I mean, taking someone to court is just another way of saying "I hate you and you are a criminal". It's hard to imagine a more efficient way to insult someone than taking him to court.
Are you seriously saying that contract disputes in Sweden don't end up in court when negotiations break down? Here you have one organization exercising its perogative to choose its members, and its parent organisation saying, no, you can't admit this specific person because he's black, and we're going to punish you. Talks went nowhere, so it's in court.
If I start a private club, I have the right to deny admittance to anyone I feel like, no matter their race, colour or creed. Just because it's my club.
The question is, if you say that anybody meeting a certain set of criteria can apply to join, can those criteria include things like race, gender, creed, or orientation? In America, as I said things seem to be a bit muddied on this issue. Personally I think that other than political or religious groups, the answer should be no.
Why does this army reservist want to be in a club that doesn't want him because they're a bunch of racists? Does he think it'll be fun to be in that club, especially after he's taken them to court?
I take it you're a member of the traditionally dominant racial/gender group in your country? Pace JD, such 'private' clubs have always been a nexus for networking and dealmaking. This is true whether we're talking golf, Masons, or cigars. (If you think all those junior white collar types at the corporate country club outing are there for the pleasure of golf, then I have a very pretty bridge with great brand value to sell you.) Allowing them to remain exclusively white male serves to perpetuate the existing racial and gender hierarchy in society by making it harder for others to get jobs and business.
The state organisation to which it belongs then tried to effectively shut them down, and the lodge, (not the AA member) sued.
The grand master, or leader of the Masons in Georgia, J Edward Jennings Jr, sent an email to members saying that Marshall was a legitimate member and should be treated as such. But that did not quell the row. Under pressure, Jennings agreed to convene a Masons court to hear a complaint against the head of the Atlanta lodge, Michael Bjelajac, who is accused of violating "moral law", the "ancient landmarks" and "immemorial usages" of Freemasonry by admitting Marshall. But the complaint has met with ridicule in part because there are largely black Masonic lodges in the US as well as in African countries such as Ghana.
Under pressure, Jennings agreed to convene a Masons court to hear a complaint against the head of the Atlanta lodge, Michael Bjelajac, who is accused of violating "moral law", the "ancient landmarks" and "immemorial usages" of Freemasonry by admitting Marshall.
But the complaint has met with ridicule in part because there are largely black Masonic lodges in the US as well as in African countries such as Ghana.
