilla new GM term?  SO since that edict was in 2007 and no new edicts have been isued is it not in effect anymore?  The edict is the only thing keeping someone from waring that belt buckle is what I am hearing and if the the words "identified with" are left out of the edict someone could ware that buckle.


----------



## Bill Lins (Feb 26, 2014)

OK- time for some facts. As stated above, in 2007 a resolution was proposed for GLoTX to recognize the Widows' Sons MC as an organization to which Texas Masons could belong.

_*The Grand Lodge of Texas, A.F.& A.M., can and does, as do most other regular Grand Lodges, regulate organizations in their jurisdiction which require their members to be Masons.*_ 

*Art. 225a. Other Organizations, predicating membership **on Masonic membership, recognized.* 
_In addition to those organizations recognized in Art. 225, next above, as being entitled to use Lodgerooms and Anterooms of Subordinate Lodges, the __Grand Lodge of Texas may recognize and authorize other organizations which predicate membership on Masonic membership._
_Recognition and authorization must take place by approval of the Grand Lodge in Grand Communication._

Read the above again, Brethren- Grand Lodge, meaning those of us who meet in Grand Annual Commmunication, consider the proposed resolutions, & vote on them, decide whether or not to recognize such organizations.

In 2007, we heard the resolution & the ensuing discussion and voted in favor of recognition. A Brother subsequently moved reconsideration of the matter, which, while unusual, is properly allowable under GLoTX law. After hearing additional discussion, we reversed our vote.

In 2011 the then Grand Master, having heard that some Brethren had joined the WS _*in violation of Art. 225a*_, issued his edict reminding those Brethren that WS was not recognized and that they, thus, could not belong to it. Whether or not one agrees with the fact that the members had refused recognition to the WS, the Grand Master's issuance of the edict was totally & entirely proper.

At the 2011 Grand Annual Communication, the edict was submitted to us for ratification, and received such. At that point it became GL law and remains in effect until such time as _*WE*_ decide otherwise. 

If one wishes for WS to become recognized by GLoTX, he will have to write a resolution proposing such, have it sponsored by either a Past Master or a Texas Lodge, and submit it to the Grand Secretary by May 15th. If the resolution is in proper form & timely submitted, _*WE*_ will consider it in December.


----------



## crono782 (Feb 26, 2014)

Sounds about right. GM edicts normally "expire" at the end of the year unless submitted to be ratified then, yes?


----------



## rfuller (Feb 26, 2014)

Bill_Lins77488 said:


> OK- time for some facts. As stated above, in 2007 a resolution was proposed for GLoTX to recognize the Widows' Sons MC as an organization to which Texas Masons could belong.
> 
> _*The Grand Lodge of Texas, A.F.& A.M., can and does, as do most other regular Grand Lodges, regulate organizations in their jurisdiction which require their members to be Masons.*_
> 
> ...



Couple of questions for clarification.  

Where you there in 2007 for the discussion?

Follow up, if you were, do you remember the discussion?  

I'm purely curious.  I could honestly care less if the WS are recognized or not, but I'm just wondering how things happened and what the rationale was.  

Another question, are votes at grand lodge typically very one sided, or are there issues where the lodge is pretty evenly divided?  

I'd like to point out, this is absolutely curiosity, and I'm genuinely wondering how grand lodge works.  For what it's worth, I'm in the middle of the L.I.F.E. program, so right now all I've got to go on is what I've heard our lodge reps mention briefly in passing, and what little I've read in the L.I.F.E. book.


----------



## rfuller (Feb 26, 2014)

One other question: As you read the edict, was I correct in concluding that wearing the belt buckle in question would be in violation, or is it more a matter of membership, and less about things like wearing a gifted belt buckle?


----------



## Bill Lins (Feb 26, 2014)

crono782 said:


> Sounds about right. GM edicts normally "expire" at the end of the year unless submitted to be ratified then, yes?


Correct. Unless approved by the "Grand West", they expire @ the end of that GM's term.


----------



## Bill Lins (Feb 26, 2014)

rfuller said:


> Couple of questions for clarification.
> 
> Where you there in 2007 for the discussion?
> 
> ...



