United Order and distribution of wealth

[mustang90]

Americans are the most charitable people on earth and we give more than any other people to charity....especially Republicans/Conservatives. Liberals give the very least. That is a fact.

I don't know if politics really affects charity. There are conservatives that are charitable and some that are stingy. Same with liberals, some may be charitable others not.

The rain falls on the just and unjust alike. I wonder how many people that don't have medical insurance have cable tv, or cell phones or smoke ciggarettes or ......? The solution is not for the Government......tax payers to provide medical insurance. More affordable health insurance....sure. A safety net.....oh wait a minute, that's called Medicaid.

Sure, but again, not everyone watches HBO while waiting for universal health care. Universal healthcare has been proven to work, as in Canada, France, Spain, UK, Germany, and others. Meanwhile the UN has ranked the United States health care system as the 22nd best in the world, right behind...ta da: Slovenia?

Anyone born in America hit the lottery of life. People risk life and limb to come to America. Those who work and take advantage of the opportunities provided by this great land....do well. Get rich? Maybe...maybe not. Struggle to earn a living...sometimes. Poverty is an abused term in this great land of plenty......

Sure, and some people who work hard and struggle need a helping hand, especially when it begins to effect their life.

Not true. County hospital have to take patients in the ER regardless of ability to pay. Bleeding heart rhetoric.

Correct. But private hospitals do not. Often times private hospitals are the closest and county hospitals distant. There have been many cases where people injured, ill or dying have been turned away from private hospitals, rushed to county hospitals, and died before they could be helped.

Where?? Schools provide text books.....other countries perhaps, but not here.

All schools provide text books, but the quality is the question. Many schools use old ragged textbooks that are outdated and hand-me-downs from wealthier school districts.

Agreed. Alcoholism and drug use claim the lives of many living on the "streets". Bad choices often lead to bad consequences.

Agreed.

Agreed........I believe in helping those who would help themselves if they could..but can't. I am not for helping those that can help themselves but won't. People living on the dole is suffocating this country. People need to grow a backbone and get of there lazy rears and quit feeling entitled.....time to earn.

I totally agree. Laziness is not one of the reasons I gave for government support.

Edited November 5, 2008 by mustang90

[bytor2112]

If many conservatives are liberals who have been mugged by reality, Brooks, a registered independent, is, as a reviewer of his book said, a social scientist who has been mugged by data. They include these findings:

-- Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).

-- Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.

-- Residents of the states that voted for John Kerry in 2004 gave smaller percentages of their incomes to charity than did residents of states that voted for George Bush.

-- Bush carried 24 of the 25 states where charitable giving was above average.

-- In the 10 reddest states, in which Bush got more than 60 percent majorities, the average percentage of personal income donated to charity was 3.5. Residents of the bluest states, which gave Bush less than 40 percent, donated just 1.9 percent.

-- People who reject the idea that "government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality" give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition.

Brooks demonstrates a correlation between charitable behavior and "the values that lie beneath" liberal and conservative labels. Two influences on charitable behavior are religion and attitudes about the proper role of government.

[JohnBirchSociety]

I'm sorry but somehow I don't think social programs can be really compared to Satanic plans or Nazi regimes. The first seems a tad ridiculous the latter insulting to those who really did live and die under such an evil regime.

Or maybe I missed something?

Yes, you missed something.

What exactly do you think the Nazi ideology was? National Socialism.

It was Satanic. Socialism is satanic. Communism is Socialism to the extreme.

[a-train]

It does not change what I see everytime I visit, to someone not used to seeing such poverty its heart wrenching and the difference between the Western European Cities I have visited over those in the US is startling. I know at least in the UK we still donate both to deal with poverty in the UK and abroad, despite paying taxes.

And I have to say I do not find my country or others I have visited in Western Europe to be even close tyrannical, far from it.

-Charley

I was out with some friends at the upscale shopping and dining district known as the Plaza in Kansas City. A man approached our group of a half dozen twenty-somethings and asked for money. One young lady, (20 years old) asked him if he had a place to stay, food to eat, if he was safe for the night. The man looked stunned. She asked him if he had been to the shelter operated by a Church north-east of downtown where a night's stay, dinner, and breakfast are free.

He just stared in shock, mumbling as if he knew not what to say. She mentioned the locations of three or four other similar shelters and their programs in the area and offered to help him get into one. He replied that he had a place to stay. She mentioned that they had programs wherein he could do day labor within 72 hours that could lead to more long term employment.

