Beliefs Culture Politics

Jimmy Carter’s essay on quitting church is suddenly viral

Former President Jimmy Carter during a book signing at The Washington Post on March 26, 2014 for his new book, “A Call to Action: Women, Religion, Violence and Power.” Religion News Service photo by Adelle M. Banks

NEW YORK, (Reuters) – Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter can still command people’s attention. His 2009 column on why he quit his church for women’s rights  — “Losing my religion over equality”  —  has abruptly gone viral.

Carter, 90, a Nobel Peace laureate and longtime human rights champion, has campaigned to end violence and discrimination against women since leaving the White House in 1981, calling it “the human and civil rights struggle of our time”.

Carter’s campaign for the better treatment of women and girls globally has never stopped and last year his book, “A Call to Action: Women, Religion, Violence and Power,” was published calling on world leaders for action.

Ensnared in religious beliefs and traditional customs that often trump civil law, women’s rights are under constant assault across the globe, Carter told Reuters. 

He has drawn up a list of 23 gender-based issues he wants addressed, from child marriage to honor killings – but for him, one is of particular worry.

“I would say the one that concerns me the most is the murder of little baby girls, the aborting of them when they’re found to be female,” he said, referring to the practice of sex-selective abortion in countries where there is a preference for sons.

“That’s about the most horrendous of all the problems we’re facing,” he said in a telephone interview.

Due to these practices, there are some 160 million missing girls, primarily from India and China, but also from other countries, he said.

“These countries pass laws that prevent these abuses, but people just ignore the laws and the government looks the other way.”

His fight for women’s rights was sparked during his years travelling around the world when he became increasingly concerned about the myriad problems he saw involving women.

Carter, the 39th U.S. president who took up office in 1977, founded the Carter Center with his wife Rosalynn in 1982 dedicated to the protection of human rights, promotion of democracy, and prevention of disease.

His determination to promote the rights of women led him in 2000 to sever ties with the Southern Baptist Convention, after six decades, over its rejection of women in leadership.

He explained his decision to quit the church in a 2009 article titled “Losing my religion for equality”.

“Women and girls have been discriminated against for too long in a twisted interpretation of the word of God,” he wrote in the article.

A flood of people have viewed the article on the website of Australia’s The Age newspaper — the highest rated story in the publication’s history — after it was tweeted recently by a U.S. pastor and spiraled on social media. It has been shared over 900,000 times on Facebook and 1,400 times on Twitter.

“I’ve always admired the unusual decency & humility of former US Pres Jimmy Carter – movingly evident here, again,” tweeted Australian Senator Penny Wright.

About the author



Click here to post a comment

  • Poor Jimmy, quitting “church” will not help bring about equality. Working for reform within religion’s structure is the crusade you should pursue. Your international fame is an asset that you could use to open doors to frank discussions with religious leaders. Educate them as a co-religious, not as an outsider.
    Your message infers that Religion is a roadblock to women’s equality, thus giving some credence to the idea that God is somehow to blame. If people are not accepting of your beliefs, just keep trying…..their eyes may open long after you are dead because of your statements now.
    You assume that inequality does not exist in the secular world, can you also leave the world because they don’t listen to you? Society in general has thought of women as “less than men” since antiquity, so throwing off the shackles of religion means little….in fact it’s discrimination.

  • “Women and girls have been discriminated against…in a twisted interpretation of the word of God,” Carter wrote…

    This is not a ‘twisted interpretation’. Rather, it is your willful ignorance of the Bible.

    God COMMANDS YOU ….Kill the women. Rape the little girls:

    “Moses was furious ….’Why have you let all the women live?’ he demanded. …They are the ones who caused the plague to strike the LORD’s people. Now kill all the women who have slept with a man. Only the young female virgins may live; save them for your pleasures.” (Num:31:18)

    Religion is madness.

  • One passage from one part of an enormous work taken out of context by a mind that tells itself it knows better is the kind of madness I’m grateful to say religion has saved me from.

  • The SBC was never really a good fit for Mr. Carter. The article wasn’t saying religion is a roadblock for equality nor that he has renounced his Christian faith. He was saying however some religious beliefs oppose equality and freedom. That is not a false statement in any way.

    Jimmy Carter finds the Southern Baptist sect constraining on his personal beliefs and faith. He is probably better suited for plenty of other sects. There is no need for him to stay and abide by the dictates of the hierarchy of a church he no longer feels no affinity for.

