Quote Originally Posted by Mike1 View Post
If any member of the Scottish Rite felt he was supposed to wear a kilt to any Scottish Rite function, he must have slept through his degree work.

As a 32° member of the Ancient Accepted Scottish Rite, Valley of Indianapolis, I am afforded no special treatment when I sit in my Masonic Lodge, as a Masonic Lodge does not recognize the appendant degrees. My Lodge allows me to wear symbols identifying myself as a Past Master, but Scottish Rite regalia is not allowed.

Non-Masons speculating about Freemasonry is as edifying as men speculating about birthing a child. There's little more than guess-work involved.
That's all well and good, but you really didn't say anything that sheds light on Rex's original query which was: "is there any reason why someone would think that the kilt is at all indicative of a Mason?"

Best regards,

Jake