+
upworthy

president

Jimmy Carter at the COmmonwealth Club.

Jimmy Carter, 99, was the 39th president of the United States (1977 to 1981). Looking back on his achievements both in and out of office, it’s easy to say that he was a man ahead of his time. He was far ahead of the mainstream when it came to advocating for social justice, human rights, and the environment.

Carter famously installed solar panels on the White House in 1979, only to have them removed by Ronald Reagan.

The former peanut farmer and Navy Lieutenant from Plains, Georgia, was also far ahead of his time when supporting gay rights. In 1976, while running for president, he said he would sign the Equality Act, an amendment to the 1964 Civil Rights Act that would prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation. “I will certainly sign it, because I don’t think it’s right to single out homosexuals for special abuse or special harassment,” he said.


He continued to advocate for gay rights as president. In 1977, the first gay delegation visited the White House. He also campaigned against California’s Proposition 6, which would have barred gays and lesbians from teaching in the state’s schools and was the first Democratic president to endorse gay rights in the party’s platform in 1980.

It may seem unusual for Cater, a confessed born-again Christian, to be a staunch advocate for gay rights. But he has publicly said that he believes that being pro-gay is wholly aligned with the teachings of Jesus Christ. Carter’s advocacy is in the spotlight once again after a meme featuring his thoughts about Christ and homosexuality from 2012 went viral on Reddit's MadeMeSmile forum on April 8, 2024.

Jimmy Carter
byu/PR0CR45T184T0R inMadeMeSmile

The viral quote was taken from an interview with the Huffington Post in 2012, during which Carter promoted his book, “NIV, Lessons from Life Bible: Personal Reflections with Jimmy Carter.” At the time, LGBTQ rights were the subject of heated debate in Washington, and President Obama had just “evolved” and began publicly supporting same-sex marriage.

"A lot of people point to the Bible for reasons why gay people should not be in the church or accepted in any way,” the interviewer Rev. Paul Brandeis Raushenbush said. But Carter responded by correctly noting that Jesus Christ never said anything about homosexuality.

"Homosexuality was well known in the ancient world, well before Christ was born and Jesus never said a word about homosexuality. In all of his teachings about multiple things—he never said that gay people should be condemned. I personally think it is very fine for gay people to be married in civil ceremonies,” Carter said. "I draw the line, maybe arbitrarily, in requiring by law that churches must marry people. I'm a Baptist, and I believe that each congregation is autonomous and can govern its own affairs.

"So if a local Baptist church wants to accept gay members on an equal basis, which my church does, by the way, then that is fine. If a church decides not to, then government laws shouldn't require them to,” he continued.

Three years later, Carter shared the same sentiments in another interview with the Huffington Post, this time shortly after the U.S. Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage. “I think Jesus would encourage any love affair if it was honest and sincere and was not damaging to anyone else and I don’t see that gay marriage damages anyone else,” Carter said.

Jimmy Carter’s belief in gay rights stems from his faith as a Christian, but it’s also in complete alignment with his values as an American. Carter believed that the United States was a “beacon” for human rights, and in his 1981 presidential farewell address, he reminded the nation that the job was an ongoing struggle.

“The battle for human rights – at home and abroad – is far from over,” Carter said. “If we are to serve as a beacon for human rights, we must continue to perfect here at home the rights and values which we espouse around the world: A decent education for our children, adequate medical care for all Americans, an end to discrimination against minorities and women, a job for all those able to work, and freedom from injustice and religious intolerance.”

Judging by today's plunging stock market and the White House scrambling to correct three crucial pieces of information, last night's presidential address (which you can read in its entirety here) did little to reassure the country that the government is adeptly handling the coronavirus pandemic.

A mere few hours after the president concluded his remarks, global preparedness and humanitarian response expert Jeremy Konyndyk took to Twitter and shared the address that Americans really needed to hear.


I don't think it's overstating to say it's pretty much perfection. Check it out:

"My fellow Americans, the next few months are going to be hard. For many of us, harder than anything we've faced in our lifetimes. Life in our country is about to change. We must unify against this threat like we unified after 9/11.

And indeed, this virus threatens to kill more Americans than terrorism ever has.

But we can defeat it, and we will defeat it. My administration has a plan to lead this fight. I will outline that plan in a moment.

But more important than the plan is this:

We must all own this fight.

Defeating this outbreak will take science and medicine, but it will also take unity and partnership—from all of us. For now, medicine cannot defeat this disease. But *people* can. We have no vaccine, we have no treatment, although we are working furiously to develop both.

Until then, what we have is us. Our choices, our decisions, our behavior—that is how we will do this.

Here is the plan. Our most important priority over the coming months is to protect our highest-risk citizens, and the hospitals that will work to save them if they become ill.

We have seen what happened in Wuhan, and is happening in Iran and Italy. We should not imagine it cannot happen here. Make no mistake: this is a dangerous disease. While most who contract it become only mildly ill, it is extremely deadly for the elderly and people with chronic health problems.