Shocked, the man stumbled on his words as he tried to explain why none of that would do. Her family runs a Church that is very involved in the metro area efforts to support the homeless. The man simply gave up and left us to go peddle elsewhere.

Why? Because in Kansas City a person can earn over $100 a day pan-handling for tax free cash. In fact, several cases of professional pan-handling have been covered by the media. One character in particular was famously known and hated by many and adored by others. An LDS friend of mine while a young lady, began pan-handling when she was about 17. Her first time trying it she made over $20 in her first half our. She would do it for an hour or so each night. She finally decided it wasn't right.

There are a great many charitable endeavors in the United States, but none of it will prevent the occurance of those sleeping under bridges and begging for money in the streets. Many of these folks are chemical addicts who have been in programs, but simply do not want to stay in them. Some are professional pan-handlers. That is the beauty of America, we have all kinds both good and bad.

Many of these people know where to go to get various assistances, from both organizations private and public, but choose for various reasons not to. Should we force them?

The only way to get rid of this activity is to outlaw it and enforce its removal from society, a policy I personally do not advocate. What right do we have to say these people can't do what they are doing? To assume that they are incapable of doing something else? To force them to do something else? We offer them help, but many don't take it. Many don't want it. To assume otherwise is to engage in broad generalizations and to promote compulsion.

-a-train

Edited November 5, 2008 by a-train

[checkerboy]

I can say that one of the defining moments of my life came when I gave up the victim mentality that government "owed" me something and let my benefits run out. I didn't reapply. I realized I was never gonna get anywhere when I was jumping through the hoops I had to to get the benefits I thought I needed. Surprisingly this was only two years ago. In that two years time I have been able to pay down many debts and start saving money. Something that I never could do while under governments thumb. And all that time I was buying groceries with my own money. *gasp*

[JohnBirchSociety]

It does not change what I see everytime I visit, to someone not used to seeing such poverty its heart wrenching and the difference between the Western European Cities I have visited over those in the US is startling. I know at least in the UK we still donate both to deal with poverty in the UK and abroad, despite paying taxes.

And I have to say I do not find my country or others I have visited in Western Europe to be even close tyrannical, far from it.

-Charley

Poverty is not really the issue. It is a diversion from the issue at hand. Poverty is to be had everywhere on this Earth.

Speaking of Western European cities, I've lived in a few. Mingled with the common folk (as a missionary). I've SEEN the poverty there, and it is NOT rivaled by what is here in the US. It was equal in my experience. Of course, personal experience is anecdotal (yours as well).

The issue at hand is theft. Thou shalt not steal. There are two connotations to this.

1) A prohibition against stealing by GOD mean that GOD recognizes private property rights.

2) Stealing is wrong, no exceptions. (I cannot find a single scriptural exception to the prohibition on stealing)

When you take, by force, whether as an individual, or as a group (government) you are stealing, no matter the pretense.

If you believe that government has the right to steal (Socialism) then it also has the right to take anything it wishes. In fact, the position of Socialism is the antithesis of individual liberty.

Our church leaders, in General Conference have declared, always, that Socialism is evil. They've never approved of it. Ever.

Doesn't that make you think about your position? Or don't you REALLY believe that our leaders speak the word of GOD?

[JohnBirchSociety]

If this is the case then we have long since slipped into Satan's plan....since taxation in general is not a voluntary thing but rather required. (no matter how small or how big our individual contribution may be)

Good try at diversion.

The issue IS NOT taxation. Taxation (where tax is collected and used for the proper and just function of the government, for instance a military for the common defense) is appropriate. By the ideals of the Social Contract if you benefit from such general welfare / protection and are able bodied / mentally sound, then you pay such taxes as are just.

The issue is THEFT. When, by force, whether individual (robbery) or government (plunder), the private property / wealth of one is taken and disbursed directly to another individual, that is ALWAYS theft. Pretense is of no consequence.

Tyranny is the summation of the best of unprincipled intentions.

Socialism is evil. And, besides that salient point, it has never worked.

[Starfish]

This is one of the many reasons I love the LDS Church. Every penny donated to the needy, goes to the needy. No handling fees. No bureaucracy. No compulsion. Small needs handled locally and individually. Large needs met swiftly and given freely.

