Jump to content

President Carter Says.....


JDaveG
 Share

Recommended Posts

......Democratic party should reconsider its position on abortion.....

Carter: Jesus Would Not Approve Of Abortions

March 30, 2012 11:45 AM

Share this 113 comments

141814383.jpg?w=300

Former President Jimmy Carter speaks during a press conference in Cairo on Jan. 13, 2012. (credit: AMRO MARAGHI/AFP/Getty Images)

Filed under

Government, News, Politics, Syndicated Local

Related tags

abortion, Jesus Christ, Jimmy Carter, Laura Ingraham

ATLANTA (CBS Atlanta/AP) — Former President Jimmy Carter believes Jesus Christ would not approve of abortions.

Carter made the comments during Thursday’s “The Laura Ingraham Show” while talking about how the Democratic Party should be more pro-life.

“I never have believed that Jesus Christ would approve of abortions and that was one of the problems I had when I was president having to uphold Roe v. Wade,” Carter told Ingraham on her nationally syndicated radio show, “and I did everything I could to minimize the need for abortions.”

The former commander in chief feels women should only have abortions when their life is at risk during a pregnancy or if they got pregnant due to rape or incest.

“I’ve signed a public letter calling for the Democratic Party at the next convention to espouse my position on abortion which is to minimize the need, the requirement for abortion and limit it only to women whose life are in danger or who are pregnant as a result of rape or incest,” Carter told Ingraham.

Carter believes that if Dems took this position that the party would win back conservatives it has lost over the abortion issue.

Carter’s comments came the day Georgia lawmakers struck a last-minute agreement to restrict abortions five months after women get pregnant.

Angry Democrats and women stood and turned their backs on bill supporters on the House and Senate floor, then left the chamber chanting in protest. The legislation now heads to the desk of Republican Gov. Nathan Deal, who generally favors limiting abortion.

The compromise was part of a long and chaotic day as lawmakers rushed to pass their bills before the midnight deadline for the General Assembly to adjourn for the year. In addition to the anti-abortion measure, the General Assembly passed measures that would ban assisted suicide, overhaul the state criminal sentencing laws, reduce unemployment benefits for workers and require that welfare applicants pass drug tests.

House Speaker David Ralston, R-Blue Ridge, praised lawmakers for passing a tax cut bill earlier in the session. Georgia has a 9.1 percent unemployment rate.

“What is important is we focused this session on the thing I think mattered most to Georgians, which was jobs,” he said, shortly after midnight. “That’s why when I think about this session, I’m going to think about tax reform. I’m going to think about the initiatives that will make Georgia more competitive.”

In the last hour of the session, most eyes were watching an anti-abortion bill sponsored by Rep. Doug McKillip, R-Athens, that earlier appeared to stall. It would have banned abortions 20 weeks after conception except in cases when a pregnancy threatened the life or health of the mother. But Senate lawmakers amended it with a big concession: Doctors would be allowed to perform abortions after the five-month mark if they diagnose a fatal defect in a fetus.

Lawmakers ultimately passed the more lenient version from the Senate.

“We are going to save a thousand babies when this bill goes into effect,” said McKillip, who did not take questions as the clock drew closer to midnight — the deadline for adjourning.

Five minutes after the Senate took up debate on the issue, the GOP leadership shut down the discussion and called for a vote over the objection of several Democrats, many of them women.

When the Senate passed the measure by a vote of 36-19, the Democratic women went to the front of the chamber and unraveled yellow “caution” tape in protest before storming out. In the halls of the Capitol, they declared that the women of Georgia would not stand for the vote and chanted, “Women will remember in November!”

“Men do not control us ladies,” said Sen. Valencia Seay, D-Riverdale. “We’ve been elected, just like they’ve been elected. We will not stand silently by. We are mad.”

(TM and © Copyright 2012 CBS Radio Inc. and its relevant subsidiaries. CBS RADIO and EYE Logo TM and Copyright 2012 CBS Broadcasting Inc. Used under license. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

As an independent and a Christian I don't agree either, but I can't tell a woman what to do with her body...

Also, freakonomics proves that a ban would increase crime. So you ban abortion and prepare for more unwanted children to be born and an increase in crime or you go against your conscience and allow abortions to take place knowing that it keeps crime down... (read the book and saw the documentary)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jesus would also try to win the hearts of the people having the abortions so that they could avoid the behavior that led to the consequence of pregnancy. Don't bring Jesus into it unless you want to discuss personal responsibility and commitment to God.