You may be one of those people, or you may love one of those people—all of us have a stake in this. That is why tonight I am announcing national policy guidance on social distancing, and tomorrow I will be speaking with every governor in the country to secure their commitment to implement this guidance.

This must be a whole-of-society effort. We do not want to lock down our population as China did. But to avoid that, we must apply universal and aggressive public measures to slow the spread.

Even if you are young and low risk, you can still contract and spread it. And that threatens those who are at higher risk. So I am calling on all communities to suspend all mass gatherings of over 50 people.

I applaud the brave and difficult decisions made today by the NCAA and NBA—they are leading by example. I call on other business and civic leaders to follow them. These important measures are how we can protect our health system. We must ensure that those who do fall sick can obtain the quality care that they need, and survive. Aggressive social distancing measures help achieve this by reducing the number of people sick at any one time.

Reducing the number of people who are sick at once is the best way to keep our health system from being overwhelmed. And that in turn helps not just COVID-19 patients but also everyone else who must seek treatment in a hospital. You will learn more about these measures in the coming days, and I beg you to abide by them.

Social distancing, along with handwashing, are the most important things that average Americans can do to defeat this disease. Next, we must protect Americans who are highest risk from this virus. I have directed HHS to refocus the federal Public Health Service to reinforce their state and local counterparts on outreach and support to high risk people and facilities.

But they can't do this alone. We must all work to ensure that every seniors' home, retirement community, and other high-risk facility has the support it needs to prevent infections. And I urge Americans to take ownership of this. If you have loved ones in a high-risk facility - join us in this effort.

Next we must ensure that our nation's hospitals have the resources and support that they need to manage the coming flood of cases. While I fervently hope that we will not see the severe case volumes witnessed in China and Italy—we must be ready for that scenario. That is why I am directing HHS to immediately make urgent resources and support available to hospitals to safely isolate and treat COVID-19 patients.

I am also directing the military to make military doctors available to expand critical care capacity around the country. And I am directing the Army Corps of Engineers to help hospitals expand their intensive care facilities, and also to rapidly establish drive-through testing, which have proved successful in South Korea.

And let's talk about testing. First, I apologize.

I and my administration bungled this badly, but we are moving with total urgency to fix the problem. Public health labs and major research institutions across the country will now have free rein to initiate widespread testing, and the federal government will reimburse this fully.

This rapid expansion of testing will be available, free of charge, to every American. And if you feel ill, or suspect you have been exposed, I urge you to be tested so that you can self-quarantine if needed. Self-quarantine is a powerful tool against this virus.

Finally, we must protect our economy, and also protect those who may be most hurt by mass social distancing measures. Gig workers; hourly wage-earners; small businesses; event planners—all will face economic hardship over the next several months.

I am announcing tonight the creation of a social distancing empowerment fund, which will provide modest bailouts to self-employed workers and small business owners who lose significant income due to our new distancing guidelines.

These measures - mass social distancing, protecting our highest risk citizens, and protecting our hospital system—are the critical trifecta that will restrain fatalities in our country while helping to bring disease transmission under control. But none of this works without you. You—every citizen—must own this fight.

I know many of you do not trust me, and do not often wish me to succeed. But in this I will do my best to deserve your trust, and once this is over we can go back to fighting over judges and policy. This will be a long hard fight. But we must prevail and we will prevail. I commit to you that I and everyone in the federal government will do our part; and we call on you to do yours.

Good night."

I don't know about you, but just reading that speech made me feel better. If the president had given this address, I'd be left feeling like the president not only understands the full scope and gravity of the situation, but also how to get the country all on the same page with what specific actions to take and why.

Konyndyk is a global outbreak preparedness and humanitarian response expert with the Center for Global Development, as well as a member of the World Health Organization's high-level Independent Oversight and Advisory Committee. Seems it would have been wise for the president to have asked him to write his pandemic speech. And maybe even oversee the administration's response to the pandemic as well, instead of putting people with no experience and a huge learning curve in charge.

What a startling contrast that would have been.

In a completely unsurprising yet somehow still somewhat shocking move, the President of the United States has compared his impeachment inquiry to a lynching.

A lynching. There are just no words.


People with consciences everywhere were quick to condemn the tweet, explaining what really should not need to be explained. That calling a legal process a "lynching" is both factually erroneous and blatantly inappropriate. That a white man in power harkening to historical violence against black people in an attempt to paint himself as a victim is racist as all get out. That the comparison is horrendous and hurtful and beneath the basics of human decency, much less the dignity of the office of the President.

The backlash was swift, severe, and completely deserved.

Scholar and author Ibram Kendi called out Trump's audacity:

Bernice King, daughter of Martin Luther King, Jr., pointed out that the tweet is "a reflection of the very real trajectory of our nation and the very repugnant evil of racism, which still permeates both legislation and language in the United States."