    You are reading a level of hostility to religion and Christianity which is not evident in the article. But I could understand how you would think that was there. Many Christians of a fundamentalist bent conflate their ideas and beliefs with the entirety of Christendom. Disavowing any sect within the faith which does not comport with their own ideas.

  • Yes, Mr. Carter’s mind is less crisp in his old age. Like it or not, men and women are very different, yet together they form a complementary whole. Roll back the clock 100 years, and you’d hardly find a woman who lusted after splitting wood, plowing the fields behind a team of horses, coal mining, hauling boulders to a house so to build a foundation. If I were a woman at the turn of the 20th century, I’d be quite happy cooking, cleaning, and ironing. However Mr. Carter does make 1/2 a point: he is saddened when young girls are aborted in their mother’s womb, but apparently doesn’t see anything wrong with the snuffing out of young boys. Maybe only the left half of his brain is atrophied.

  • That was incredibly arrogant and offensive on your part Greg.

    Essentially accusing his choice as being the result of senility. I guess you want to give any excuse why someone would chose to leave a given church to follow their personal beliefs.

    Mr. Carter’s essay certainly didn’t show a mind being destroyed. Far from it. Your insinuation to the contrary is not supported by facts but definitely shows spite and malice on your part. Something we never saw of Carter in public. He may not have been a lousy president and not particularly politically astute, but one could never accuse him of lacking moral fiber and conviction of beliefs. Slinging mud at a man like that is disgusting. You should be ashamed.

  • Good god man! Haven’t you ever read a history book?! North America was built on the backs of pioneer women who cut wood and worked alongside their husbands in the field. All while taking care of the children. These superwomen deserve so much more than to be written out of history by lazy thinkers and ideologues.

  • [Correction]

    He may have been a lousy president and not particularly politically astute…

    “My kingdom for an edit function”
    -Richard III

  • What? Carter leaves the Southern Baptist Convention 15 years ago, writes a silly justification for it 6 years ago, and suddenly it’s topical?

    Actual mistreatment of women abroad has little to do with contrived disputes over the ‘role’ of women in American religious congregations. If Carter’s foolishness (and responsiveness to bien pensant rubbish) were not intense, he would know that.

  • That was incredibly arrogant and offensive on your part Greg.

    You know, Larry, we often do not see ourselves as others do.

  • Of course, ‘inequality’ is not a problem, cruelty is, but the address of that is abroad and leaving the Southern Baptist Convention in response to clitoridectomies in Somalia wins a grand prize for non sequitur.

  • The numbers text deals with how ancient battles between Marion’s were fought. The text is misread by the athirst, the virgins of the day would have been very young and able to assimilate into Hebrew culture, the rest would have been an ongoing problem.
    As for Mr. Carter, the SBC made him, not the other way around. As a politician he milked it to become governor and then president at the height of the 70’s Jesus movement. He began distancing himself from the SBC hours after he was elected and they him. What a disappointment on so many levels. How can anyone respect a guy like this? I actually have more respect for Walter Mondale.


    “If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and she will never be allowed to divorce him.” (Deut. 22:28)

    That is God’s hatred.
    I think it is wonderful there is no reason to believe this god is true at all.

  • How laudable. Aborting “female babies” is a crime…

    I’m sure all the male babies hacked up and sucked through a vacuum would agree.

    Jimmy’s thinking is just a clear now as it was when he was POTUS.

  • Jimmy Carter was more his own man in 1976 than he is today, in the sense that his articulated perspective owed more to particular features of his life and upbringing and was very un-hip. He seems more and more to reflect the outlook of a nuisance UN bureaucrat (see the silly “Elders” enterprise he undertook with bad comedy Desmond Tutu and the ghastly Mary Robinson). Old people susceptible to the zeitgeist are very unedifying (Wendell Barry, I’m looking at you).

  • I would refer you to Early American Life or to colonial house museums and other work on the material culture of the colonial period. There was a domestic division of labor and there had to be. The differences in the anatomy and physiology of men and women made that necessary.

    You can still see it today. I worked for a company which had not a single male employee in its HR department the entire time I was there. However, the only tradesmen on the premises who were female were the staff horticulturalist and some IT techs. Plumber, electrician, HVAC techs, the works, all male.

  • worked alongside their husbands in the field.

    You fancy farm families had multiple teams of draught animals as a rule, or that kitchen gardens and hearths were untended?

