Summary Of Our Endangered Values By Jimmy Carter

Our Endangered Values by former President of the United States of America, James Earl Carter Jr. (Jimmy Carter), is a book which discusses America’s “moral crisis.” The aforementioned crisis concerns heavily debated political issues since President Carter’s term, including abortion, gay rights, foreign policy, and the death penalty, and discusses President Carter’s views on such topics. He speaks of his contention between his religion, Christianity and his own political beliefs, as a Democrat (Left-Wing), and in his book, often compares biblical values to current left-wing values. President Carter also reminisces his time at the White House, and discusses his change in beliefs from his term in the White House (1977-1981) to circa 2005, when Our Endangered Values was released. There is no overarching argument in this book; however President Carter makes several different arguments towards recent political
decisions and discusses his personal beliefs towards them; some based off his biblical values, and some based off his political party.
President Carter shows the way one’s belief system can change, and not always be cut and dry towards their political party, or religion.

In this book, President Carter makes several different arguments for many different beliefs. Although some of President Carter’s arguments were well made, the majority were made from a religious perspective which hindered his argument. Although the very point of this book is to argue from a religious perspective, the idea of arguing from a religious perspective is not the most efficient one. For example, in arguing against the death penalty, President Carter discusses the Bible preferring a policy of clemency rather than a death penalty. He
directs this argument towards those who are specifically Christian, and believe in the death penalty. There are two flaws within this argument; the first being the audience. Although a slight majority of those who are in favor of the death penalty are Christian, this argument would not serve those who are not; it would not change or affect their opinions dramatically. The argument would simply not be valid to those who do not follow the Bible, or identify as Christian but are not very religious. The second flaw within this argument by using the Bible in his argument. The Bible is a religious, not factual, text, which means it can be interpreted differently by different people. Although it can be used to support his argument, the use of the Bible, or any religious text for that matter, as a primary source in an argument allows room for a counter argument. Facts cannot be interpreted differently because their meanings cannot be changed. However, a quote from a religious text can be interpreted differently as there is no set definition. President Carter’s attempt at using religion as an argumentative tool was exactly that; an attempt, that was well intended, but ended fruitless.

This book was helpful in learning the (recent) history of Guantanamo Bay. Guantanamo Bay is a high-security military base, which contains a US military prison, and held many prisoners of war from other countries, and suspected terrorists, although some were held without a trial. This book taught me about the conditions of which prisoners at Guantanamo Bay were kept. For instance, President Carter quotes the Physicians of Human Rights in saying that the psychological torture used at Guantanamo Bay deeply affected the wellbeing of the prisoners held there. It is quite important to learn about recent history, or, more accurately, current events of this sort (Guantanamo Bay is, at the moment, still used), to understand more about human rights, and to understand the flaws in the country.

Although the argument was weak, the historical evidence was clearly accurate. President Carter obtained quite a bit of this knowledge during his tenure as president, which gives him credibility. An example being, in arguing against abortion, President Carter brings up some of the decisions he made regarding this topic. He speaks of how he did not support using federal funds to assist in giving impoverished women abortions, and how, although he was opposed to abortion, he enforced the Roe v. Wade; however he does admit to purposely placing legal restrictions on abortion to support his personal beliefs. This information is, of course, accurate; President Carter knows better than the majority of others, the reasoning behind his decisions, or the actions he took as president. Besides using information from his tenure as president, President Carter uses information from independent researchers, which assists in avoiding bias in his writing. An illustration of this technique is used when President Carter argues against gun control through using The Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research as a source of information. The Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy is an independent research center, which assists in relying on President Carter’s evidence to support his argument. Had it been a government funded research center, or a center funded by a anti-gun control group, bias would have been prevalent, thus further hindering Carter’s argument.