Roy Barnes and David Poythress are speaking out on a fight among some Atlanta-area Masons.
The suit, which was filed in DeKalb Superior Court, seeks a restraining order against the Grand Lodge of Georgia, whose Grand Master – the top official in Georgia – had referred to a Masonic “trial” the charges brought against Atlanta’s Gate City Lodge #2 by the heads of two other lodges for admitting a “non-white man” to the organization.
The suit contends there is no prohibition in the Masonic rules against the admission of a black man and that the charges spring from “racial animosity and hatred.” It also contends the Masonic “trial” was being rushed toward a “Star Chamber” proceeding in “bad faith,” and questioned why the case was even proceeding when the Grand Master, himself, had declared just a few months earlier that the black Mason “is a regular Mason and should be received as such.”
Among the remedies it seeks is an injunction prohibiting the Grand Lodge from proceeding with the original charges or “under any subterfuge whatsoever” that could result in expelling the lodge, its officers or members from the order.
Poythress, a Mason for more than a decade, told InsiderAdvantage Wednesday afternoon he spoke to the Grand Master after the charges hit the media. “He authorized me to say that he is preparing a public statement that will definitively eliminate the question about whether a person of any race can be a member of Masonry – they can.”
Poythress said he is certain that are some individual Masons in Georgia who are racially biased, but does not believe they represent the bulk of Masonic membership or the precepts of the organization.
“Are there individuals who have a 19th Century attitude? Of course, just like in church there are so-called Christians who have socially unacceptable ideas. But Masonry as an organization is far from it. Its principals are very much egalitarian,” Poythress said.
Barnes said in an e-mailed statement to Insider: “As stated by Grand Master Ed Jennings … there is no color or racial prohibition to be a member of the Masons. As he further noted, Mr. (Victor) Marshall was correctly admitted as a member of the Gate City Lodge. This is correct and I agree with it. I would not be a member of an organization that would exclude persons on the basis of race.”
Asked why he thought the Grand Master would first issue a declaration stating that Marshall was a “regular” Mason but then refer to a Masonic trial the charges attempting to assert that he wasn’t, Barnes, a lawyer, wrote: “I don’t know enough about Masonic law to be able to tell you whether it was correct. He may have had no choice. I simply don’t know.”
I find it odd that Barnes and Poythress would comment on this. Outside of the Masonic community would anyone know or care they were Masons? Why not just stay out of it all together?
{ 35 comments }
The whole concept of the masons is strange to me anyway.
No one would know that they were Masons (and like Morris, the concept in general is strange to me).
That said, you had better believe that their political enemies – Cannon and Baker come readily to mind, though certainly any enemy could do this – would be quick to point out that ‘[he] belongs to a club that won’t admit the black man’. No mention would be made of any details, but the charge would be pretty dang damaging and would require a lot of effort to battle.
Better to nip it in the bud before anyone can come along and make those accusations.
Spend 5 seconds on it now or 5 months on it a year from now… hmm… tough choice…
The headline of this post makes an interesting assumption – that only African American voters would care about a candidate being accused of racism. In the Democratic party, most voters of all races are against racism. Isn’t that true of your party as well, Buzz?
I have a problem with anyone who is a member of a secret society regardless of how egalitarian it is.
jkga,
Yawn.
“The preserved records of the Reichssicherheitshauptamt (the Reich Security Main Office) show the persecution of Freemasons. RSHA Amt VII (Written Records) was overseen by Professor Franz Six and was responsible for “ideological” tasks, by which was meant the creation of anti-Semitic and anti-Masonic propaganda. While the number is not accurately known, it is estimated that between 80,000 and 200,000 Freemasons were killed under the Nazi regime. Masonic concentration camp inmates were graded as political prisoners and wore an inverted red triangle.”
These Masons and their womens auxillary were just a few of the Christians that the Nazi concentrated.
http://www.princehall.org/history.html
For many years both Prince Hall [very integrated] and “mainstream” Grand Lodges have had integrated membership, though in some Southern states this has been policy but not practice!!!
