I'll have to disagree. Religious people pay taxes, send their children to school, and otherwise fulfil every aspect of citizenship in this country, the same as anyone else. They are entitled to their vote and to attempt to win a place in governance. It is unreasonable to expect them to 'check their beliefs at the door' once they enter the arena. I see no reason to believe the their basis for governance, or for choosing reading material, is any less valid than anyone elses. Is a book that says that God created the world any less valid that one that says that Republicans are destroying it?
Back to honour societies. I suppose I was confused by the title. I am familiar with the term only in regard to those groups that call themselves by that name, usually academic or fraternal organizations. Their membership consists of persons who have completed some requirement or another to be admitted: high academic scores, successful business ownership, or some other recognizable accomplishment. Such groups usually have, or used to have, ethical and moral standards that must be met to gain and retain membership.
If I recall correctly, one such group is the Circumnavigators Club, consisting of people who have completed a solo circumnavigation of the world. Its membership is mostly sailors, but includes, again working from memory, President Gerald Ford, who walked around the world at the South Pole, and one or more astronauts. The criteria for membership used to require that members be "Gentlemen of upstanding character" or some such statement. When Tania Aebi completed here circumnavigation, the first woman to do so, she was denied membership because she did not fit the bill. Initially, the objection was seen as sexist, because she was not a 'gentlemen', but it turned out that it was the 'upstanding character' that was the stickler. Apparenlty she had a male sailor living aboard for part of the journey, and wrote about in her book. Eventually, if I recall correctly, she was denied membership, neither because of her gender nor her character, but because, by having someone else on board, she did not fulfil the 'solo' requirement for membership. Someone may want to correct me if I have some of the fact wrong here.
That has always been my understanding of what an 'honour society' is. And it is a bit different from this discussion.
Quod scripsi, scripsi.