And the constant teaching: prepare, plan, thrift, learn, save, share, work, choice, righteousness.

The Church welfare program is a model to the world.

[Guest HEthePrimate]

Those of you who are against resources going from the people who earned them to the people who didn't, what's your take on the United Order? I know that secular communism/socialism have their corruption problems, and that the United Order will be led by the Lord. My question for you is whether you're okay with the idea of a bishop distributing your resources as he sees fit (as inspired by the Spirit). Will you be okay, seeing your money or surplus goods going to someone who didn't "earn" it?

As I understand it, under the United Order the bishop would not me making unilateral decisions, at least regarding what our stewardships would consist of. If you consecrate your earnings to the Lord and need to determine what, if anything, the Order should give you, both you and the bishop would discuss it and come to a mutual agreement. The United Order is not meant to be a dictatorship.

I don't have a huge income, but what I do "earn" is earned by using gifts that the Lord gave me...thus my earnings aren't mine alone. I feel obligated to share. I have been given the gifts of health, intelligence, supportive family. Others who lack my particular gifts can be blessed when I share what my gifts bring.

What do you think?

I think you're absolutely right. Yes, the Lord wants our needs provided for, but He also wants us to share with others.

All too often I hear people discuss with horror the idea of redistribution of wealth. Well, it's happening in America already, but it seems mostly to be trickling up to those who already have enough. There's something wrong with that picture.

[a-train]

All too often I hear people discuss with horror the idea of redistribution of wealth. Well, it's happening in America already, but it seems mostly to be trickling up to those who already have enough. There's something wrong with that picture.

And how much have these same politicians, these same bureaucrats who cry so much about the middle class and the flow of wealth to the already wealthy; how much have they done to lower the tax burden of the middle class? With all their talk they have only raised that burden.

Why don't they talk about the most dramatic government process whereby wealth is redistributed to the most wealthy? Why aren't they talking about getting rid of the inflation tax which taxes the masses and gives directly to a tiny group of the most elite? Why? Because that group is funding their campaign.

Some of the top contributors to Obama's campaign, were also among the top contributors to McCain's campaign. They are all trying to buy that winner, whoever he or she may be. And all that lip service amounts to nothing year after year but more taxes, bigger government, less liberty, and more benefits for the super wealthy benefactors of the biggest tax in America, the inflation tax.

They say nothing about the real problem, the biggest wealth confiscation program in world history. Meanwhile their solution is to redistribute the dwindling wealth from the middle class to the poor making the gap between the priviledged super class and the falling upper middle class even more gigantic.

It is not a conservative effort, it is not a liberal effort. It is not Republican or Democrat. This program is the work of the business elite who are far and above party politics. Those same cronies are the ones pushing for American socialism. Why? Because it will benefit them, not us.

-a-train

[Moksha]

What is the best approach to cope with the ever widening gap between the rich and the poor? I hope nobody would suggest denial as the preferred coping mechanism.

[john doe]

Do you have stats to show that it is actually widening? My understanding is that it is shrinking, that more people are actually rising into the middle class.

[fiona84]

I agree with Church leadership on the issue. Government efforts that compel through taxation the haves to give to the have nots, both abdicate our rights to perform acts of charity and limit our liberty in economic regards. As our leadership has indicated, this approach that disregards individual rights is a Satanic counterfiet for the law of consecration.

It is an act of cowardice and unrighteousness to defer our obligation to the poor to the cold heartless halls of government. I do not ask my country to do my labor of love for me.

-a-train

Could you please specify where and who from Church leadership stated this?

Did a Church leader actually say that compulsory taxation to give to the have-nots is a Satanatic counterfeit?

I find that to be disturbing if it is true. What about all of the European countries which have a socialist stye democracy in place and in turn have a small homeless problem, health care for everyone, etc. I feel this is what Jesus Christ would want from us.

I'm sorry, but I don't see how giving a bunch to charity in lieu of taxation is actually going to solve poverty and health care crises our country faces.

[YoungMormonRoyalist]

For your information, the sum of charitable donations put to use in the United States each year through non-profit, non-government organizations is LARGER than all the government welfare programs combined. And, the rhetoric you are using is the same used by the Marxists, the NAZIs, and other european socialists who used false accusations and bigotry to implement tyranny.