Admit it Buzz, I nailed you.
Yep, you nailed me. Democrats = pure, holy warriors for truth. Republicans = evil, racist Nazis.
Buzz,
tsk tsk tsk.
The proper response was:
“Yeah, but I nailed your sister.
…and your mother.”
Oh come on Icarus! That shot at The Ox was well below the belt and you know it!
Wow, not sure which is worse. Secret cabalists or Margarita mixing Yacht Captians.
jkga wrote:
“In the Democratic party, most voters of all races are against racism”
In what Orwellian sense? The Democrat party is the party of racism. Democrats created Jim Crow laws. Democrats created, and fought to maintain, segregation. Democrats fought against the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act (it took Republicans to pass them). Democrats created the welfare state that has ravaged black Americans, destroyed black families, and kept a lot of black Americans in poverty and dependency for decades.. Democrats are the creators and maintainers of race-baiting, class-division politics. Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, etc. are prime examples of racism. You won’t find racism in the ranks of conservatives. Rockefeller Republicans maybe, but not conservatives.
I also find it interesting that, historically and in contemporary society, the white racist groups also tend to be socialist and fascist, just like the far left of the Democrat party.
FULL DISCLOSURE:
I’m a Grand Master of the Witchitaw Blumpkin Shizzle Ding Bat Society.
For those of you who don’t know, Grand Master is the lowest rank in the Witchitaw Blumpkin Shizzle Ding Bat Society, according to Wikipedia.
(I’m also the President.)
Sweet.
Pretty narrow society, these Ding Bats.
To answer your question, MSBassSinger, I’d say that most Democrats are against racism in exactly the sense that is relevant to this post – that they would find something offensive about a candidate being a member of an organization that excludes black people. I just thought it was interesting that, based on the headline he wrote, Buzz apparently assumes only black voters would care about that.
I’m amused that you’re calling opposition to the Voting Rights Act an indication of racism, as I’m pretty sure that would make Karen Handel a racist (by your standards, not mine!).
Since you clearly don’t get it, let me spell it out for you.
African-Americans are the most important voting block in the Democratic primary. Barnes, Poythress and everyone else who is seeking the Democratic nomination for Governor desperately want to get as large a chunk of that demographic as possible. Thus, Barnes and Poythress cannot afford to get tagged with being part of an organization that excludes African-Americans. It doesn’t matter whether or not the Masons are such an organization – it’s all about appearances. Clearly this is preemptive CYA as Barnes and Poythress cannot afford anything that might be used to question their loyalty to African-American issues. The loss of votes could come from African-Americans who take offense at the Masons’ behavior, or it could be white liberals laden with white guilt. Hence the title of my post.
I can’t help it if you twist the title’s meaning to trot out the ‘ole tried and true “All Republicans Are Racist Pigs Who Should Be Rounded Up And Sent To Re-Education Camps” meme. That’s obviously some sort of personal problem you need to deal with.
Of course this is about appearances and CYA – it’s politics, right? What have I said that makes you think I don’t get that?
“The loss of votes could come from African-Americans who take offense at the Masons’ behavior, or it could be white liberals laden with white guilt. Hence the title of my post.” You’re not making sense here – the title of your post refers to African-American votes, which in common usage would mean votes cast by African-Americans. But I’m glad to see that you agree with me that these accusations, left unanswered, would hurt these candidates with white Democratic voters as well.
Still, the fact that you specify that only white liberals would care about these accusations (again, if they weren’t answered and exposed as being non-issues – which I’m not arguing) suggests that you don’t think they would bother white conservative voters. Am I understanding you correctly? I don’t want to put words in your mouth, even though you haven’t afforded me that respect.
Having, decades ago, gone through two of the three rites of Masonry (which makes me 2/3 Mason) I verbaled WHOA several times while reading this. Some of you ‘outsiders’ may not know it, but this is the “Ft. Sumter” first shot between the older (over 75) and younger (over 30) Blue Lodge Bro’s over tussles regarding the ‘color issue’.
They start letting the Brothers in, I may have to take that third degree.