  • Yeah there were some tough gals back then. But reality is reality. Regarding our modern society, well inventions have certainly opened up a large area of opportunity for women. And that is good, but we need to remember where we came from. And BTW, Jimmy Carter lost his bearing years ago; he is merely spiraling down as he gets closer to meeting Jesus. He needs to go into retirement from both speaking and writing, otherwise he might lose his current footing as being the second worst president in US history (our current one has topped Ol Jimmy).

  • Carter groups the discrimination of women the world over as equal, when it is clearly not, and is clearly not relgiously based across the board. The one child law of China caused the infanticide of female babies, the unequal pay for equal work is largely a modern Western issue, and the second class status of women is most notable in 3rd world countries. Female circumsion is unknown in most of the world, and raped women being killed for being raped is just as rare. So Carter blasts religion, or the Baptist mindset for all of this? Just isn’t coherent where he is going with this.

  • Then you would be totally disconnected from the women in the early 1900s. Jimmy Carter has a full deck and us not a misogynist. If slaving in a home for a man is so rewarding Greg have a go at it

  • Abrahamic religions can’t really come to grips with women’s equality.

    No, they ‘come to grips’ with it. They merely maintain that the sort of popular journalistic feminism you’ve seen in this country for 50 years is bloody wrong and needs to go away for everyone’s good.

  • His viewpoint is crude and stupid. He ought to know better. He looks at everything with frames which might have been favored by a George McGovern campaign volunteer. That’s no way to understand the world.

  • It may interest you to know that the Godhead has always had a Feminine. All you have to do is read Sirach, Edras, and The Book of Wisdom, along with Proverbs 8 to see what I mean. These books were placed in the Canon of the Bible at the Council of Carthage in 418-19. They appear in EVERY Christian Bible including The Original King James Bible before 1885 and the Geneva Bible which was used by the Puritans when they came to America.

    Holy Wisdom is referred to as the Breath of God, Who is the Holy Spirit. We don’t have to reference anything outside of what we already have in the Word of God. Genesis states that humans were made in the Image of God:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” Women are made in the image of Holy Wisdom, the Breath and Spirit of the Most High. If we would have kept the power of this mystery, which the Eastern Christians have understood over the centuries, we would not be in this mess.

  • Also the Sacrifice of Abraham only makes sense in the larger context of the Covenant he had with God,(who is called El Shaddai, by the way. Look up what that Name means). They both pledged to give each other EVERYTHING they had. That included their children. Abraham was willing to sacrifice his own son on God’s Word not like some crazed cultist but because he believed that God would raise his son back to life: Hebrews 11:
    …18 it was he to whom it was said, “IN ISAAC YOUR DESCENDANTS SHALL BE CALLED.” 19 He considered that God is able to raise people even from the dead, from which he also received him back as a type.

    Abraham had been told that his seed from Sarah would be called in a special way. How could that happen if he was dead? So Abraham figured that God would bring his son back. Instead God provided a LAMB in place of his son. If he had not been willing to give his son, then the Covenant would not have been valid. And centuries later.. “Behold the Lamb of God” Jesus…

  • Oh, heavens, another delusional feminist. God created man and woman in His Likeness, different, but equal. Man or woman cannot continue civilization without each other. The traits of each sex balance each other, it is only a modern fad to pretend that the sexes are equal biologically and emotionally.
    Get a grip, don’t chastise God when you see yourself as worthless. Accept your abilities in life and move on.

  • If slaving in a home for a man is so rewarding Greg have a go at it

    A man earns wages or a salary which he deposits in an account which his non-employed wife spends, ergo he is ‘slaving at an office (or factory) for a woman’.


    Strange as it may seem to the terminally childish, there is such a thing as domestic division of labor, wherein the utility of a couple is enhanced. Some people even derive much satisfaction in life from this mutuality.

  • I left because of inequality in my own SBC. Let’s be real. Women are far from being treated equally in this country in SBC.

  • I agree. I left the SBC because of inequality several years ago. Nothing has changed since. Women are second class, just like the Catholic Church. Welcome to the 21st century SBC, it’s time to catch up!

  • Atheist Max, have you heard of hermeneutics? Look it up before you post anything out of context.

  • While certain issues regarding women should be examined more thoughtfully by the Body of Christ, such as the troglodyte interpretation of ‘headship’ taken by many unthinking men in the confessing church, generally speaking, I would argue that former President Carter is as muddled in his religious thinking as he was in his political thinking 3 decades ago.

