My religion teaches that God's plan involves creating and rearing families, and specifically forbids acts of homosexual intimacy. But then again, my religion also teaches that we should love our neighbor and not judge others.
It all depends on the man. I might be against admitting a flamboyantly gay man, just as I might be against admitting a flamboyant womanizer. Anyone who uses their own sexuality openly and without discretion deserves, at the very least, a second and maybe a third look.
Beyond that, I think that it would be wrong to deny a man the chance to stand on a level with his fellow sinners just because he sins differently than (apparently) 90% of them.
Point(s) of Interest:
(I by no means are supporting or condoning your post here, simply a reference of subjects)
1) You have made a very valid point here, "your religion". Masonry is not a single religion, nor does it specify one religion being superior over another. Therefore, what is good for you may or may not be good for me. Until such religious definitions are made... well, you see where I am going with this. Also such a declaration would kill the fraternity as it sits today, it would not be as successful or enduring.
2) The fraternity does not specifically inquire as to the sexual nature of its petitioners, nor odes it specifically ban them from petitioning via bylaws. Therefore, until such legislation is passed, it apparently has no "play" in the assessment of a man's "sound mind and body" nor does it affect his "good report" IF he was truly and properly vouched for by worthy Brothers who SHOULD know the petitioner.
Last edited: