Courtesy of The Telegraph
'Since 1998 those becoming judges or magistrates have been required to say if they are a Mason after the then Home Secretary – Mr Straw – said membership of "secret societies such as freemasonry" could raise suspicions of impartiality and objectivity (Err...Yep! You betcha! Like the Grand Lodge thinks this, so lets do this...).
But, now Justice Secretary, Mr Straw has abandoned the requirement after the United Grand Lodge of England threatened legal action following a ruling by the European Court of Human Rights (As the Masons would know, money talks!) In 2007, the court ruled in favour of Italian Masons that making an official declare their membership breached their rights to free association and was discriminatory.(This is the same European Court of Human Rights that's banning Crucifixes in Italian Schools...Uh-huh, it's all starting to add up now...).
Mr Straw yesterday said a review had shown no evidence of "impropriety or malpractice" as a result of a judge being a Freemason and that it would be "disproportionate" to continue with the practice. The move sparked a furious backlash in 1998 and attempts to make a similar requirement for police officers was dropped in favour of voluntary declarations (Is that because men kind of rise through the ranks of the police as they rise through the 'degrees' in the Scottish Rite?) John Hamill, spokesman for the United Grand Union, said: "We are very happy the right thing has been done at long last." (Yeah, I bet you are, mate! I can just hear nearly every High Court Judge wiping his brow and muttering, "Phew! Nice one Jack! You got me out of a fix there!")
Dum, de, dum, de, dum...So...What are all you Freemason judges and, I might add, police, afraid of?! Why all the secrecy guys? I mean, I thought, according to the modern CCTV surveillance society, ID cards, terror threat, global warming, swine flu pandemic state of fear, that we, the people, should not be afraid of being monitored or having our information on a gigantic database even though we haven't been convicted of a crime, because if we did, that we 'obviously something to hide.' Come on Masons, especially Masonic judges and police, MPs, Lords and media moguls...Don't be so coy!
'Discrimination!', they cry! 'Discrimination!!?' Try it in the Church for a while and get a job for a Local Authority wearing a Crucifix and expressing your Catholic views for a while, and we'll see whether you know the meaning of the word discrimination! How odd that the media didn't report this law change, made on a whim, without consulting Parliament, by Jack Straw, because he felt like it, a bit more...I haven't seen any comment or columnists socking it to the Masons. How odd!
Perhaps it is because the Masons, still, are just as Pope Leo XIII described them in Humanum Genus and still hold a pernicious influence in all of those high-ranking positions in Government, media and society.
6. For as soon as the constitution and the spirit of the masonic sect were clearly discovered by manifest signs of its actions, by the investigation of its causes, by publication of its laws, and of its rites and commentaries, with the addition often of the personal testimony of those who were in the secret, this apostolic see denounced the sect of the Freemasons, and publicly declared its constitution, as contrary to law and right, to be pernicious no less to Christiandom than to the State; and it forbade any one to enter the society, under the penalties which the Church is wont to inflict upon exceptionally guilty persons.
The sectaries, indignant at this, thinking to elude or to weaken the force of these decrees, partly by contempt of them, and partly by calumny, accused the sovereign Pontiffs who had passed them either of exceeding the bounds of moderation in their decrees or of decreeing what was not just. This was the manner in which they endeavoured to elude the authority and the weight of the apostolic constitutions of Clement XII and Benedict XIV, as well as of Pius VII and Pius IX.(10) Yet, in the very society itself, there were to be found men who unwillingly acknowledged that the Roman Pontiffs had acted within their right, according to the Catholic doctrine and discipline. The Pontiffs received the same assent, and in strong terms, from many princes and heads of governments, who made it their business either to delate the masonic society to the apostolic see, or of their own accord by special enactments to brand it as pernicious, as, for example, in Holland, Austria, Switzerland, Spain, Bavaria, Savoy, and other parts of Italy.