Tough Questions

In spite of how I may present at times, I don’t have all the answers. Then there’s the questions that can only be answered by each individual personally, because the answers are something that you must decide for yourself, after consulting with your faith, or lack thereof.

Pull up a seat, dinner tonight is yet to be determined, we’ll go through the freezer and see what sounds good. You know where the drinks are, grab something, and please don’t forget the tip jar where we collect for the mess.

What started this exploration was something that a brother asked in a blog for Masons, that asks, in somewhat different words, “What do we, as Masons, do if we see one of our brothers losing his grasp on reality?”

Well, I want to expand on that a little. What do we do, as friends, shipmates, brothers, or family, if we see someone “losing the bubble”?

It’s an especially tough question for Masons, because we take an oath not to share things told in confidence, “murder and treason excepted.” Beyond that though, those things shared with you in confidence, even if you and the confident do not share the bond of Masonry are things that are by definition, confidential.

If you have any honor at all, at least as I define that word, you don’t share things that someone said, without permission, or at least you make sure to remove any identifying data, if you’re sharing it with people that were not part of the discussion.

My reply to the brother was:

“That’s an incredibly tough call. On the one hand, many of us are wise enough to recognize that “he’s losing it” or “there’s something not right here” On the other hand, almost none of us are trained professionals at dealing with that sort of thing. I can tell you as a former cop, that I would almost rather deal with a DV (Domestic Violence, every cops least favorite call) than with a “10-28” the name we use, because we aren’t allowed to use “Psycho” or “Nut job” and they even frown on EDP (Emotionally Disturbed Person).

We took vows of secrecy, “Murder and treason excepted.” Does calling a medical professional/ calling a crisis line or such on a brother that we think is going over the deep end violate that vow? If it doesn’t, why not? If it does, and we choose not to call professional help for a brother that we can’t get to find help on his own, what do we say, and what spiritual liability do we have if he then goes out and commits violence on himself or others?

If the brother is an older and respected member, probably a past master, maybe even a grand lodge officer, we’re most likely going to give him a pass on things that would not get a pass if he were a first year or even fifth year MM.

Is that right?

It’s understandable, but is it RIGHT?

I think it comes down to: What duty do we owe to a brother? Does that duty include doing things we think are in that brother’s best interest, even if he does not agree? Who, and by what moral yardstick do we decide?”

Now let’s expand that from the specific to the general. I have a very libertarian (small L) viewpoint. That includes things like as a competent adult, you have the right to go to hell in your own way. This includes self-destructive behavior. Basically, if it doesn’t harm other people, have at it, harming yourself is stupid, but hey, it’s your life. If you harm others, well, we have a problem.

Ah, but there’s a mealymouthed word there: “Competent.”

Who gets to define what “Competent” means? Now for purposes of this discussion, I’m going to ignore those folks with a “duty to report.” You know who you are, and what your requirements under the law are, we’re not talking about those cases. I’m also not talking about anyone reading this with a degree in psychology or psychiatry. Yes, you obviously have a full working definition of “competent” and are qualified to make that call.

What we are talking about is where does “Caring for my fellow man” or “the Community Caretaker” column stop for Joe Citizen, and “Karen, who can’t mind her own damn business” start?

At what point does your opinion of someone’s actions, words, or behavior justify the breach of trust required to report behavior to “the authorities?”

Is it different for different people? Does someone that you’ve known for decades get a pass that you wouldn’t give to someone you’ve only known for a couple months? Why, or why not?

This is an open question; I don’t pretend to have the answers for it. I have MY answer, but it’s frustratingly incomplete, and there are a lot of “well it depends” statements in it. Whether you feel like sharing it here or not, it’s a question you should ask yourself and come up with a good answer, as part of being a mature adult.

On an only slightly related note, it seems that the fact that we originally only had rescued one of the two officers in that F 15 strike eagle was leaked, along with his last known location, by someone in the US Government, to the Iranian Quds Forces.

Well, let’s see: the US constitution Article three, section three defines Treason

Clause 1 Meaning

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

Is there any dispute that what we have here fits that definition?

Then we have the Crown of the UK. Now someone correct me, if I’m wrong, but I believe that “Defender of the faith” and titular head of the Church of England is still part of the title for the king or queen of the United Kingdom. Yet King Charles issued a Ramadan message, during that holiday, and refused to issue an Easter message during that holiday… Not my king, and not my faith, but DAMN. I’m pretty sure we could power all of formerly great Britian by hooking generators up to the deceased crowned heads of England.

My old friend who writes under the name of OldNFO came up with an “interesting” observation, THIS... It seems that Homeland Secretary Mullin has thrown on the table the possibility of pulling CPB and Customs Officers out of the airports in Sanctuary Cities, citing lack of cooperation and refusal of funding.

By itself that doesn’t sound that bad… until you consider that no Customs means No international flights in or out from that “Port of Entry.” Consider for just a few seconds, how much of a cluster fuck for the cities, states, and finances involved there would be if no international flights in and out of LAX, Seatac, O’Hare, Kennedy, Laguardia, Boston, Midway, Philly, and SFO was a reality.

CDR Sal put up a nice piece on Trump’s speech last week, -we-had-president-trump-give-a It’s a nice summation of the “Punitive Expedition” fan’s take on the war to date, and where we go from here.

Now in addition, I would like to say that all the folks with international law degrees from Facebook University are stoned. No, bombing bridges, dams, and power generation equipment is not a “War Crime.” Oh someone can charge it as one, but much like civil suits, you can charge anything… Getting it to stick? Well that’s something else. You could charge Trump with war crimes for farting. (Use of Toxic gas on noncombatants is a war crime) Good luck enforcing it though. What does the strike that will fall on Iran, if they miss the deadline to negotiate and open the straits look like?

Well by the time you read this, we’ll probably know. One thing I will bet on, it’s not going to look like what Obama, or Biden or even Bush did. Trump is far less interested in threats and half measures, based on behavior to date. I suspect that by the time this hits your computer, there’s going to be a lot of physical changes to the landscape of Iran.

Artemis II’s urine collection toilet apparently froze up again on the dark side of the moon… this is the third time the thing has had issues. Still, this is why you fly test flights. Nothing can test things like “will my urinal be able to flush in zero G and total shade?” except going out and trying it. I suspect the fix will be as simple as a heating wire, and it’s not as big of an issue as the press is making it. Vessels have failures during sea trials; it’s why you do sea trials.

Well, that’s all I’ve got for this week, take care and I will see you next week.

QOTD “It is our duty still to endeavor to avoid war; but if it shall actually take place, no matter by whom brought on, we must defend ourselves. If our house be on fire, without inquiring whether it was fired from within or without, we must try to extinguish it.

Thomas Jefferson

Yours in Service,

William Lehman