Mormon President Of The "Free" World? Would It Be Paradise?

[LeSellers]

[Non-LDS US politicians have not be much interested in defending its country's foundational ideology] in the past 110 years.

Sorry. Did I say in the past 110 years? I was wrong.

It's not happened much in the past 160 years.

Mostly they've been about growing government—the precise antithesis of the Constitution.

This part is absolutely correct.

Lehi

[Paddy]

ozpoof:

http://www.ldschurchnews.com/articles/31626/Church-helps-flood-victims-in-Australia.html

and

http://lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=09c884d4a0a0c010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&hideNav=1

thesometimesaint

I think this link is probably more relevant then the ones you provided.

My link

We were asked to fast and the offerings for that week would go directly to the disaster relief. As yet we have not been made aware of how that releif is going. However I do trust that the Church is doing something to assist our brothers and sisters up north...

Paddy

[Paddy]

Sorry. Did I say in the past 110 years? I was wrong.

It's not happened much in the past 160 years.

Lehi

Lehi

Unfortunately I am not that versed in American politics. But my question was a serious one (I am not suggesting that you response wasn't serious!!). Being an Australian the US constitution has little or no bearing on how I believe or practice my religion. I am just wondering why it would somehow be more of an imperative for a US Mormon...??

Thanks

Paddy

[Jeff K.]

A question for you: Why does being a Mormon in US politics create some imperative to defend the US constitution? Would not a non-Mormon US politician also be interested in defending its country's foundational ideology?

Foundational ideology is an interesting turn of the phrase. The United States has changed much since its "foundational ideology" and in some ways remains the same. Reid and Romney for example are on oppostie ends of the political spectrum and yet both being members of the church hold to their interpretations of the constitution. I do not think being a member of the church makes us more bound to the constitution or its foundational ideology anymore than the founders themselves (who were not members of our church). We do as a church appreciate the freedom of religion it provides (something denied to us earlier). Such things are important to us.

[Paddy]

We do as a church appreciate the freedom of religion it provides (something denied to us earlier). Such things are important to us.

I agree...

However it is ironic that the LDS got basically persecuted and driven from their country because of their religion..!!

Paddy

[Jeff K.]

It is. But then the Irish were driven from their land for being, well... Irish! (Which I might add benefitted the US and other nations greatly) It seems the US and other countries often devour those who wish them best. The world if full of such ironies.

[thesometimesaint]

Paddy:

The oath of office of the President of the United States is an oath or affirmation required by the United States Constitution before the President begins the execution of the office. The wording is specified in Article Two, Section One, Clause Eight:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

[thesometimesaint]

Lehi:

Government overhead is about 1-2%. Private is about 30% and as high as 100%.

[LeSellers]

Government overhead is about 1-2%.

CFR, and, no, self-serving government statistics will not do.

Further, the real reason I object to government "charity" is the fact that there is no alternative. It's their way or the highway (to prison).

And, in cinepro's analogy, there was no overhead when he took the $5 from his own wallet. There is no overhead in the Church welfare program, either. Anything that might qualify is absorbed in the tithing fund or eliminated by voluntary labor.

Lehi

[Paddy]

It is. But then the Irish were driven from their land for being, well... Irish! (Which I might add benefitted the US and other nations greatly) It seems the US and other countries often devour those who wish them best. The world if full of such ironies.

Too true...!

[Paddy]

Paddy:

The oath of office of the President of the United States is an oath or affirmation required by the United States Constitution before the President begins the execution of the office. The wording is specified in Article Two, Section One, Clause Eight:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

Fair enough....

I am probably reading a little too much into your earlier statement that "If you are a Mormon in US politics your first duty and responsibility is to support and defend the Constitution of the US." It seems that if you are a President it is your duty by virtue of your oath to protect the constitution. I am just wondering why being a Mormon (or not) has anything to do with your duty as a US politician and/or President to protect the constitution..??

Paddy

[LeSellers]

I am just wondering why being a Mormon (or not) has anything to do with your duty as a US politician and/or President to protect the constitution.

According to the Doctrine and Covenants of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the USmerican Constitution was divinely inspired (at least as of 1836), written by men the Lord raised up for that express purpose. It's near scripture for many of us, and had a divine imprimatur when the Lord made His pronouncement.

Others may look at the Document as a very good thing (although most look at it as an impediment to their personal power, standing in the way of making USmerica in their own image, and that's as much the Congress and Judiciary as the Executive), but there is not a faith on the face of the earth that regards the Constitution for the united States of America with quite the same reverence as we Saints do.

This does not mean that every LDS politician has that in mind. Others have noted Harry Reid is the Majority Leader of the Senate, the most powerful man in that body. he has done little to uphold and defend the Constitution, and has, to the contrary, done everything in his considerable power to undermine and weaken it.

Mitt Romney, not a federal politician (yet), has also ignored the basis on which the Document was conceived: that of government's being as small as possible while retaining the power to do a certain limited number of things that it is more effective for the state to do than the people as individuals (who retain the right, under the Document, to do them for themselves anyway, if they choose or must).

Nonetheless, I believe that most LDS politicians do look at our founding Document with the kind of reflected glory, given Father's statements on the matter, it deserves. At least until they make friends of mammon and love the power of the offices they hold. "All power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Lord Acton was right.