-a-train

Reductio ad Hitlerum - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For the sake of trying to keep us (As members of Christ's Church) from tearing at each other's throats, I think we should refrain from drawing comparisons between forum members and Nazis.

Debate? Fine. But let's not get to the point where we aren't feeling the spirit.

"If ye are not one, ye are not mine."

"Contention is of the spirit of the devil"

-----------------------------

On a related note, I was wondering something. When are taxes acceptable?

Surely there have to be some cases:

David's kingdom

Solomon's kingdom (for the purpose of building the temple, other than that he drove the country into massive turmoil for his huge taxes)

The Nephite's under their kings, and later their republic.

Or when Christ said "Render unto Caeser what is Caeser's."

I'm not going to say anything either way, I just want people's thoughts on this.

[JohnBirchSociety]

What is the best approach to cope with the ever widening gap between the rich and the poor? I hope nobody would suggest denial as the preferred coping mechanism.

The best approach is liberty. The least amount of government necessary to secure liberty.

Theft, no matter the pretense, is never right. It will never work.

Here's one reason:

Those you (or the government) are stealing from are going to be very *&%$#@! - off. They don't want to be stolen from.

Can begin to see how this, alone, is a problem?

[Misshalfway]

It seems like this whole debate is over what government should do, and what it shouldn't. I don't like programs that do for people what they should be doing for themselves. I think this is one of the reasons why the churches welfare system works because it is a hand up but only on the basis of personal responsibility.

I think too often some want the government to take care of them. In my mind, I don't think the founding fathers ever viewed the government as something that should take care of the people. I think that instead they wanted a government that would support the efforts of the individual pursuit of happiness.

With regards to healthcare..... I find myself in a state of confusion. Should healthcare become a right? Should we pool our resources for the sake of the whole? Well, I think yes, the same way we handle education. Education for all is in everyone's best interest and we do now pay taxes for education whether we have a child in school or not. BUT, I could argue all day about the effectiveness of said state education. How do we help and maintain quality?

But the water gets muddy for me on the "how" question. In these universal healthcare plans, where do we lose liberty? What do we compromise in order to help people?

I think that what we need in terms of a healthcare plan hasn't been thought of yet. Some hybrid of government involvement AND free markets. But there has to be some kind of checks and balances with regards to costs.

I see other countries succeed in their efforts with healthcare on SOME very compelling fronts but I worry that if we copy these other systems entirely then we lose what makes the US the place where so many come for the best treatments. I think there are things we should learn from other countries. Perhaps we will need to try something new and see where it takes us. Perhaps be willing to fail and falter in the finding of something better. I don't think anyone would argue against the the idea that what we have now clearly isn't working!

I am thinking about my cousin and her son. They live in Canada. He was diagnosed with a brain tumor and he is only a toddler. She was able to secure some of the best neurosurgeons to work on him. She also was able to have therapist visit her home to teach her son to walk again. All without a dollar out of pocket.

My brother on the other hand, has one child with autism and another with aspergers. They both need speech and other therapies. Yesterday, they applied for one of them to attend the local school districts preschool for special needs kids. The child scored high on all tests showing aspergers, but was turned away because her IQ test was too high by one point for their quota. So, now how do they pay for the special schools and therapists needed? The costs for a speech therapist alone is $60 per hour per child. And they are lower middle class. They have a good job and good health insurance -- insurance that doesn't cover all these costs. Not to mention the high tuition they need to send them to the right schools. So they live in the best country in the world, yet they will never get ahead financially and will be forced to rely on the help of family and friends and the grace of God just to deal with healthcare costs. Heaven forbid anyone else in the family gets sick!

Edited November 6, 2008 by Misshalfway

[bytor2112]

Could you please specify where and who from Church leadership stated this?

Did a Church leader actually say that compulsory taxation to give to the have-nots is a Satanatic counterfeit?

I find that to be disturbing if it is true. What about all of the European countries which have a socialist stye democracy in place and in turn have a small homeless problem, health care for everyone, etc. I feel this is what Jesus Christ would want from us.

I'm sorry, but I don't see how giving a bunch to charity in lieu of taxation is actually going to solve poverty and health care crises our country faces.