Yes- I was there, originally voted for and, upon reconsideration, voted against recognition. The primary issue brought up during reconsideration was the "merry widow" patch shown to us. We did not feel that it presented a proper image of Masonry.




rfuller said:


> Another question, are votes at grand lodge typically very one sided, or are there issues where the lodge is pretty evenly divided?



Depends on the question. Some issues fly through with hardly any discussion, while some are extremely contentious and are so close that a written ballot must be taken to determine the outcome. It's funny, but many times an issue that doesn't seem contentious becomes such, while issues one would think would be turn out not to be.



rfuller said:


> I'd like to point out, this is absolutely curiosity, and I'm genuinely wondering how grand lodge works.  For what it's worth, I'm in the middle of the L.I.F.E. program, so right now all I've got to go on is what I've heard our lodge reps mention briefly in passing, and what little I've read in the L.I.F.E. book.



I've attended GL for the past 12 years, & I'M still trying to figure out how it works!  :wink:


----------



## rfuller (Feb 26, 2014)

Bill_Lins77488 said:


> I've attended GL for the past 12 years, & I'M still trying to figure out how it works!  :wink:


Haha.  Okay.  Well, I've been trying to wrap my head around it all, and trying to be more informed.  I just keep running into dead ends.  Thanks for your responses.


----------



## dfreybur (Feb 26, 2014)

On wearing the belt buckle the words that catch my attention are "or to be identified with".  I would display the buckle at home not wear it.

I don't know how open it is to interpretation to wear such a buckle.  Think of wearing a PM ring - Earn it then wear it.  As a non-member I would not be interested in pushing the boundaries.  On the other hand I was a Shriner in Illinois well before Arkansas pulled Shrine recognition.  Were I in Arkansas I'd be tempted to push the boundaries.  Noting that in both cases I disagree with the ruling and also acknowledge the authority of the body granting the ruling.



rfuller said:


> Another question, are votes at grand lodge typically very one sided, or are there issues where the lodge is pretty evenly divided?
> 
> I'd like to point out, this is absolutely curiosity, and I'm genuinely wondering how grand lodge works.  For what it's worth, I'm in the middle of the L.I.F.E. program, so right now all I've got to go on is what I've heard our lodge reps mention briefly in passing, and what little I've read in the L.I.F.E. book.



Most communications are open to Master Masons so I encourage you to ask your lodge secretary how to get credentials to attend in December.  Any December you can get time to go not just the years you're JW/SW/MW in the line.  Attending GL is a wonderful experience.  One brother who I walked around in his third degree attended Illinois GL roughly two months later and he loved going.

As to votes, I've seen them fall in a range.  Most years most votes are obvious but it seems like most years there is at least one that needs a counted vote.  Also different types of votes need different ratios to pass.  You'll want to read the law book before going to get an idea of what types need a majority or what degree of super-majority.


----------



## jvarnell (Feb 26, 2014)

I guess I just need to put the buckle up for now and figure out how to get toware it later.  I really don't care if they are in Texas or not it is just the way that edict seem to go against meeting on the level.


----------



## Brother JC (Feb 26, 2014)

It sounds like a group of like-minded riders need to submit a completely new petition for recognition (with the appropriate patch design) soon. Show GL that you're "MMs first," and that you will be of value to Texas Masonry.


----------



## brother josh (Feb 27, 2014)

I would keep the buckle it was a gift either way cherish the gift and in time I'm sure tge edict will change when u have reasonable men meeting on the level eventually ignorance is defeated it might just take a little time


Sent From My Freemasonry Pro App


----------



## jvarnell (Feb 27, 2014)

It is hard to gather as like minded riders as to discuss the WS petition because the edict is writen so that can't happen.  Just like with the belt buckle it has unintended consequences in the way it was writen.  If we follow the rule of law the edict will have to be resended before we can have and get to gethers to discuss this.


----------



## Brother JC (Mar 2, 2014)

jvarnell said:


> It is hard to gather as like minded riders as to discuss the WS petition because the edict is writen so that can't happen.  Just like with the belt buckle it has unintended consequences in the way it was writen.  If we follow the rule of law the edict will have to be resended before we can have and get to gethers to discuss this.


I disagree. A discussion to draw up a petition for recognition isn't the same as "identifying with" an organization. You're talking about a subject in the privacy of your own home, not wearing the t-shirt to the pancake breakfast.