They start letting the Brothers in, I may have to take that third degree.
Why?
I’ve had an interest in Masonry for years… my experience with a collegiate fraternal organization was very helpful during my younger developing years, and I’d like to find something like that as an adult. However, I’ve balked at pursuing it seriously because of the image (in the South at least) that it’s a segregated organization of older racists. If times are changing, my interest might pick back up.
jkga,
Take things in perspective. Opposition to the Voting Rights Act and Civil Rights Act in the mid 60s was purely due to racism, and at least in part (without justifying it) to the societal memory of Northern carpetbagger racists abusing black voting during Reconstruction. Opposition to renewing the Voting Rights Act today is just common sense – it is not needed, and represses the voting rights of all. The impediments to a person voting because of color are no longer there, not systemically, or in any other way.
You wrote: “that they would find something offensive about a candidate being a member of an organization that excludes black people”
But most liberal Democrats and many Rockefeller Republicans would be fine with a candidate that belongs to an organization that excludes white people, men, or Christians – especially Christian white males. Racism and sexism cuts both ways.
To be honest, racism will no longer be an issue in this country when people of all colors realize that 1) we have no reason the feel guilty for, or to hate others because of, what happened decades and centuries ago to others, and 2) most of what people label racism today isn’t really racism, but a clash of cultures (and their inherent mores) – the expected outcome of multiculturalism. White people – North and South – learned from the 60s to put away racial hatred and to judge a person based on that person’s character – a very conservative, Biblical concept. When the segment of blacks and Latinos who are also racists learn to do the same thing, and stop playing the race card, this nation will be so much better for it.
I understand the historical context – I admit that the Karen Handel comment was just a cheap shot. Of course, if we’re going to talk about historical context, it is just as much a cheap shot for you to call out the Democratic Party of today as being racist for its Southern wing’s behavior in the 1960′s, when so many of those politicians left the party shortly thereafter.
“White people – North and South – learned from the 60s to put away racial hatred and to judge a person based on that person’s character.” That may be true of most white people, but it sure as heck isn’t true of all of them. You do realize that there towns in this state where high school proms are segregated, right? The ones organizing the exclusive proms are the white parents – and a lot of them were born after the 60′s.
jkga:
They are segregated by choice in those towns, not by government mandate. MONUMENTAL difference.
Individuals have the right to free association – and if that means a group of people choose not to associate with another group pf people for whatever reason, so be it.
Jeff-
1) I was replying to MSBassSinger’s comments saying that white people weren’t racist anymore after the 1960′s, giving an example to suggest that he should open his eyes a bit.
2) They are segregated by the *white parents’* choice. According the the NYT, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/24/magazine/24prom-t.html :
“When the actor Morgan Freeman offered to pay for last year’s first-of-its-kind integrated prom at Charleston High School in Mississippi, his home state, the idea was quickly embraced by students — and rejected by a group of white parents, who held a competing “private” prom.”
and a similar situation is described in Montgomery County, Georgia. I find this appalling. I never said I thought it was illegal or unconstitutional; it just makes me sad that people are such jerks. And it goes to show there are plenty of white racists out there still, maybe not the majority everywhere any more, but enough to make it tough on minorities. A parent who is unwilling to even let their kid celebrate graduation with classmates of a different race for one night is obviously not going to be completely impartial and fair in their professional and business dealings with members of that race.
Back to my original, original point – most Democrats, I think, share a similar point of view on this to mine, and wouldn’t want to vote for a candidate who belongs to a group that discriminates based on race. I honestly don’t know whether most Republicans do as well, but nothing here on this thread has suggested to me that they do.
I could give you quite a few examples from Randolph County and other areas of majority-black areas being just as racist. That is something that happens ACROSS racial lines.
This just further shows the hypocrisy of the ‘tolerance’ movement, be it ideological, racial, gender, whatever. You exclude those with opposing views.
Me, I tend to embrace opposing views – the so-called ‘top of your lungs’ philosophy. Heck, I even brought in a contributing author over at SWGAPolitics.com that I tend to pretty vehemently disagree with, simply because he has a lot of time to devote to Lee County politics that I simply don’t have, and it is an area that I’ve wanted more coverage in for a few months now.
