One of my favorite people, a friend of my dad's from the University of Tennessee (slightly older than my dad, did college a few years "behind schedule" I think because of the Korean war) is a high Mason. He and I have had some long talks about it, and I think I'd be interested, barring two factors, one of which is fatal and one of which might as well be:
1) The Higher Power stuff. I wonder (and in fact, was having a conversation with a fellow law student about this just a couple ofd days ago) whether this is winked-and-nodded at. After all, what does a (technical but not dogmatic) Atheist [EDIT: please read in here "or agnostic" -- Tim ] have to lose exactly in disingenuously claiming otherwise? For some, I could see it being a problem of conscience; for others, I could see them thinking of such a claim as something more like part of the pageantry of the world which they may find false or illusory, but nonetheless useful and perhaps even a moral neutral.
(If that sounds like I'm painting atheists either as anal-retentive prigs or cowardly liars, think of it this way: I suspect -- no, I *know* -- that a lot of Christians don't believe in transubstantiation, and yet consider themselves good Christians, and as far as I know, are perfectly devout and sincere.)
But, for me, I don't like it, and can't image being content to mouth such a belief knowing that I didn't truly hold it, UNLESS I was well convinced that the other members were content with that possibility; I would not want to disrespect their sincere belief therefore. That's the "fatal" one
(In speaking w/ my dad's friend, a truly accomplished, multitalented, erudite, honorable person -- the kind of person who would make an atheist even think about being in such an organization! -- I get the strong feeling that this view is appropriate; he knows and respects my thoughts on religion, and in his (very informative) description of Masonry has never hinted that a "wink and nudge" assertion of belief would suffice or be appropriate.)
2) The whole problem of group identities and loyalties. Maybe those who tell lodge secrets aren't really disemboweled at midnight with their entrails burned and scattered to the winds etc, but that's another thing I wouldn't want to either pledge to enforce or be subject to unless I was well convinced that it wasn't really going to happen. Swearing allegiance to a group of people fraternity style is troublesome; what if you find out that your lodge brother treats his wife badly, or cheats customers at his store? (I don't represent myself as knowing the scope of such obligations within Freemasonry, just speaking in general terms about group loyalties.)
There's ambiguity, I'll admit; there's also something attractive and (at least sometimes) noble about keeping secrets in common in pursuit of lofty goals -- whatever my thoughts on religion etc. Freemasonry was certainly an organizing force among the American founding fathers, and for that I feel grateful for its positive influence. (I bet it certainly colored the choice of a specific provision guaranteeing freedom of assembly.)
I'm curious, and have a question for any of you Masons out there: does your lodge have a shooting range either attached or used by so many members that it may as well be?
timothy