  • @JoyintheLord,

    How does hermeneutics fix this?

    God Commands: “You MUST RAPE YOUR NEIGHBOR’S WIVES in Daylight to PUNISH THEIR Husbands”
    “Thus says the Lord: ‘I will bring evil upon you out of your own house. I will take your wives [plural] while you live to see it, and will give them to your neighbor. He shall force sex on their WIVES in broad daylight. You have done this deed in secret, but I will bring it about in the presence of all Israel, and with the sun looking down.’ ” – YAHWEH GOD (2 Samuel 12:11)

    Looks to me like this horrific stuff
    was written by a barbarian conquerer who likes having sex with his conquered slaves.
    Looks to me like he has written into this ‘Word of God’ a special permission for himself to have all the raping sex he wants and to be blessed for it.

    Otherwise – it Looks like Rape Sex was exactly what your God wanted for women.

  • @Diogenes:

    “troglodyte interpretation of ‘headship’ taken by many unthinking men…”

    What about the unthinking troglodyte Men who wrote the bible? Why do you excuse them!?

    GOD (conveniently) SAYS:

    “And the daughter…if she profane herself by playing the whore, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt to death with fire.” (Leviticus 21:9)

    How civilized.

  • Isn’t it a bit hypocritical of Carter to bemoan the abortion of baby girls because of their sex while he supports abortion rights up until the last semester? How about the millions of little boys aborted? In the USA alone, thanks to this abortion mentality, we’ve lost some 58 million lives…and counting. The majority, of course, from the minority “brown races,” as Margaret Sanger, the apostle of the culture of Death, called them, and the main reason why she founded Planned Parenthood.

  • PART 1
    “God COMMANDS YOU. Kill the women. Rape the little girls.”

    The correct rendering of Numbers 31:15-18 says: “Moses said to them: “Have you preserved the females alive? Look! They are the ones who by Balaam’s word induced the Israelites to commit unfaithfulness toward Jehovah over the affair of Peor, so that the scourge came upon the assembly of Jehovah. Now you should kill every male among the children and kill every woman who has had sexual relations with a man. But you may keep alive all the young girls who have not had sexual relations with a man.” The act of Balaam and the entire nations of Moab & Midian was a deliberate act to bring God’s punishment upon the Israelites. Why? Because the Israelites were beginning their conquest of the Promised Land and they “felt sick with fear because of the Israelites.” (Numb. 22:1-4) So the Moabites and Midianites hired the spirit medium and diviner Balaam to curse Israel. But Jehovah put a stop to that. (Numb. 22:4-14) CONTINUED…

  • PART 2
    So Balaam came up with a new plan to induce the Israelites to break God’s laws on fornication, idolatry and demon worship. (Numb. 25:18 & 31:15, 16) It worked. People have free will. So “…the people started to commit sexual immorality with the daughters of Moab. The women [of Midian & Moab] invited the people to the sacrifices of their gods, and the people began to eat and bow down to their gods. So Israel joined in worship of Baal of Peor and Jehovah became enraged.” (Numb. 25:1-3) So Jehovah punished the Israelites because they willingly did this. As a result the Israelites were punished with a scourge that left dead those involved-over 24,000. Moab and Midian were trying to get Jehovah to destroy the Israelites Himself so they wouldn’t be conquered-it was a deliberate act of war and so Jehovah later commanded the Israelites to retaliate. Moses asking “have you preserved the females alive?” was because they kept alive the women responsible for everything that happened.

  • PART 3
    And as for the law on rape you listed from Deuteronomy 22:27 & 28; yes, sometimes some things in the Bible can seem quite shocking or confusing-on the surface-to modern eyes. (And sometimes, though rarely, no explanation is given or can be found) However, so I do not fill up this thread with another 20 posts you can read this if you’d like. It gives quite a detailed explanation on this subject. Part of it says: “This law deals with the ancient Near Eastern practice of betrothal, where a man would obtain a bride by giving her father a quantity of silver as a “bride-price” (sometimes also called “bride-wealth”). The bride-price was higher for virgins, so sleeping with a virgin out of wedlock would rob her family of the higher sum. Given the value placed on virginity, it would also severely reduce her chances of securing a husband, which would leave her socially and economically vulnerable. CONTINUED

  • PART 4
    The law resolves these problems by requiring the seducer to pay the higher amount and take the girl as his wife.”

