For more information, see:
"As there is no worse lie than a
truth misunderstood by those who hear it, so reasonable arguments, challenges to
magnanimity, and appeals to sympathy or justice, are folly when we are dealing with human
crocodiles and boa-constrictors."
Is Debate Possible ...???
...with someone who is so inflexible, whose ideas are so foreign, and who appears to be totally wrong?
Over the years, Masons have tried to engage in debates with those who believe Masonry is satanic, part of some huge conspiracy, or want to gain notoriety. The results are often less than satisfactory and the Mason may well come away feeling beaten -- not because his facts were wrong or his presentation weak but because he simply wasn't prepared for the range of seemingly ridiculous claims.
The same holds true for the anti-Masonic debate. There can be no argument that
yet we often feel the need to debate with those who would espouse those lies!
And Masons in these situations are always at a disadvantage. They'll be forthright and direct while their opponent will be practiced and smooth. The Mason will be a 'virgin' in this type of endeavor; his antagonist will have practiced this type of thing many, many times before. Whether it's 'witnessing' to Mormons or preaching the New World Order conspiracy, the Mason will consistently find himself at a disadvantage.
Instead of debating, this site encourages the following:
"Hatred, for the man who is not
engaged in it,
Just click on "Prince, the Search Dog" to find things on our site. He's here on every page and he'll take you directly to our search form where you can see if we've written about whatever it is you're interested in. Prince has a great memory; he always remembers where things are! We also encourage you to use our Site Map and Contents Page for a full overview of the many things you'll find here.
This site and its contents are © (copyright) 1998-2012 by Edward L. King (Ed King). All rights reserved. All comments and opinions are mine personally.
Got some thoughts or reactions?
We'd be interested in your comments - within reason of