I think you miss the point. We are taxed far to much as it is. Most "tax" payers work until June every year to pay taxes....thats how much of our income the Government takes. How much does the government waste??? How much say so do we get in how they spend it? No one is saying that we shouldn't pay taxes...we should...a fair amount for all. Businesses grow when not hindered by oppressive taxes....people spend more on goods and services when they have lower taxes....businesses then create more employment opportunity's. Simple economics. As for the healthcare crisis...you really want to trust the government with healthcare? There are ways to lower healthcare costs without turning it over to Uncle Sam. It really isn't the function of Government to care for us from the cradle to the grave.

You really want a Socialist style democracy over our Representative Republic? Jesus would want that? Really? You do know that America is a choice land set apart and that our Founding Fathers were divinely inspired, right? I am only guessing....but if divinely inspired.....then our system of government is divinley inspired.

Now, we have safety nets in place. Medicaid, welfare, public housing, food stamps. All designed to help the-have-nots? But, I think these programs keep people in bad situations....as do bad life choices. Reasonable taxes and charity and education..yes...not government takes over.

We pay tax on our income...we pay social security tax (which we may never recieve)...we pay medicare tax (which we may never see).....we pay property tax....we pay sales tax....we pay chool tax......we pay taxes on gas......we pay county, city and state tax and some states have an income tax.....now we want to add another deduction for some government healthcare and deepen the amount of the other deductions????

There is not a debtors prison in the US...thankfully.....can't be arrested for bad debt...BUT You can be imprisoned if you don't pay your taxes.

[a-train]

Could you please specify where and who from Church leadership stated this?

Did a Church leader actually say that compulsory taxation to give to the have-nots is a Satanatic counterfeit?

I find that to be disturbing if it is true. What about all of the European countries which have a socialist stye democracy in place and in turn have a small homeless problem, health care for everyone, etc. I feel this is what Jesus Christ would want from us.

I'm sorry, but I don't see how giving a bunch to charity in lieu of taxation is actually going to solve poverty and health care crises our country faces.

First Presidency Message in the September 1979 Ensign contained this statement:

Communism is Satan's counterfeit for the gospel plan, and it is an avowed enemy of the God of the land. Communism is the greatest anti-Christ power in the world today and therefore the greatest menace not only to our peace but to our preservation as a free people. By the extent to which we tolerate it, accommodate ourselves to it, permit ourselves to be encircled by its tentacles and drawn to it, to that extent we forfeit the protection of the God of this land.

Elder Marion G. Romney's April 1966 Conference Talk that was discussed in another thread. In it he said:

As to the fruits of socialism, we all have our own opinions. I myself have watched its growth in our own country and observed it in operation in many other lands. But I have yet to see or hear of its freeing the hearts of men of selfishness and greed or of its bringing peace, plenty, or freedom. These things it will never bring, nor will it do away with idleness and promote "industry, thrift and self-respect," for it is founded, in theory and in practice, on force, the principle of the evil one.

Also, listen to this 1977 Conference Talk from Ezra Taft Benson and read this talk.

Type "socialism" in the search bar at LDS.org and look for advocacy of it among the words of our leaders, you will not find anything but the rejection thereof.

Also take a look at this July 1936 First Presidency Statement.

Or read this talk.

While state welfarism promises good, it amounts to the ruin of the people and the loss of liberty. This reality can be found throughout the teachings of the prophets. Satan is luring this planet with promises of peace and prosperity toward captivity and ruin.

-a-train

Edited November 6, 2008 by a-train

[fiona84]

Thanks a-train,

I understand the context under which the leaders were talking about communism and socialism (the Cold War) and their statements make sense.

I'm just relieved to see that it doesn't say that taxation to help the have-nots is Satanic in its own right. I have lived in Europe and it is a Europrean style DEMOCRACY I advocate.

I understand many don't feel the same way. I grew up incredibly poor in a rural part of the midwest and if it wasn't for gov't sponsored programs such as Head Start and WIC I wouldn't have had any sort of leg up or probably not even my vaccinations. And I was a child so there was no way I could provide for these things myself with my own work ethic and will. I feel Heavenly Father blessed me with these gov't programs to help me on my way and now (again thanks to gov't Pell Grants) I am nearly a college graduate.

[JohnBirchSociety]

Thanks a-train,

I understand the context under which the leaders were talking about communism and socialism (the Cold War) and their statements make sense.

I'm just relieved to see that it doesn't say that taxation to help the have-nots is Satanic in its own right. I have lived in Europe and it is a Europrean style DEMOCRACY I advocate.

