Jimmy Carter: Democrats Should Abandon Pro-Abortion Position

Jimmy Carter: Democrats Should Abandon Pro-Abortion Position

Appearing on the radio talk show of conservative radio host Laura Ingraham today, former President Jimmy Carter said he believes the Democratic Party should moderate its position on abortion, which it currently supports without limits and funded at taxpayer expense.


Better late than never.

This is pretty cool because Jimmy Carter is a pretty respected and respectable guy. Too bad no one will hear he says this outside of people that already agree with him…

:eek: Are we talking about the same Jimmy Carter???

Just so we understand what we are talking about…

“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 and I did everything I could to minimize the need for abortions. I made it easy to adopt children for instance who were unwanted and also initiated the program called Women and Infant Children or WIC program that’s still in existence now. But except for the times when a mother’s life is in danger or when a pregnancy is caused by rape or incest I would certainly not or never have approved of any abortions.”

I applaud the man for saying so, and for doing so on conservative talk radio.

Of course he doesn’t go far enough, but in the fight against the legalized murder of children we’ll take what we can get.


Yeah, I’m talking about this guy:

Jimmy Carter served as president from Jan. 20, 1977, to Jan. 20, 1981. Significant foreign policy accomplishments of his administration included the Panama Canal treaties, the Camp David Accords, the treaty of peace between Egypt and Israel, the SALT II treaty with the Soviet Union, and the establishment of U.S. diplomatic relations with the People’s Republic of China. He championed human rights throughout the world. On the domestic side, the administration’s achievements included a comprehensive energy program conducted by a new Department of Energy; deregulation in energy, transportation, communications, and finance; major educational programs under a new Department of Education; and major environmental protection legislation, including the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act.

He won the Nobel Peace Prize too, which is pretty respectable in my book.

In other words, the same Jimmy Carter who was yelled at the Pope for not ordaining women and who called JPII a ‘fundamentalist’


I’m glad we are clear on exactly how respectable Jimmy Carter is :thumbsup:

This is the only issue I think I agree with Carter on. We can hope that Democrats listen, but unfortunately I do not think they will because the party is funded by the abortion lobby. But they are fighting a losing battle, because Americans are becoming more pro life, the majority of Americans do not support unrestricted abortion like the Democrat platform supports.

Well…my word. It sounds as if he should have kept a cooler head during those discussions. I still think he’s respectable…becoming president is respectable in its own right, meaning “able to be respected.” All humans deserve respect, he’s no exception. :wink: He’s done more good in his life than I probably ever will!

In the context of my original post though, I was mostly referring to his being highly regarded in liberal circles, and internationally. It would be good if these people heard what he’s saying about abortion now.

There are pro-life Democrats. They were generally called the blue-dog Democrats. Unfortunately, most of them were voted out after last election.

That said, Carter also appointed Paul Volcker to the Fed. That is seen more and more these days as one of his better accomplishments/appointments.

I wonder if there is any Democrat though, that because of their pro life position, they would rather a pro life Republican be president in November, over pro abortion Democrat Obama winning reelection?

“I never have believed that Jesus Christ would approve of abortions…But except for the times when a mother’s life is in danger or when a pregnancy is caused by rape or incest I would certainly not or never have approved of any abortions…"

Is it respectable to sit on the fence? Except for rape or incest is a qualifier that makes one pro choice.

Stop it! :smiley: You’re killing me!!! :rotfl:

Ahhhh, my sides hurt…

Not to go too far off-topic but maybe if the nominee were Ron Paul, since he’s also anti-war and anti-Fed and can work with the Democrats. Just my opinion.

Looks like Life News is bearing false witness again and showing itself to be a political organization masquerading as a fake news site. Or can anyone show me where in the Democratic Party platform it supports abortion “without limits”?

Federal law requires that states cover abortions under Medicaid in the event of rape, incest, and life endangerment, but bans the use of federal Medicaid funds for any other abortions.

U.S. laws also ban federal funding of abortions for Federal employees and their dependents, Native Americans covered by the Indian Health Service, military personnel and their dependents, and women with disabilities covered by Medicare. kff.org/womenshealth/upload/3269-02.pdf

It would have nice if President Carter had enunciated such a policy while he was president. The Democratic Party platform essentially upholds Roe v Wade. And Roe v Wade was from the outset a blessing of abortion on demand. Despite it’s original trimester policy, every abortion restriction had to make provision for life–and health–of the mother. And under its companion decision Doe v Bolton, the Court made clear that “health” could essentially mean whatever the abortionist wanted it to mean–physical health, mental health, family factors, etc. State legislatures found it nearly impossible to have any abortion restrictions upheld under the Doe v Bolton agenda.

The Democratic Party has become increasing pro-abortion in the decades ever since. The platform becomes more pro-abortion every year. And of course, Mr. Obama in the Illinois legislature, opposed even a bill intended to protect infants born alive. Being pro-abortion has become nearlhy a litmus test for Democratic candidates. I think it was Bishop Burke who said that the party risked becoming the ‘party of death’ because of it’s pro-abortion stance. Not much as changed at the top of the party.

2008 Democrat party platform:

The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v Wade and a woman’s right to choose a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.


If you look at the following website you can see how from 2000 to 2008 how the Democrat party has for every party platform used more abortion supporting language:


Really? I was unaware of this. You mean like the pro-lifer, Bart Stupak?

Yes, really. If he were Republican (and it sounds like you are too), you’d probably be defending him. No?

Romney’s an admitted pro-choicer and pro-war but he’s given the benefit of the “doubt” (as was Reagan) so what’s wrong with the “blue dog” Democrats? (I believe there were 64 of them in the last Congress.)


My district had a pro-lifer run against the Republican heavy but could only raise $16,000; it is going to be a tough battle getting these Democrat pro-lifers (and keeping them) in office. Maybe this will be a start in that direction.


Scroll down to page 52



The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to choose a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.

I don’t see the Democratic party listing any limitations on the use of this so called ‘right’.

I’m not the biggest fan of Lifenew’s reporting skills either, but this is a time when they are right on the money

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.