“This just further shows the hypocrisy of the ‘tolerance’ movement, be it ideological, racial, gender, whatever. You exclude those with opposing views.”
Or he may not have known about those scenarios.
Jeff, try to think about it this way – when people tend to worry about one kind of racism more than the other it’s not necessarily hypocrisy, but a rational response to where there are real problems in society.
Let’s consider some math. Assume 10% of all whites and black harbor prejudice against members of the other race. And to make the math easy, let’s imagine the population is 90% white, 10% black, and let’s imagine that people in positions of power to make decisions that can affect others’ lives (police officers, teachers, politicians, loan officers, employers, jurors) are also 90% white, 10% black – and 10% racist across the board. Now let’s ask the question – who bears the brunt of racism, blacks or whites?
Well, statistically then every time a black person has to apply for a job, loan, permit, college, etc., there’s a 9% chance that they’re gonna get an unfair disadvantage (and a 1% chance they’ll get an unfair advantage, dealing with racist blacks). For white people, there’s a 1% chance of being the object of racial hostility, and a 9% chance of getting racial preferences. So even if people of all colors are equally likely to be racist, it’s a serious problem for minorities, and not really much of a problem at all – in fact, on average it can be a bit of a boost, usually not recognized – for members of the majority.
Of course, this is oversimpified, and as you point out, when whites aren’t in the majority locally things can turn out differently. But, by and large, being a victim of racism is not going to be a significant, persistent factor in the life experience of many whites in the same way it is for most blacks.
So, I have no hesitation in saying that white-on-black racism is a much more serious problem socially than black-on-white racism, even if they are both equally wrong from an individual moral standpoint.
i may not know where the holy grail is, or which species of alien runs which lodge, but I do know quite a few African Americans who are masons. Are there a specific rite (I believe is the correct term there) of masonry which is whites only? Or does it depend on if the bigots run the lodge or not? Or am I just confused sheeple?
the whole mason thing is a little complicated, and frankly–kinda weird–just like there are a slew of “jewish country clubs” on long island founded by upwardly mobile jews that could not gain entry into the more waspy counterparts –there is a branch, rite, group, whatever–of mason “kindom hall” i believe that are mostly african american–i think there are very few overtly white only. or black only groups around these days–there are many predominately one or the other many born out of the exclusion of groups in the past who decided to form their own groups that now have a history and tradition of their own and of course many “unwritten rules” do still exist unfortunately –to get back to jkga’s point–i doubt most gop’s are interested in supporting members of truly overtly racist organizations (david dukes electoral success in la aside) but i imagine both sides have plenty of folks in groups that just by their nature are composed mostly of folks like themselves–and i don’t think it’s really that big a deal…
I guess they let Catholics in, but the Catholic church will not allow it’s members to be Masons. Like having an abortion or a divorse, it means immediate ex-communication.
And I mean excommunication is the literal since, being ineligble to take communion.
Baptists won’t kick you out for being a Mason, and many Protestants are Masons. However, most Protestant denominations, including Southern Baptists, are not too fond of its members being Masons. The secretiveness of the group is far too reminiscent of the Gnosticism that had its roots in the late 1st century, and grew more after the Apostolic period. Roman Catholicism, however, has different reasons (that I herein explain, but do not try to justify) based on a long history (since the early 1700s and the Inquisition) between Freemasonry and RC. The Knights of Columbus was founded to give Catholic men a corollary to the Masons.
That said, most Masons I know are good and decent men, and do a lot for their communities. They aren’t heretics. My dad was a Mason, and it disappointed him a little that neither my brother nor I would become Masons and wear his ring. But, for some of us who try to do our best to be more like the men that Scripture teaches us to be, secretive organizations like the Masons or Congress don’t feel right for us to choose for ourselves. For those that do enter Freemasonry, I certainly offer no judgment. That is for God alone to know and ultimately judge.
Comments on this entry are closed.