    In all due respect sir, you must do more research before copy and pasting a list of twisted and misquoted Scriptures that those before you have done no research on. These copied lists are very easy to overturn for someone with knowledge of the Bible and ancient Biblical history. However, people don’t realize this because atheists have little to no knowledge of the Bible and because people in Christendom are the same-and what they do know is twisted. (Ex: How many people have been turned away from God because of their teaching the false, pagan and horrendous doctrine of eternal torment in hell?) So even when people come out of Christendom and become atheists they believe the copy and pasted one liners because they themselves had scant and twisted knowledge when they were religious. Its like a blind man leading a blind man-they will fall into a pit.

  • PART 5

    Respectfully, I encourage you to search elsewhere. There are answers that make perfect sense and that do not contradict and that present God the way he is-not a maniacal tyrant looking to punish people by burning them alive or as someone who is indifferent to whats going on in the world. I don’t post these things to argue or belittle you or anything-I’m just trying to show you there is much more to what you’re being fed.

  • This was in punishment for the act of David taking another mans wife, getting her pregnant and then murdering her husband to try and hide what he had done. Most of the time in Scripture, when it speaks of God doing something (i.e. “I shall cause”) it merely means it is something God allows to happen. In this, Jehovah was to withdraw his protection from David as punishment for his terrible act. So when His protection was withdrawn, bad things happened committed by people with free will-his sons who had perverse and power hungry thoughts and ambitions.

  • @AR,

    “when it speaks of God doing something (i.e. “I shall cause”) it merely means it is something God allows to happen.”

    Where did you get that information!? Who are you to speak about ‘what god means?’

    And what sort of God believes RAPING A WIFE would be a good way to punish their HUSBANDS!?

    Your God would advocate raping an innocent woman because of something her HUSBAND DID!


    “If men get into a fight with one another, and the wife of one intervenes to rescue her husband from the grip of his opponent by reaching out and SEIZING HIS PENIS AND TESTICLES, you shall cut off her hand; show no pity.” – Yahweh God, Father of Jesus (DEUT. 25:11)

    No wonder your God loves rape. He’s a psychopath.

  • @AR,

    “There are answers that make perfect sense and that do not contradict”

    No. There aren’t.
    I was a Catholic for 44 years. I know all about your apologetics. And it is disgraceful.

    “When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again.” (Exodus 21:7)

    Shame on every priest who does not rip this out of the Bibles in church!

  • PART 1
    Catholics are a part of Christendom. The Catholic church has never really encouraged Bible study for their laity. They encourage their rites and traditions over what the Bible says so that just proves my point of Biblical ignorance. And there is a huge difference between Christendom’s apologetics and what is actually true when explaining. And again, your reference just now is wildly out of context. SEX slave? Many of your points collapse when these added words are taken out and the context of verse is considered. Exodus chapter 21 draws a contrast between setting a man and woman slave free. A man could be set free without hassle because he would not face the disadvantages of a woman. (Ex. 21:-4) CONTINUED

  • PART 2
    Therefore, in verses 7-11 it says: “If a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not go free the same way that a slave man does. If her master is not pleased with her [as a slave-nothing to do with sex] and he does not designate her as a concubine but causes her to be purchased by someone else, he will not be entitled to sell her to foreigners, for he has betrayed her. If he selects her for his son, he is to grant her the rights of a daughter. If he takes another wife for himself, the sustenance, the clothing, and the marriage due of the first wife are not to be diminished. If he will not render these three things to her, then she is to go free without paying any money.” This was meant as a protection for the woman. It had nothing to do with being a sex slave. CONTINUED

  • PART 3
    Look, this could go on endlessly-Me correcting, you throwing out more objections-back and forth back and forth. I saw the other things you posted here and I could answer them all like I answered the others. Like I said, I don’t want to argue. By what I’ve already answered I’ve demonstrated that the things you’ve been putting up are wrong and demonstrated that you are being fed and repeating lies and half truths. I don’t say this in arrogance but I simply don’t have the time to always do this. I just suggest that you do your research and not close your mind to something that could be the truth.

