In conclustion it is the offence and not the word that should cause the black ball.
I have been watching this thread for a little bit now, and even tried to chime in once, but internet lost signal and wasn't able to post. What you said here was right along the lines of what I was thinking and trying to post the other day, so I figure I can try to paraphrase what I had on the screen before I lost it all. As a "disclaimer" of sorts, what I am about to say is not what I believe, promote, nor is it a suggestion. I seeing both sides of the fence and figured I would put something out as "food for thought". So, me saying this is just for stimulus of conversation, and not my stance on the felony issue. Lol, might take a min, but bear with me lol.
What if there was a committee appointed by the GLoT to research civilian laws and come up with something in particular to add to our Masonic laws regarding not just felonies, but crimes in general when it comes to admission and membership?
If our laws stated specific crimes instead of using the term "felony" or the whole "moral turptitude", how would everyone feel about that? The reason I thought about this, is because there have been several posts from Brothers who know someone that cannot become a member because he has been CONVICTED of a felony in their past. I fall into the same category of some that know a man or two that Masonry would benefit from, but our Fraternity will not ever benefit from what they have to offer because of the canvassing term "felony".
There have even been a couple of Brothers that have readily admitted on here that they have committed felony crimes and either didn't get caught, or because of legal counsel or some other factor, they were not convicted of the felony crime that they were charged with orginally. Charges get dismissed. Charges get lowered. While I do go with the current law that does not allow fellons into Texas Masonry, I do feel a bit bad for someone that maybe have been in the wrong place at the wrong time years and years ago, and is now totally prohibited from joining the Fraternity. And I do not mean the typical "wrong place at the wrong time" cry of being innocent that a lot of guilty parties tend to use, but I mean the fact that they did make a bad decision/choice and unfortunately were caught doing it. I do believe that the majority of us on here have broken laws, and I do imagine that there are a lot of Brothers on here that have actually committed a felony crime. Getting caught and charged for them is the difference.
The point to my thought is possibly having the GL laws state that
specific felony crimes prohibit membership into Masonry. Alongside that,
specific misdemeanors.... The Masonic laws can set a standard format of what is acceptable and not acceptable. Instead of just the word felony, and people looking for the word "conviction", and could eliminate a lot of confusion or disgruntledness from people that really believe their buddy would be great for Masonry AND "yea, it was a felony but it wasn't anything bad". For example, guy that is convicted of Manslaughter ten years ago cannot be admitted, but someone that was convicted twenty five years ago for Possession of a Controlled Substance can. Obviously, in the formation of the laws regarding all this, they can set certain criteria regarding the length of time after the conviction/debt to society was paid, and any other kind of factors. Basically, this could maybe prevent denying Masonry the good that can be contributed by the guy that happened to be 18 years old going to a party with friends and had some dope on him twenty-five years ago, while at the same time keeping one of those
real "high crimes" out.
The same can be done with misdemeanors. I mean, you have to admit that there are misdemeanor crimes that are just traumatizing or bad to the community or the victims. So, for an example of this, a man convicted a couple times of Assualt Causing Serious Bodily Injury cannot get in, but someone that plead no contest ten years ago to Theft By Check < $50 can. Sure, everyone has thier circumstances and what they believe happened. But having a set standard instead of a vague and all encompassing terminology could prevent some hard feelings down the road for some. Sure, it may take up an extra page or two in our law books, and it may take a committee a while to investigate things and get all the "legalise" worked out, but there are only a specific number of laws in the Texas Penal Code and it could get worked out.
Now, as for my stance... I think that guarding our gates and upholding the GL laws is important. At this time, I do think that it is better to prevent convicted felons from being admitted. Whether it is to protect the "image", security, or physical safety of the Fraternity and its members. Like I said, my above statements are just merely for discussion and it does not reflect my stance on this. I do feel bad for some men that did make a mistake in their past that prevents them from getting in (because I love this organization and what it has done for me, and I am a sally like that lol), but nobody in Masonry put them in the position to be charged, and subsequently, convicted of a felony.
So, I guess my question is this: If the GLoT (or any other GL for you Brothers that are lost and haven't found your way back to the best state in the Union yet lol) started working something like this to put into the law books, or it was finalized and done, how would you feel about it? Some of you speak pretty gung-ho on not letting in ANY felons. Would something like this help build a bridge between you and the Brothers that believe some men make mistakes and learn from their lessons? Like I said, just for conversation and not what I believe to be the right choice.