----------



## dfreybur (Mar 3, 2014)

brother josh said:


> ... in time I'm sure tge edict will change when u have reasonable men meeting on the level eventually ignorance is defeated it might just take a little time ...



If the brethren wait on the leadership to make the change it will never happen.  Once it has been ratified it became a part of the rules they work to uphold.

As Trysquare posts it will take a group outside of leadership to submit the paperwork to bring the topic back up again.  As Texas is now the only problematic state there's a good chance recognition will pass this time around.  I don't have a clue what the odds are but if you don't succeed at first, try try again.


----------



## admarcus1 (Mar 3, 2014)

Texas is not the only state with an issue with the Widow's Sons.  Here is a text of an edict handed down from the Grand Master in Massachusetts in December:

"By its own rules, the Widows Sons Masonic Riders Association permits no 
Chapter to be formed in a Masonic jurisdiction without the consent of its 
local Grand Lodge. The Widows Sons Massachusetts Grand Chapter 
never requested or received the permission of the Grand Lodge of Masons 
in Massachusetts to operate in this jurisdiction.
Therefore, it is my edict that no member of the Grand Lodge of Masons in 
Massachusetts be a member of any Chapter of the Widows Sons Masonic 
Riders Association. Failure to comply with this edict shall subject the 
offending member to the disciplinary action of suspension or expulsion.
No one has been suspended as a result of this edict."

This is probably the sort of thing that could be rectified in the future, but it does seem like the issue was forseeable.  You gotta follow your own rules (assuming the Grand Master is correct, of course).


----------



## dfreybur (Mar 3, 2014)

Thanks for the response Bro admarcus1.  It sounds like Mass expected a request but didn't see one so they acted.  It's a variation on the theme.  To me it reads like an invitation to request recognition but I'm not sure how much of that is my own bias reading that into it.


----------



## jvarnell (Mar 3, 2014)

admarcus1 said:


> Texas is not the only state with an issue with the Widow's Sons.  Here is a text of an edict handed down from the Grand Master in Massachusetts in December:
> 
> "By its own rules, the Widows Sons Masonic Riders Association permits no
> Chapter to be formed in a Masonic jurisdiction without the consent of its
> ...



Are these edicts helping the the good of the futernity or hurting it.


----------



## admarcus1 (Mar 3, 2014)

I can't comment on the Texas instance because I am not familiar with it.  In the Massachusetts instance, assuming that the situation is as described in the edict, then the action taken was justified.  Whether it is good for the future of the fraternity or not depends on how you look at it.  As I understand it, the rules of Massachusetts Freemasonry hold that any organization that requires membership in the Craft needs to have the approval of the Grand Lodge.  Further, it appears that the Widow's Sons requires the same according to its own rules (if the edict is accurate).  If it is important to a) respect the legitimate authority, and b) follow the rules one has set for oneself, then it is necessary for the future of the fraternity to enforce those rules.  A Grand Lodge whose authority can be ignored is a Grand Lodge with no authority.  An organization that does not follow its own rules is unpredictable and is going to be hard to trust.

I am hoping that there was at least some attempt to resolve the situation amicably before this edict was proclaimed.  I find it heartening that no one was suspended as a result, and perhaps a resolution is in the works.  If there is anyone out there who has more information about this that he could properly share, I would be interested in hearing it.


----------



## RyanC (Mar 10, 2014)

First I would like to say I'm just a EA, so if I over step that a EA should be seen and not heard, sorry. Now for the record I ride a Harley Davidson Road King, I'm also a Police Officer and for many years was a member of the Blue Knights MC (I left the club due to family, lack of time, and for the most part preferred to ride alone), so I understand how people see a biker and make judgements by the look of them. I do agree that many people who ride motorcycles are good hard working people, and some of those people would make good mason. But I also agree that forming a MC or RC might not be what the image for Freemasonry that most GL are looking for, that begin said I think motorcycles and riding can be used to promote Freemasonry, but it would be better to due it at a local level. Get a group of guys for your lodge or several lodges, have shirts made up, S&C and lodge and number, you guys can meet on a Saturday or Sunday and just ride. More people will talk to you that way, and in doing so you can promote the Fraternity and your Lodge, you would be also enjoying the fellowship of brother from your Lodge.