RELATED: 'Everything is racist these days' because white supremacy is as American as apple pie

Some took the tack of sharing the tragic images of actual lynchings to drive home the appalling offense of such a comparison.


RELATED: A teacher had her 8th graders write 'funny' captions under slavery-era photos. Seriously, WTF.

Others sought to educate the ignorant on what lynching really is and why it's not a term to be tossed around lightly.

Congresswoman Frederica Wilson from Florida, who has served in the House of Representatives since 2011, called the tweet "despicable and disgusting" and anyone who defended it "reprehensible."

Of course, people have defended it because it's 2019 and nothing makes sense anymore. Lindsey Graham told the press that what the president is experiencing is "a lynching in every sense."

Seriously? "In every sense." What is wrong with you, man?


Some have tried to call the backlash against the use of the word "lynching" hypocritical, pointing out that the same people calling it out are okay with calling those who engage in white supremacy "Nazis."

Except that the Nazis were a political party with a racist ideology similar to those who performed lynchings, not the victims of racist, violent oppression. Also, it's not exactly a stretch to invoke the word "Nazi" when actual neo-Nazis voice support for someone in power—someone who also reportedly kept a copy of Hitler's speeches by his bed.

Soooo, yeah. Not the samesies, Mike.

A man who has been repeatedly accused of racism since long before his presidency using the word "lynching" to describe the constitutional checks and balances in our political system is gross on every level. It just is. And while calling him out on it will do absolutely nothing to change his ways, it's good to see that not all Americans have abandoned reason and decency.

Carry on and keep fighting the good fight, fellow citizens.

“If there was an active shooter, you’d all be dead,” Kayleigh, an elementary school-aged girl introduced as an “expert” bluntly tells a group of adult workers assembled in their office mail room for a team building event.

“When you talk out loud, the shooter can tell where you are and where you’re hiding,” she continues. “Sometimes we play the game ‘who can stay quietest the longest’ so we all remember.”

The adults look uncomfortable and about as shocked and disturbed as can be expected that an innocent-looking child is instructing them on how to try and protect themselves by pushing tables and chairs against doors, placing paper over windows, and crouching on toilet seats in the bathroom. Then we see what was likely flashing in their minds as Kayleigh spoke — young children carrying out these actions in a classroom.


“Try to listen for things that could help the police. For example; if you hear a lot of bangs like, ‘BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG’ the shooter might be down the hall. Or if you hear louder ones like, ‘BANG… BANG… BANG…’ he could be right outside your door,” she continues.

“And you can’t cry,” she adds. “It gives away your position and your hiding spot.”

The PSA concludes with an eerie song that Kayleigh explains was taught to her by her teacher to makes sure she and her peers wouldn’t forget what to do if there was an active shooter in their school.

“Lockdown lockdown let’s all hide. Lock the doors and stay inside. Crouch on down. Don’t make a sound. And don’t cry or you’ll be found,” she sings.

While this video may seem a little dramatic, it’s not. According to March For Our Lives, which advocates for gun control, 95% of public school children in the United States practice lockdown drills like Kayleigh describes in the video.

Gun control is not a new public policy issue, but it’s been gaining momentum lately because of the number of recent mass shootings. Unsurprisingly, it’s become a hot topic among candidates for the 2020 presidential election.

Last week President Trump addressed the allegedly flailing NRA and also "unsigned" the United States from a United Nations arms treaty which helped keep firearms out of the hands of human rights abusers.

On the other end of the spectrum, Democrat presidential candidates California Sen. Kamala Harris and New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker have made gun reform a significant part of their political agendas.

"I am tired of seeing street-level shrines to children who have been murdered — candles and teddy bears," Booker recently declared, calling gun control a public health issue. "I'm tired of going to funeral after funeral when the most perverse, unnatural things happen where parents bury children."

Obviously March for Our Lives stands with the latter candidates. Their PSA urges viewers to sign a gun reform petition advocating for laws that will prevent guns from falling into dangerous hands.

“Let the Senate know you want S. 42, the Background Check Expansion Act, passed so we can close gun sale loopholes and ditch mass shooting class,” they wrote on their website. “The fight for universal background checks is the most important fight for gun violence prevention yet, and 97% of Americans support it.”

No matter how you feel about the second amendment, can’t we all agree that thorough background checks are absolutely necessary, and that getting access to a potentially deadly weapon should be considered a privilege and not a right?

While not every one of these tragedies — Sandy Hook, Columbine, Parkland, the California synagogue, just to name a handful. — could have been prevented with tighter gun control laws, it’s very possible that many would have been. Just think about how many lives could have been saved if just one of the shooters behind these massacres hadn’t been able to get a gun.

To let the Senate know you want S. 42, the Background Check Expansion Act, passed, sign the petition by clicking here.