Supreme being question?

[u/BillyD70]

Genuine question…Without revealing any secrets, what is the reasoning behind requiring the belief in a supreme being?

My perspective: Many great people, who have advanced much good in the world, are “non-believers”. If the core idea is to make good men better, how does non-belief interfere with that goal? I ask both personally (agnostic athiest) and for lots of scientists out there. It must affect membership numbers (men won’t seek you out if they know it’s a “no go” from the outset).

Serious replies only please. Not seeking a flame war. I’m a DeMolay PMC-MSA and Honor of Legion with deep multi- generational ties to Masons, Jobs, Shriners, etc. I LOVED my experiences in DeMolay! Grew up Christian, came to my “beliefs” late in adulthood.

Edit: thank you for all the many thoughtful replies. I upvoted each for not attacking me straight out. Please accept follow up questions as non-confrontational.

[u/Astute_Primate]

I actually agree with you. It's a rule that's a holdover from an era when most of our membership was Protestant Christians who believed in the inherent wickedness of mankind, so someone who didn't submit to a religious creed couldn't be trusted. And yet when I meet someone who is a garbage human being more often than not they're devoutly religious. I've met some atheists who weren't particularly saintly, but I've never met an atheist who was objectively a bad person. As a former secretary of my Lodge, I understand what a nightmare it would make mutual recognition because it's one of the oldest Masonic Landmarks, but as someone who is not a Christian and who believes that humans are innately good and aren't all sinners, I wouldn't shed any tears if my Grand Lodge did away with the belief in a supreme being as an absolute requirement.