----------



## jvarnell (Mar 10, 2014)

RyanC said:


> First I would like to say I'm just a EA, so if I over step that a EA should be seen and not heard, sorry. Now for the record I ride a Harley Davidson Road King, I'm also a Police Officer and for many years was a member of the Blue Knights MC (I left the club due to family, lack of time, and for the most part preferred to ride alone), so I understand how people see a biker and make judgements by the look of them. I do agree that many people who ride motorcycles are good hard working people, and some of those people would make good mason. But I also agree that forming a MC or RC might not be what the image for Freemasonry that most GL are looking for, that begin said I think motorcycles and riding can be used to promote Freemasonry, but it would be better to due it at a local level. Get a group of guys for your lodge or several lodges, have shirts made up, S&C and lodge and number, you guys can meet on a Saturday or Sunday and just ride. More people will talk to you that way, and in doing so you can promote the Fraternity and your Lodge, you would be also enjoying the fellowship of brother from your Lodge.


The problem is if a MC/RC have a MM requirments the GL of what ever state has to approve it.  A lot of states GL have approved the WS and others like Texas have approved the Freemason RC (FMRC).  The FMRC is not very active around me but I do have that Belt Buckle I can't ware.  I understand everything you have said and it almost caused me a problem to say the same when I was a EA only.  Here in Texas it might have been deferent if the GLoT had not seen the back Patch for the Florada's WS.  

I was at a Railly at Blues, Bikes and BBQ and meet a bunch of WS and road with them but did not sit in lodge with them before I was told about the edict.  I guess I could have sat in lodge with them if they did not ware there colors.  I ride a 09 Street glide and if you are in Texas I will ride with you as a brother and not a MC/RC.


----------



## dfreybur (Mar 11, 2014)

jvarnell said:


> Are these edicts helping the the good of the futernity or hurting it.



That's not a question that is easy to answer.  The answer tends to be a matter of individual opinion differing from brother to brother.

There is strength in diversity.  There is strength in unity.  Both true at the same time.  Being different from state to state allows experimentation that results in strength like forming riding clubs in the first place.  Being the same from state to state allows successful experiments to go into use across many jurisdictions.  Where to stand in that spectrum is far from obvious until the vast majority of states authorize an organization.  And then it becomes time to ask if too many appendent bodies are operating in the jurisdiction competing for the brethren's time.


----------



## Bro. Kenny Goodman (Sep 22, 2014)

Greetings Brethern... I am a 32 degree AFAM MM and a proud chaplain  in the Widows Sons Motorcycle Riders Association. We are recognized world wide and have charters all over the world that are recognized by the Grand Lodges of Most States. We do not wear patches that would be offensive and the one in Florida in no way represents the others in the rest of the nation. I have attended many  lodges in Texas that have welcomed me as a brother. I believe the Grand Lodge of Texas made this decision out of ignorance and should reconsider their edict based on facts not based on one state that has a patch that the rest of the charters disagree with. If any of the Texas Grand Lodge officers would care to educate themsleves on what the true spirit of the WSMRA is, please contact me at Branson4Christ@yahoo.com. 
Fraternally,
Re. Kenny Goodman


----------



## Glen Cook (Sep 22, 2014)

Bill_Lins77488 said:


> ...The primary issue brought up during reconsideration was the "merry widow" patch shown to us. We did not feel that it presented a proper image of Masonry.
> ...
> ...



This was one of the reasons I gave in 2008 for prohibiting the organization in Utah.  This representation of a woman was on the organization's main web page and still appears to be used in more than one state, as seen on the organization's website as of this date.  

Additionally, the organization's public website had a MIFL section.  Further, the proposed bylaws required rider vests be worn to Masonic funerals.  This did not seem to be the appropriate dress for a Masonic funeral and an appendant body does not dictate the requirements for a Masonic funeral.

Subsequently, the Craftsmen formed a local group.

I would just note that to publicly admonish a sister jurisdiction to change their decision and that the decision was made in ignorance is not the better way to obtain change, even if the decision was poorly made.