  • PART 4
    And as for God “allowing” things, Jehovah never acts wickedly or unjustly. (If you think of more “wicked” acts of God, you need to consider the correct verse and context) James 1:13, 14 says: “When under trial, let no one say: “I am being tried by God.” For with evil things God cannot be tried, nor does he himself try anyone. But each one is tried by being drawn out and enticed by his own desire. Then the desire, when it has become fertile, gives birth to sin; in turn sin, when it has been carried out, brings forth death.” Basically its saying that if bad things are happening to you as a result of sin, You brought it on yourself. Also: “It is unthinkable for the true God to act wickedly, for the Almighty to do wrong.” (Job 34:10 & Rom. 9:14) It would violates his justice and holiness to act, as you assert, like a psychopath. Like I said, I can’t always be doing this so if you just post more things I probably won’t address them. But if you ever have sincere questions, I’ll…

  • @AR,

    “Jehovah never acts wickedly or unjustly.”

    It is unfortunate that you have never read your Bible with clear eyes:


    “I have wiped out many nations, devastating their fortress walls and towers. their cities are now deserted; their streets are in silent ruin. There are no survivors to even tell of what the calamity I made. I thought, ‘Surely they will have reverence for me now! Surely, I think to myself, they will listen to my warnings, so I won’t need to strike again.’ But no!” – YAHWEH, GOD OF FAILURES (Zephaniah 3:16)

    “My angel will go before you and bring you to the Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Canaanites, Hivites, and Jebusites; and I will wipe them out.” – Yahweh (Exodus 23:23)

    Sad that grown ups think this ancient claptrap this is real.

  • @AR,

    “Like I said, I don’t want to argue….”

    Well, I do.

    God specifically says slavery – which means OWNERSHIP.


    “You shall purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you…also the children..You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this…” – Yahweh (Leviticus 25:44-46)

    Shame on you for promoting ENSLAVEMENT AND OWNERSHIP OF HUMANS!

  • It’s only ‘time to catch up’ if you draw your understanding of right order from contemporary fashion, which many people are shallow enough to do.

  • Jimmy Carter didn’t have to stop being a Baptist to leave the SBC. In fact the headline of this article is misleading since he says exactly that. He left the SBC not the “church.” I don’t agree with former President Carter on much but I do agree with him on much of what he says about women in the church (not just the SBC). “… The carefully selected verses found in the Holy Scriptures to justify the superiority of men owe more to time and place – and the determination of male leaders to hold onto their influence – than eternal truths.” He describes the positions of leadership women held in the early church and how it was the 4th century that women were expelled from leadership.
    My Baptist church left the SBC a few years ago. Baptist do not have a top down hierarchy. You can be Baptist and disagree with the SBC or any other Baptist organization. Each Baptist church is independent. The SBC would like to change that and make itself into a hierarchical structure.

  • Granted Mr Carter’s presidency had more than its share of holes in it. THIS WAS BECAUSE OF……THAT’S RIGHT..

    .THE SBC Carter was betrayed by his own church for a NINETEEN SEVENTY SIX interview Carter gave with a certain adult publication….And THE JUDAS ISCARIOTS AT SBC SHOWED THEIR TRUE COWARUDE IF YELLIW AND BETRAYED HIM FOR SAYING. ” I AM A BORN AGAIN CHRISTIAN” in Hugh Hefners magazine. Maybe Hugh Hefner should be considered for a leadership position at SBC son of a notch convention

  • Troll heaven here. Many bizarre and self-serving comments about a man of faith and character who has spent a lifetime giving refuge and hope to those in need.

  • No, he wasn’t leaving his “Faith”, he was leaving a certain church that was refusing to accept women into leadership roles, because of nothing more than gender, not qualifications.
    That is very consistent for President Carter.

  • Yes, one should not quit ISIS, one should work from within it, changing it from the inside.

  • What a horrible excuse for a ‘man’ you are. Religion is slowly being phased out. Christianity is becoming an anachronism. Your ideas are out of step with time. Most people know God did not write the Bible, MEN did. I’m not here to change your warped mind; however, women have tasted the freedom and we’re going forward, not back. And yes history will leave you and your vulgar ignorance behind.

  • Lizbet, it takes a strong women to question that which she has been taught all her life. I’m sorry you are not that women. Go in peace and have a good life.

  • i’m a liberal christian and i’m just now finding out that president carter still attends the sbc affiliated church he always attended. i’m not impressed.

  • Mr. Carter bemoans the fact that more female babies are aborted ONLY because of their gender. This does not at all imply that he thinks it’s OK to abort boys. The culture of the countries who value boys more than girls, or indeed allow only one child, is what Mr. Carter is criticizing.