See, I tend to agree with this view, plus I think it's inappropriate to use my personal faith as a basis for passing laws (as Psychic Gibbon points out).

I think the Democrat party ought to re-think it's position on abortion because it is morally reprehensible, relies on the same flawed moral framework as chattel slavery, and is antithetical to a free and right society. What Jesus says about it is only relevant to my personal behavior and actions, at least under the legal framework our Constitution spells out. The better argument is it is an affront to human freedom and dignity and ought be curtailed for that reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jesus would also try to win the hearts of the people having the abortions so that they could avoid the behavior that led to the consequence of pregnancy. Don't bring Jesus into it unless you want to discuss personal responsibility and commitment to God.

I agree with this, but you must also see why people make the decisions they do. The answer to this will lead to another question, then another and another. One of the answers will be being poor. One will be its hard to make good decisions when your hormones are going wild. I don't know the root cause but I know it would take hundreds of years to solve the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See, I tend to agree with this view, plus I think it's inappropriate to use my personal faith as a basis for passing laws (as Psychic Gibbon points out).

I think the Democrat party ought to re-think it's position on abortion because it is morally reprehensible, relies on the same flawed moral framework as chattel slavery, and is antithetical to a free and right society. What Jesus says about it is only relevant to my personal behavior and actions, at least under the legal framework our Constitution spells out. The better argument is it is an affront to human freedom and dignity and ought be curtailed for that reason.

I'm not a big fan of abortion myself, but I can see why people get the procedure and would prefer if it remained an option (sans late term abortions unless something has gone horribly wrong with the pregnancy/development of the fetus). In my opinion, if you want abortion rates to drop then you need to promote better sex education, provide better access to contraception, promote better laws which guarantee paid maternity leave (it's perfectly legal to fire a woman for being pregnant in far too many areas in this country), grant greater tax credits for families who have children (so having kids isn't viewed as such a great economic burden), provide better access to daycare, and promoting adoption. That is a better way of trying to curb, or end, abortion than protesting for the end of abortion and doing nothing else.

Edited by Psychic Gibbon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

See, I tend to agree with this view, plus I think it's inappropriate to use my personal faith as a basis for passing laws (as Psychic Gibbon points out).

I think the Democrat party ought to re-think it's position on abortion because it is morally reprehensible, relies on the same flawed moral framework as chattel slavery, and is antithetical to a free and right society. What Jesus says about it is only relevant to my personal behavior and actions, at least under the legal framework our Constitution spells out. The better argument is it is an affront to human freedom and dignity and ought be curtailed for that reason.

I agree with what you state here 100%. I just get tired of people wanting to do the right thing in one regard in the Lord's name but forget or look beyond doing the right thing in many other regards. Jesus told Peter to "feed my sheep". This goes beyond providing food to the masses, but in our current political environment, we're trying to provide less to those who need more and keep more and more for ourselves. Most of the people who hide behind religion in politics are filth and couldn't care much less for what Jesus actually represented vs. what the exploitation of the Bible can do to further their careers.

I agree with this, but you must also see why people make the decisions they do. The answer to this will lead to another question, then another and another. One of the answers will be being poor. One will be its hard to make good decisions when your hormones are going wild. I don't know the root cause but I know it would take hundreds of years to solve the problem.

Poverty and hormones are excuses. We are not animals, given into instinct. We are human beings, endowed with a sense of right and wrong and (mostly, anyway) an idea of what consequences result from our decisions and actions. Being poor is no more a reason to abort a child than it is the excuse to get pregnant in the first place.

In truth, poverty inadvertently may lead to girls and women becoming pregnant because there is a very clear gap in our educational system that is based upon income. They may not know what happens as a result of unprotected sex. However, after becoming pregnant the first time, that woman/girl has no excuse to become pregnant again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a big fan of abortion myself, but I can see why people get the procedure and would prefer if it remained an option (sans late term abortions unless something has gone horribly wrong with the pregnancy/development of the fetus). In my opinion, if you want abortion rates to drop then you need to promote better sex education, provide better access to contraception, promote better laws which guarantee paid maternity leave (it's perfectly legal to fire a woman for being pregnant in far too many areas in this country), grant greater tax credits for families who have children (so having kids isn't viewed as such a great economic burden), provide better access to daycare, and promoting adoption. That is a better way of trying to curb, or end, abortion than protesting for the end of abortion and doing nothing else.