----------



## jvarnell (Sep 22, 2014)

Bro. Kenny Goodman said:


> Greetings Brethern... I am a 32 degree AFAM MM and a proud chaplain  in the Widows Sons Motorcycle Riders Association. We are recognized world wide and have charters all over the world that are recognized by the Grand Lodges of Most States. We do not wear patches that would be offensive and the one in Florida in no way represents the others in the rest of the nation. I have attended many  lodges in Texas that have welcomed me as a brother. I believe the Grand Lodge of Texas made this decision out of ignorance and should reconsider their edict based on facts not based on one state that has a patch that the rest of the charters disagree with. If any of the Texas Grand Lodge officers would care to educate themsleves on what the true spirit of the WSMRA is, please contact me at Branson4Christ@yahoo.com.
> Fraternally,
> Re. Kenny Goodman


 
 I was a FC learning the work when I went to Bikes Blue's and BBQ rally 2011 I think and met a bounch of widows son.  I came back to the Dallas area and asked about this group on this web page.  You can probly see the thread still but I think it was closed.  I was threatened by a couple of brothers to stop the questining or they would stop me from being raised.  I was also told if I was looking for a motorcycle group I sould join the shrine and become a motorcycle clown.  I droped it was raised and that was that until I recived the beltbuckel from a freind and brother.  I then started this thread.  I was hoping others in Texas would say something positive.  I am older than other MM my age and have been conterating on learning and working my way through the Line since.  It maybe become my cause again when I have made it through the line.  I have meet a couple of FMRC guys but that club doesn't give me the same feeling of brotherhod as the WS I meet in B, B and BBQ.


----------



## jvarnell (Sep 22, 2014)

Glen Cook said:


> This was one of the reasons I gave in 2008 for prohibiting the organization in Utah.  This representation of a woman was on the organization's main web page and still appears to be used in more than one state, as seen on the organization's website as of this date.
> 
> Additionally, the organization's public website had a MIFL section.  Further, the proposed bylaws required rider vests be worn to Masonic funerals.  This did not seem to be the appropriate dress for a Masonic funeral and an appendant body does not dictate the requirements for a Masonic funeral.
> 
> ...


So urging change good for the brotherhood is only to be said in back rooms and allies.  It is always good to know what brothers object to so an org. can fix it instead of playing go fech a rock.  To fix it we need the discription of the rock you and others want.  If that image was gone would you.  The wearing of motorcycle atire to funerals comes from the Patriot Guard so should it say "when approprate" on the web site or did I just bring you a rock that was not the right one.


----------



## Warrior1256 (Sep 22, 2014)

Don't know if you should wear it or not but it is a cool buckle.


----------



## jvarnell (Sep 22, 2014)

Warrior1256 said:


> Don't know if you should wear it or not but it is a cool buckle.


I know I am not going too.


----------



## Glen Cook (Sep 22, 2014)

jvarnell said:


> So urging change good for the brotherhood is only to be said in back rooms and allies.  It is always good to know what brothers object to so an org. can fix it instead of playing go fech a rock.  To fix it we need the discription of the rock you and others want.  If that image was gone would you.  The wearing of motorcycle atire to funerals comes from the Patriot Guard so should it say "when approprate" on the web site or did I just bring you a rock that was not the right one.



I have tried to foster change.   Pictures disrespectful of women and vulgar web pages are not, in my mind, a change for good.  I do not like those rocks.

I gave specific reasons when declining permission for the organization. It was clear why I didn't like those rocks.  

I no longer have the role to approve organizations. We also now have another motorcycle organization. So, we found a similar rock.  

We are not the Patriot Guard.  We are Freemasons.  I don't have a problem with either one of those rocks, but we use different rocks for different purposes.  

I note that I am a member of the American Legion Riders.  So, I like the motorcycle rock fine.


----------



## Bro. Kenny Goodman (Sep 24, 2014)

First of all Brother Cook, my deepest apologies if anyone was offended when I said "ignorant". That is only a bad word if people choose to remain ignorant. Ignorant merely means lacking knowledge on a certain subject, it does not mean stupid or dumb. 

I have been to our web site and seen no such thing as far as the MILF  accusation... also I have read our bylaws and do not read anywhere that we wear our vests at funerals. Here in Missouri we wear the proper attire to a Masonic funeral.

Are you sure you are reading from the World wide organization or something someone sent you that they made up??? If it is truly there, please show me where it is so that I can address these at our local and State meetings as I would agree with you whole-heartedly  that these two actions do not constitute proper masonic ettiquette.

