nipper Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 . . . and then of course we have the lady freemasons. Lady Freemasons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Fox Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Ladys of the lodge are less well known about than the men... but can call on their male buddies for help in situations.. It's all poo and stinks to high heaven.... I like Charles Flynns' remarks, and if he is reading this!! Happy New year to you and the family.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geo Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Being a member of a secret society that demands you pledge a sacred oath of allegiance to it, and it's members, seems to me to be rather like the maffia.. sounds like the catholic church to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Well Ned Stooge Geo as far as I am aware members of the Catholic Church don't join the church to dispense business favours to their Lodge Buddies. Nor do they keep membership a secret. I mean, what with all those robes and all, Mass every Sunday in a place of public worship and so on it would be rather difficult to hide membership of the Catholic Church wouldn't you say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Flynn Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Ladys of the lodge are less well known about than the men... but can call on their male buddies for help in situations.. It's all poo and stinks to high heaven.... I like Charles Flynns' remarks, and if he is reading this!! Happy New year to you and the family.. Red Fox, Thank you for remarks. Let's hope the New Year will be a good one for all who share our views and those MHK's who are prepared to do something about it. Happy New Year to you and your family. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Probably going to get flamed here, but ... How does being a member of some secret society really promote you or your ideals? If you are a complete dork, then surely, the secret society of which you are a member will recognise that and sideline you pretty quickly? It's a rhetorical question, in a way, because at school and at uni, there seemed to be people who were programmed to get involved and who you knew would 'just do well', whereas the rest of us just bumbled along and, in the real world, did equally well. Just a thought, but there are enthusiasts in life, who will always seem to have the upperhand, but perhaps not..? Unfortunately, most of us (if there were no laws of libel etc) could name a good number of people who were just 'bumbling along' in life and whose sudden, quite unexpected success came about, 'coincidentally,' shortly after joining a masonic lodge. I am not defending Freemasons, but just posing the question how much of the perceived advancement is to do with the innate qualities of the person or the helping hand of the lodge? There are ambitious people who join organisations because that's what you do if you want to have all the trappings of a particular status in life. It could be the local church, the Rotary Club or the Masons. Couple that ambition with a ruthless quality, which is often the case, and you will have someone who will climb to the top over others' heads, whether a mason or not. If the Freemasons didn't exist then the same people would use foul means or fair to achieve their objectives outside of an instituion or form one themselves. Having said that, membership of the Masons should be a declarable interest for politicians, purely because of the suspicion that the organisation is viewed with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Flynn Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 It is up to the people to ensure ruthless ambitious selfish individuals do not abuse our Society, our Government and our people. A declaration of all personal financial interests and the bodies with which they are associated should be made by all candidates. Let them make this declaration voluntarily or explain why not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 . . . . . and a declaration from others paid from the public purse, including Government Officials, Police, the Judiciary, etc There are ambitious people who join organisations because that's what you do if you want to have all the trappings of a particular status in life. It could be the local church, the Rotary Club or the Masons. Couple that ambition with a ruthless quality, which is often the case, and you will have someone who will climb to the top over others' heads, whether a mason or not A burning ambition to succeed by merit, hard work, and so-called networking has to be admired. But to 'succeed' or to 'win' by skulduggery, cloak and dagger tactics, and shitting over others not in your secret club is quite despicable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 . . . . . and a declaration from others paid from the public purse, including Government Officials, Police, the Judiciary, etc There are ambitious people who join organisations because that's what you do if you want to have all the trappings of a particular status in life. It could be the local church, the Rotary Club or the Masons. Couple that ambition with a ruthless quality, which is often the case, and you will have someone who will climb to the top over others' heads, whether a mason or not A burning ambition to succeed by merit, hard work, and so-called networking has to be admired. But to 'succeed' or to 'win' by skulduggery, cloak and dagger tactics, and shitting over others not in your secret club is quite despicable. Yes, but often there is a very fine line between burning ambition and skulduggery, and I don't think youwill ever readicate the latter. But a disclosure of that interest may make politicians and, as you say, others in public office, ensure that they conduct themselves properly knowling that they may be under scrutiny because of their memberhsip of some orgnaisiton. As for a voluntary disclosure req Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 . . . . . and a declaration from others paid from the public purse, including Government Officials, Police, the Judiciary, etc There are ambitious people who join organisations because that's what you do if you want to have all the trappings of a particular status in life. It could be the local church, the Rotary Club or the Masons. Couple that ambition with a ruthless quality, which is often the case, and you will have someone who will climb to the top over others' heads, whether a mason or not A burning ambition to succeed by merit, hard work, and so-called networking has to be admired. But to 'succeed' or to 'win' by skulduggery, cloak and dagger tactics, and shitting over others not in your secret club is quite despicable. Yes, but often there is a very fine line between burning ambition and skulduggery, and I don't think you will ever eradicate the latter. But a disclosure of that interest may make politicians and, as you say, others in public office, ensure that they conduct themselves properly knowing that their actions may be under scrutiny because of their membership of some orgnaisiton. As for a voluntary disclosure requiring reasons to be given for non-disclosure, I don't see how that would work. If you have to give reasons why you are not making a disclosure, then surely you might as well make the disclosure in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 Yes, but often there is a very fine line between burning ambition and skulduggery, and that line varies from very fine to about the breadth of Broadway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 We seem to have agreed that all candidates should be asked: 1. Who will you support for the post of Chief Minister? 2. Are you a memebr of the Freemasons, or any similar organisation'with secrets'? And then, as usual, we've got bogged down arguing the merits of them! How about a few more such as: Do you support the idea of a Tynwald that is wholly elected by the general public? Would you support the 'lighting' of the MEA fibre optic cable regardless of whether or not Manx Telecom objected to it? Would you vote 'for' or 'against' an all-island speed limit? And there surely ought to be many more! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 Some good questions there. As a rhetorical question to the candidates, I would like to ask them if they agree with testing "the sirens" 4 times a year for ever and ever. oh, and if they get a chance, would they be willing to go up to the person who organised this and call him a soft cretin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Flynn Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 We seem to have agreed that all candidates should be asked:1. Who will you support for the post of Chief Minister? 2. Are you a memebr of the Freemasons, or any similar organisation'with secrets'? And then, as usual, we've got bogged down arguing the merits of them! How about a few more such as: Do you support the idea of a Tynwald that is wholly elected by the general public? Would you support the 'lighting' of the MEA fibre optic cable regardless of whether or not Manx Telecom objected to it? Would you vote 'for' or 'against' an all-island speed limit? And there surely ought to be many more! Tynwald should be wholly elected although I would make an exception for the Bishop who I believe brings clarity of thought to many thorny issues. I certainly would not want to see him removed from the proceedings preferably retaining his vote at least for the time being. However in the last resort it is the people in a democracy who must decided. I would hope the MEA and MT could negotiate a succesful deal between them but if not E-commerce is so important to the Island the MEA should go it alone. I am against an all island speed limit but I want existing speed laws enforced as safety has to come first. As for someone being called a soft cretin - well why not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheesemonster2005 Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 Tynwald should be wholly elected although I would make an exception for the Bishop who I believe brings clarity of thought to many thorny issues. I certainly would not want to see him removed from the proceedings preferably retaining his vote at least for the time being. However in the last resort it is the people in a democracy who must decided. Isn't the Bishop a non-voting member? If he isn't then he certainly should be. A fully-elected Tynwald is the only possibility for a democratic government. The same applies with the UK parliament. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.