Bravo post .....I'm pro choice and at the same time I hate abortions, I just don't believe I have the right to decide for someone else what not or do with there body...But I do live in a country that has all that you mentioned above and much more. At least if the women decides to keep the child she knows she will have a large social safety net that will help her in the raising of that child.

Side note: starting this Monday it will cost my company about 25$ more a week because I promised one of my cooks some 8 months ago I would give him an extra 50 cents a hour pay raise he if and his gf (waitress) decided to keep the child. They were thinking abortion at the time.. I like to think that my little 50 cent helped make that decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bravo post .....I'm pro choice and at the same time I hate abortions, I just don't believe I have the right to decide for someone else what not or do with there body...But I do live in a country that has all that you mentioned above and much more. At least if the women decides to keep the child she knows she will have a large social safety net that will help her in the raising of that child.

Side note: starting this Monday it will cost my company about 25$ more a week because I promised one of my cooks some 8 months ago I would give him an extra 50 cents a hour pay raise he if and his gf (waitress) decided to keep the child. They were thinking abortion at the time.. I like to think that my little 50 cent helped make that decision.

so you used a conditional pay raise in order to push your beliefs on someone else.

nice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with what you state here 100%. I just get tired of people wanting to do the right thing in one regard in the Lord's name but forget or look beyond doing the right thing in many other regards. Jesus told Peter to "feed my sheep". This goes beyond providing food to the masses, but in our current political environment, we're trying to provide less to those who need more and keep more and more for ourselves. Most of the people who hide behind religion in politics are filth and couldn't care much less for what Jesus actually represented vs. what the exploitation of the Bible can do to further their careers.

Poverty and hormones are excuses. We are not animals, given into instinct. We are human beings, endowed with a sense of right and wrong and (mostly, anyway) an idea of what consequences result from our decisions and actions. Being poor is no more a reason to abort a child than it is the excuse to get pregnant in the first place.

In truth, poverty inadvertently may lead to girls and women becoming pregnant because there is a very clear gap in our educational system that is based upon income. They may not know what happens as a result of unprotected sex. However, after becoming pregnant the first time, that woman/girl has no excuse to become pregnant again.

This is your perspective and you are entitled to it. My next question is are you Catholic? If so, then you are not suppose to use contraception. Man it would suck that every time I had sex with my wife, it would only be for procreation...

I believe we have tried before to tell teenagers to abstain from sex, it really doesn't work. Teach them to have protected sex. No we are not telling them to go have sex with everyone they see, but you know teenagers are going to do what they want to do, so allow them to have enough information to make the right choice.

Until you fix the causality of people making babies they dont want, then i will say I like to keep crime rates down and allow them to continue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, I'm not Catholic. And it isn't just teenage girls, by the way. I've witnessed my cousins and young women who grew up in church having children at 25 because their clock is running down and they can't find a good man. I'm pretty sure most of them got pregnant doing the nasty. The point I'm making is that people are going to do what they're going to do. Explanations for these actions sound much too much like excuses.

Oh, and I hope I'm not on a high horse to have my opinions because I'm filthy in more ways than can be counted. I just don't agree that the former President should be throwing up religion as a basis to curb behavior. Nor do I agree with 80% of the reasons people wind up in tricky situations and need welfare or government assistance to get out of them. As was stated before, if something is to be prevented, it should be for moral reasons moreso than religious reasons, but how do you regulate morals?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, I'm not Catholic. And it isn't just teenage girls, by the way. I've witnessed my cousins and young women who grew up in church having children at 25 because their clock is running down and they can't find a good man. I'm pretty sure most of them got pregnant doing the nasty. The point I'm making is that people are going to do what they're going to do. Explanations for these actions sound much too much like excuses.

Oh, and I hope I'm not on a high horse to have my opinions because I'm filthy in more ways than can be counted. I just don't agree that the former President should be throwing up religion as a basis to curb behavior. Nor do I agree with 80% of the reasons people wind up in tricky situations and need welfare or government assistance to get out of them. As was stated before, if something is to be prevented, it should be for moral reasons moreso than religious reasons, but how do you regulate morals?

Oh I see. The only thing you can do is provide proper incentives to hopefully get the desired behavior. Also your clock doesn't run out at 25... I want to have a kid before my wife turns 32 (within 6 years). Maybe it is a myth about problems with kids born from parents in their late 30s, but I don't want to chance it... and I want "ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL" my kids out of the house before I turn 50... which means we need to be done in 2 years :( I probably wont get this wish, but oh well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See, I tend to agree with this view, plus I think it's inappropriate to use my personal faith as a basis for passing laws (as Psychic Gibbon points out).

