Paul1405,

Sorry if I misunderstood your meaning.

I had a grin when I read your post. From family members I know that the Freemasons don't discriminate, apart from it being a fraternal membership. So there would be gay members. Although I doubt they do anything with lights out.

The community service clubs I belong to are not much different. Freemasons, Rotary etc are men's sheds.

Paul1405,

Yes, there are failings within churches and within the laity also. But there are failings in the wider society. We are all human and failings are part of the human condition. No - I do not like concepts of hell-fire damnation. But obviously those that follow a religion accept this. - and perhaps not literally. Nothing is achieved by attempting to destroy a person's faith, which in so many cases is important to them and a great solace - unless you can provide something to replace it. Those who already have doubts will search for the answers.

As for Freemasons, the only thing I know about them is that they have a secret handshake and wear an apron at meetings. Do Freemasons ever come up on one's radar for any reason I imagined that in this day and age, that freemasonry provided a chance of networking.

Paul1405,

You ask me about papal announcements. These do not affect me at all. If their laity accept them, and many don't, eg. Birth control, that is their decision.

You mention busy-bodies in the religions. I don't think there are any more there than in other areas of society. Office politics can be extremely savage. Again, this doesn't affect me. If I was informed that I was destined for hell - I wouldn't take it on board, but be rather amused.

Incidentally, I had a religious upbringing, but rejected it and am not a Christian. This was my choice. Although I rejected Christianity, I respect others' rights to embrace it. One shouldn't throw the baby out with the bath-water.

Danielle, "I imagined that in this day and age, that freemasonry provided a chance of networking"

From close relatives I believe that such an expectation (of benefit) would not be tolerated at all. They have a high moral standard. It is I believe a way for men who accept responsibility and aspire to better moral conduct (take that in the broad) can meet similar men. When you think about it, the men's service clubs were all like that, men's 'sheds' as it were. Families are great, work is fair but never-ending - you need a break from it for a couple of hours a month, for sanity and a breather with other men.

Where else could like-minded family men, good citizens, meet? There was only the pub, a poor alternative if you were a responsible guy and you didn't want to 'pee the family's income up against a wall' or gamble to lose it even faster.

Beach, I have no problem with civic organizations as you call 'men's clubs' Rotary, Lions Club, the CWA. I would prefer if these organisations were all inclusive the CWA could welcome gays then they could become the CW and GA, in the end you end up with the alphabet club. On balance these restrictive clubs/organisations do far more good than harm, for that alone I see them as a positive in society.
Danielle, you might be missing my point a little. I to at one time believed that seeing the little old men and women, and others, going into the church and being lectured was basically okay, as it seems all very benign, besides as you say it gives them some comfort, even if its false comfort, and if they were not doing that what would they be doing? robbing banks, no.
To me like the civic orgs mentioned above, it comes down to balance, the good and the positives that organised religions contribute to society, and they do contribute such, as opposed to the bad and the negatives they also contribute. Churches do not limit their influence to only the adherents, although they are a most influenced group, they also wish to influence government decision making and the thinking of the broader community as well. They also act to limit the actions of people, if the mass is dissatisfied with their lot, the church rather that championing the people, placate them with false promise. As Karl Marx's famously said in full;
"Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. It is the opium of the people."
As I said it is a question of balance.

onthebeach,

Thank you for the information re Freemasons.

Russia provides evidence of what occurs when religion is banned. Instead of loosing its hold, it goes underground and appears to get stronger. This demonstrates that many have a need for some belief system. How would this be replaced?

Those who do not believe, should be a little gentle with those that do. This, of course, does not mean ignoring horrors, which should be condemned loudly, and exposed, such as child abuse.

This applies to all religions.

Many Islamic reformers blame Western priests of political correctness, who come to the support of Islamists, for slow progress in bringing about changes, which they perceive condemn their people to misery. They feel that with Western condemnation, changes would be introduced.

Religion does influence governments. We only have to look at the Western world to see that so many of our laws are based on Christian ethics. In time these laws evolve to reflect wider societal values.

But a recognition of the value of religion, whichever religion, in people's lives is important.