Had I my way, no one could hold any combination of elective office(s) for more than a total of twenty years (fifteen when I'm feeling cynical), nor could he run for any office while holding one. There would be absolutely no pensions or other compensation except a small salary. Public service should be "service" not a means to great wealth. The aforementioned Reid is far more wealthy today than when he first ran for office. And it did not come from his senatorial pay. The Founders did not imagine a professional political class, they tried to create a system wherein real people would make laws that applied to the real world and under which they, themselves, would have to live. That is not the case with the governments we have in our lifetimes, federal, state, and local.

Lehi

[LeSellers]

it is ironic that the LDS got basically persecuted and driven from their country because of their religion..!!

With the constitutional guarantees we had back then, and given the events to which you allude, how much worse would it have been had Father decided to "jump the gun" and Restore His kingdom in 1492 or 1611 or 1215?

Given the toxic religious environment in any of those epochs, there could have been no chance whatsoever of its taking root and flourishing.

Lehi

[Paddy]

Lehi

Thanks for the reply...it is starting to make a little more sense.

According to the Doctrine and Covenants of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the USmerican Constitution was divinely inspired

Is the constitution divinely inspired? Although I have heard this statement before - even here in Australia - it seems that this is a bit of a stretch. D&C 101:77-80 is the source text for this idea but it appears that god simply allowed the "wise men" to establish the constitution not "divinely inspire" it...?? Again maybe I'm over analysing this...??

Thanks

Paddy

[Paddy]

With the constitutional guarantees we had back then, and given the events to which you allude, how much worse would it have been had Father decided to "jump the gun" and Restore His kingdom in 1492 or 1611 or 1215?

Given the toxic religious environment in any of those epochs, there could have been no chance whatsoever of its taking root and flourishing.

Lehi

Lehi

Totally agree with what you're saying. I was just being facetious before...

Paddy

[Jeff K.]

Lehi

Thanks for the reply...it is starting to make a little more sense.

Is the constitution divinely inspired? Although I have heard this statement before - even here in Australia - it seems that this is a bit of a stretch. D&C 101:77-80 is the source text for this idea but it appears that god simply allowed the "wise men" to establish the constitution not "divinely inspire" it...?? Again maybe I'm over analysing this...??

Thanks

Paddy

Consider that the US Constitution (after the failure of the Articles of Confederation) was the first enduring non monarchial representative government (and only one for quite some time), it wouldn't be a stretch to say it is inspired, and in many ways unique.

[thesometimesaint]

Paddy:

I believe the US Constitution to be divinely inspired. But then I'm pretty liberal when it comes to insiration from God.

...If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.

[thesometimesaint]

Lehi:

So according to you. Giving women the right to vote was the wrong thing to do?

[thesometimesaint]

Lehi:

http://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/admin.html

[LeSellers]

So according to you. Giving women the right to vote was the wrong thing to do?

We have threshed this grain a dozen times.

It was the right thing to do, but the federal government was not the right entitiy to do it. There is nothing in the original Constitution that defines the electorate; that was a function of the states. Even the XIV doesn't go there. It says (and rightly, too) that if a state decided to forbid any group of people from voting in federal elections, that its representation in the House would be reduced by the proportion of those so trammeled compared to the number of white men in the state. But it left the matter up to the states, where it rightly belonged.

By the time the XIX passed in 1920, a sizable portion of the states had already granted suffrage to women. The trend was growing, and it would not have been much longer that even New Jersey woud have done so. There was no need to use the power of the federal government to bulldoze the states into compliance.

Lehi

[LeSellers]

Citing a government source to show the antiSocial inSecurity Administrangulation has ~2% overhead.

Please recall I asked for non-governmental sources for the reason that anything from the state is self-serving.

Please recall that antiSocial inSecurity does not pay its employees from FICA, and that it does not steal the tax itself, but threatens employers to do it for them (shifting the financial burden to them) and does not even enforce its demands itself, but palms that cost onto the Infernal Revenue disService.

And, last and far from least, while antiSocial inSecurity is a huge part of federal expenditures, it is not the whole of the federal guaranteed receipt of stolen goods programs. You forget AFDC (which was supposed to disappear when antiSocial inSecurity got fully under weigh, as it was a stopgap measure), Food Stamps and a myraid (literally) of others. None of these has anything like a 2% overhead. Were we lucky, it would be only ten times that percentage. We are not lucky.

Lehi

[LeSellers]

Is the constitution divinely inspired? Although I have heard this statement before - even here in Australia - it seems that this is a bit of a stretch. D&C 101:77-80 is the source text for this idea but it appears that god simply allowed the "wise men" to establish the constitution not "divinely inspire" it...?? Again maybe I'm over analysing this...??

It was far more than His "allowing" those wise men to write the Document. He did it.

80 And for this purpose have I established the Constitution of this land, by the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this very purpose, and redeemed the land by the shedding of blood.

If the Lord says He raised those men up, and that He did so for that very purpose (to write the Constitution), and that He established it, then I have a hard time seeing how anyone could read this any other way but that the Constitution for the united States of America was inspired by God Himself to accomplish His goals (one of which was the Restoratio of His Priesthood and Church).

Lehi

[ozpoof]

You are misinformed. From Earthquake:

Christchurch is in New Zealand. I live in Australia.

[ozpoof]

I know of many families here locally that specifically sent supplies through the church down to the region. So I find the accusation both unkind and inaccurate.

I know of families, including my own, who got no help at all from the church. Church members helped clean up, but the church kept their distance.

[ozpoof]

http://newsroom.lds....untry/australia

This does not count what would normally be offered through fast offerings and such I believe.

Still waiting for monetary aid..................