Thank you for educating and helping me.

Fraternally,

Rev. Kenny Goodman


----------



## Glen Cook (Sep 24, 2014)

Oh, I wasn't offended.  You were criticizing Texans.  I'm an Okie.  We view picking on Texans as a laudable past time (my oldest son is a Texan.  We just try not to talk about it )

After over 30 years at the bar and on the bench, I am fairly sure I have a grasp on the definitions of commonly used words. Certainly, there are some matters of which I am most ignorant  (I recently heard a counterfeit rare metals case, of which I knew nothing). However, I do know that publicly criticizing, and using any form of the word ignorant, regarding another Grand Lodge is not the way to achieve change.

My note on the subject indicated the status of the website in 2008.  Yes, it was the national website. You appear to agree that the (inappropriate) representation of a woman is still on the website.

I quite accept that your bylaws do not have a provision regarding funeral attire. The bylaws I reviewed did. My experience as a past presiding officer,  chairman of jurisprudence,  and a member of a bylaws committee of three different international Masonic bodies is that the national body is responsible for the bylaws of its constituent groups. If it is not, this demonstrates another weakness. Really, though, that was not the greater issue.  Rather, it was the public vulgarity, lack of respect for women  and inappropriate representation of the fraternity.

Shall I volunteer my recommendation of how to achieve change? I would take senior members of the craft and approach the new grand master and other decision makers informally (this means you have to be knowledgeable as to who helps makes decisions in the jurisdiction). I would not attack the prior decision. I would explain how we have changed and the prior rationale is not applicable to the facts today, such as removing the offending forum section.  But of course, this can't be done yet, as the national organization still condones the use of the objectionable patch and publicly displays it's use on the website.


----------



## jvarnell (Oct 1, 2014)

Glen Cook said:


> I have tried to foster change.   Pictures disrespectful of women and vulgar web pages are not, in my mind, a change for good.  I do not like those rocks.
> 
> I gave specific reasons when declining permission for the organization. It was clear why I didn't like those rocks.
> 
> ...


The thing I beleive is that the GLoT should have just isued the edict that the pole dancing imblem is not appropate and shall not be worn and that the GLoT does not reconize the widows son is not reconized.  Then all the problem are averted without officaily reconizing the widows son.


----------



## MarkR (Oct 2, 2014)

jvarnell said:


> The thing I beleive is that the GLoT should have just isued the edict that the pole dancing imblem is not appropate and shall not be worn and that the GLoT does not reconize the widows son is not reconized.  Then all the problem are averted without officaily reconizing the widows son.


Grand Lodges usually exercise control over membership in any organization if membership in that organization requires Masonic membership.


----------



## square (Oct 2, 2014)

Forgive me if I'm misinformed but I was under the impression  that Massachusetts GL had a problem with  another MASONIC mc called stolen souls Masonic riding association,not the widow sons ,can anybody enlighten me on that? thank you


----------



## admarcus1 (Oct 2, 2014)

square said:


> Forgive me if I'm misinformed but I was under the impression  that Massachusetts GL had a problem with  another MASONIC mc called stolen souls Masonic riding association,not the widow sons ,can anybody enlighten me on that? thank you


The Massachusetts GL had a problem with the Widow's Sons.  The edict is from December 12th, 2013.  The key part of the edict follows:

"By its own rules, the Widows Sons Masonic Riders Association permits no
Chapter to be formed in a Masonic jurisdiction without the consent of its
local Grand Lodge. The Widows Sons Massachusetts Grand Chapter
never requested or received the permission of the Grand Lodge of Masons
in Massachusetts to operate in this jurisdiction.
Therefore, it is my edict that no member of the Grand Lodge of Masons in
Massachusetts be a member of any Chapter of the Widows Sons Masonic
Riders Association. Failure to comply with this edict shall subject the
offending member to the disciplinary action of suspension or expulsion.
No one has been suspended as a result of this edict."

Before that part, though, there is also the following text:

"Recent activities in connection with the 
Widows Sons Masonic Riders Association have underscored a divergence 
between the practices of their association and the principles and 
prerogatives of the Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of Masons in 
Massachusetts"

I have no idea exactly what this means, but it suggests to me that something else may have been going on that brought the MC to the GL's attention.


----------