I understand many don't feel the same way. I grew up incredibly poor in a rural part of the midwest and if it wasn't for gov't sponsored programs such as Head Start and WIC I wouldn't have had any sort of leg up or probably not even my vaccinations. And I was a child so there was no way I could provide for these things myself with my own work ethic and will. I feel Heavenly Father blessed me with these gov't programs to help me on my way and now (again thanks to gov't Pell Grants) I am nearly a college graduate.

European style Democracy is unconstitutional. God has said that anything more or less than the constitution "cometh of evil".

If you are an American Church member, in particular, how do you get around this fact?

[Moksha]

It seems like this whole debate is over what government should do, and what it shouldn't. I don't like programs that do for people what they should be doing for themselves.

Thing is that many programs were created out of necessity. I like the idea of recipients of programs helping out to some extent like the Church does, however that really is not possible for some seniors and disabled people, as well as children. I like to frame the debate over a more essential question and that is, should we help one another.

[Misshalfway]

Thing is that many programs were created out of necessity. I like the idea of recipients of programs helping out to some extent like the Church does, however that really is not possible for some seniors and disabled people, as well as children. I like to frame the debate over a more essential question and that is, should we help one another.

I don't think there is a question over whether or not we should help each other. It is a question of "how".

I probably should have said that the government should help those that can't help themselves because I agree that there are those in our population that need help. And why wouldn't we be obligated to help?

[FunkyTown]

I don't think there is a question over whether or not we should help each other. It is a question of "how".

I probably should have said that the government should help those that can't help themselves because I agree that there are those in our population that need help. And why wouldn't we be obligated to help?

Therein lies the problem, Halfway - Basically, the disagreement between people on A-Train's side(Such as JohnBirchSociety and Bytor) and people on -our- side of the fence is whether or not the government should step in to regulate excesses of wealth and how they should.

For instance: Under A-train's ideal, everyone would give liberally to help give a hand up to one another. Under -our- ideal, we believe that humainty is inherently selfish and requires government regulation to provide for all people.

We see their system as being inhuman and naive, leaving the poor to die outside hospitals while the rich live lives in islands of wealth. They perceive our system as being tyrannical, stealing from the majority to provide excuses for governmental monopolies and only incidentally providing for the needy while being abused by rich and poor alike.

The truth is that Heaven will be much closer to their worldview than ours, simply because we -will- provide for those that need because we do love one another and it won't be forced. In the meantime, I have seen far too much of man's inhumanity to those that are not part of their immediate circle. I know without government mandate, those people will fall through the cracks - Far more than do now. I know this because before government mandated social programs, they did. Look at Victorian England or 19th Century American working conditions to see the consequences of unfettered business practice.

I think A-Train understands where I'm coming from on this and where you're coming from on this. However, I believe his argument is that more government control means more waste and corruption and more likelihood of tyrannical practices. I agree.

I also believe that corporate excesses result in the same, except that we can vote out government corruption.

I think we both see the same facts, but just have different conclusions.

[JohnBirchSociety]

Thing is that many programs were created out of necessity. I like the idea of recipients of programs helping out to some extent like the Church does, however that really is not possible for some seniors and disabled people, as well as children. I like to frame the debate over a more essential question and that is, should we help one another.

But there is no debate here on whether we should help one another.

The debate is, despite the attempts at diversion by yourself and others, theft.

I know it makes you uncomfortable, but the facts cannot be avoided.

You have no inalienable right to the property of others or the fruits of their labors. Neither do a group of people (government / nation). Nobody does alone, nobody does as a group.

Whether I, or you, or the government take by force that which is not ours to take, and disburse it to another individual, that is theft.

Theft is the issue at hand, not giving.

By the way, you cannot give what is taken by force.

[fiona84]

European style Democracy is unconstitutional. God has said that anything more or less than the constitution "cometh of evil".

If you are an American Church member, in particular, how do you get around this fact?

Good grief. Get around what fact?

You are basically saying that European style democracy 'cometh of evil.'

I have to disagree. And I would reckon Pres. Uchtdorf, as well as all of the other saints living in or from Europe, would disagree, as well.

Oh, I don't think European democracy is unconstitutional, either. True, it doesn't fall directly in line with every thing written in our constitution (such as the right to bear arms) BUT our American constitution was based on European thought-The Magna Carta, Roussaeu, British common law, etc.