I think the Democrat party ought to re-think it's position on abortion because it is morally reprehensible, relies on the same flawed moral framework as chattel slavery, and is antithetical to a free and right society. What Jesus says about it is only relevant to my personal behavior and actions, at least under the legal framework our Constitution spells out. The better argument is it is an affront to human freedom and dignity and ought be curtailed for that reason.

I think both sides need to rethink their stance on abortions, as in quit using it as a hot button issue with no real plans to do a thing about it either way.

One thing tho, for the crowd who says " what about in instances of rape or the mothers life in danger?"

Pretty sure those are such a low % of actual cases they could be dealt with on an individual basis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an independent and a Christian I don't agree either, but I can't tell a woman what to do with her body...

Also, freakonomics proves that a ban would increase crime. So you ban abortion and prepare for more unwanted children to be born and an increase in crime or you go against your conscience and allow abortions to take place knowing that it keeps crime down... (read the book and saw the documentary)

it's not about what the woman does to her body, it's about what she does to the body of a completely seperate human being.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's not about what the woman does to her body, it's about what she does to the body of a completely seperate human being.

If you are willing to sacrifice making crime higher in 20 years to end abortion, then by all means be my guest. I by all intents and purposes would like to keep crime low. You can choose to believe freakonomics or not, but it roe v wade saved us from the doomsday predictions of the early 90s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you are willing to sacrifice making crime higher in 20 years to end abortion, then by all means be my guest. I by all intents and purposes would like to keep crime low. You can choose to believe freakonomics or not, but it roe v wade saved us from the doomsday predictions of the early 90s

well if we want to keep crime low then why not just legalize everything? then we will have effectively eliminated crime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is your perspective and you are entitled to it. My next question is are you Catholic? If so, then you are not suppose to use contraception. Man it would suck that every time I had sex with my wife, it would only be for procreation...

I believe we have tried before to tell teenagers to abstain from sex, it really doesn't work. Teach them to have protected sex. No we are not telling them to go have sex with everyone they see, but you know teenagers are going to do what they want to do, so allow them to have enough information to make the right choice.

Until you fix the causality of people making babies they dont want, then i will say I like to keep crime rates down and allow them to continue.

Then maybe its time to question why you are Catholic?

And Im bored with the " they do it because they are not educated" stuff. Kids today know more about sex by the time they are 9 than 21 year old kids did a decade ago.

Kids have sex because it is a very strong drive and urge. They don't think about the consequences even tho they know them well. Its not that complex really. If something feels incredible, people will do it. Period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well if we want to keep crime low then why not just legalize everything? then we will have effectively eliminated crime.

Sigh.... I won't argue. I could argue up and down why abortion is wrong morally and religiously. Sadly, you know my context then distort it to make a counter argument. Until you solve the problem of why people are baby making before they are ready, I can't say blindly end abortions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

when it comes to our goverment, our republic, everyone likes to talk about democracy, everyone's vote counts, etc, and that's a wonderful thing, but one of it's main functions is not to go with the majority but in fact to protect the minority from the majority. if we cannot protect the most innocent of those among us, then really, what are we doing here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you are willing to sacrifice making crime higher in 20 years to end abortion, then by all means be my guest. I by all intents and purposes would like to keep crime low. You can choose to believe freakonomics or not, but it roe v wade saved us from the doomsday predictions of the early 90s

why assume all the babies will be criminals? What if one was the one to cure cancer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then maybe its time to question why you are Catholic?

And Im bored with the " they do it because they are not educated" stuff. Kids today know more about sex by the time they are 9 than 21 year old kids did a decade ago.

Kids have sex because it is a very strong drive and urge. They don't think about the consequences even tho they know them well. Its not that complex really. If something feels incredible, people will do it. Period.

I agree with you but I think that there is more to it than that.

Part of the lack of consideration of the consequences come from our society and upbringing. Our society is definitely based on immediate gratification now

Wasn't there a report awhile back that showed that people in many countries make a lower comparable income on average and yet are able to save more than Americans?

edit: I know Germany was one example used

Edited by Dago 3.0
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sigh.... I won't argue. I could argue up and down why abortion is wrong morally and religiously. Sadly, you know my context then distort it to make a counter argument. Until you solve the problem of why people are baby making before they are ready, I can't say blindly end abortions.

i have no illusions of ending abortions by making them illegal. maybe the fact that abortions are so easily available, and legal, is actually contributing to the unwanted pregancies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...