Cal Thomas’ Inane Views on Evolution


Cal Thomas was one of the founders of the Moral Majority and has been a longtime right-wing columnist in which he routinely spews incredibly stupid beliefs. Appearing on a Christian TV show recently he spewed some serious nonsense about how public schools are “re-education camps” run by “the enemy” and evolution will lead to killing the elderly.

“Don’t put your children in the enemy’s re-education camps where they’re taught they evolved from slime and their nearest relative is down at the zoo and that’s why they like bananas on their cereal, and where they don’t learn the real history of America,” Thomas said before charging that the “government education system” is state-imposed Unitarianism that unfairly demonizes the Pilgrims as people who “hated the Indians and deprived them of their land.”

Later in the interview, Thomas said the theory of evolution will inevitably lead to the murder of “the elderly and then, soon after that, the handicapped, the unwanted, the mentally unfit and the rest” while Obamacare will establish death panels that will decide “who gets care” based in part on “how much you’re contributing to the tax base.”

“I spent a lot of time in the UK and I studied the NHS and I hear these horror stories. This is coming to America. You’re going to have — now Sarah Palin called them death panels, the left didn’t like that— but there will be bureaucrats deciding who gets care, who gets surgery and who doesn’t based on your age, the cost of the procedure and a lot of other factors, how much you’re contributing to the tax base,” he said.

“It’s coming and the reason it’s coming is we’ve devalued human life among the unborn. It will now be attacked at the other end of life among the elderly and then soon after that the handicapped, the unwanted, the mentally unfit and the rest because once you decide that we’re evolutionary accidents, we weren’t created in the image and likeness of an objectively existing God who endows us with a right to life, then all bets are off.”

If evolution leads to killing the elderly and the infirm, what are we waiting for exactly? Evolution has been around for 155 years now.

Comments

  1. tbp1 says

    Evolution has been around for 155 years now.

    I know I’m being persnickety here, but evolution has been around for millions of years. It’s Darwin’s theory that was published 155 years ago.

  2. gshelley says

    “I spent a lot of time in the UK and I studied the NHS and I hear these horror stories. This is coming to America. You’re going to have — now Sarah Palin called them death panels, the left didn’t like that— but there will be bureaucrats deciding who gets care, who gets surgery and who doesn’t based on your age, the cost of the procedure and a lot of other factors, how much you’re contributing to the tax base,” he said.

    How does he think insurance companies work? That they just approve anything anyone wants? And the ACA is going to take those decisions out of their hands into government bureaucrats who are going to say “Sorry insurance company, you can’t pay for that life saving treatment, you must turn don this claim”?

  3. marcus says

    “…but there will be bureaucrats deciding who gets care, who gets surgery and who doesn’t based on your age, the cost of the procedure and a lot of other factors, how much you’re contributing to the tax base bottom line” he said.
    This is a travesty!!! That is is the insurance companies’ job!

  4. cptdoom says

    I spent a lot of time in the UK and I studied the NHS and I hear these horror stories.

    Would that be the same NHS that is in a country led by an 88-year-old woman and her 94-year-old husband/consort? Would that be the same NHS that treated the longest-known survivor of ALS, Stephen Hawking? I guess he didn’t get caught up in the socialist death panels because he was, like, smart or something.

  5. eric says

    …unfairly demonizes the Pilgrims as people who “hated the Indians and deprived them of their land.”

    I have no idea how the Pilgrims (collectively or individually) felt about the Indians, but I cannot fathom what he’s teaching in American history if he thinks the European colonists did not deprive the Indians of land. Does he teach the Trail of Here Be Our Guest?

  6. doublereed says

    but there will be bureaucrats deciding who gets care, who gets surgery and who doesn’t based on your age, the cost of the procedure and a lot of other factors

    as opposed to…?

  7. countryboy says

    Seems to me it’s the clowns on the right planning to kill all those folks by depriving everyone not rich of affordable healthcare.

  8. iknklast says

    You mean my doctor won’t decide what care I get? Like, he might have to change the blood sugar monitor I’m on because the insurance company thinks the strips cost too much? Like I might have to take a medication that doesn’t work as well because it’s the one the insurance company prefers? Like, my doctor might have to get approval from a non-doctor administrative type before he can refer me to a specialist? Wow! How could I possibly deal with that?

    Sounds suspciously like Blue Cross, Blue Shield to me.

  9. says

    Cal Thomas is a nationally syndicated columnist. I knew he was an idiot social conservative, but this goes well beyond that, doesn’t it?

    I wonder if my local paper could be persuaded by this to stop carrying his columns. Hmmm…..

  10. matty1 says

    He is of course lying about the NHS rationing treatment based on how much you contribute to the tax base. Here is a rough outline of what happens.

    There is a body called the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) that makes the hard choice of which treatments to fund. Note *treatments* not individuals, the choice of who gets treated is made at the time, by doctors based on clinical need.

    NICE face decisions like “We can spend £xmillion on new cancer drugs, which of these drugs would help most people for that money?” Sometimes it may be as simple as number of lives saved, other times it may be necessary to consider things like is it better to give 100 people an extra 6 months or 10 people an extra 6 years.

    The most controversial decisions tend to be ones that recommend funding a treatment only in certain circumstances but even then you are talking about “Not for people in later stages of the disease because it is less effective” rather than “Not for people we don’t like”.

    Finally if your doctor thinks you would benefit from a treatment not on the list you can ask them to think again or are completely free to pay yourself or find a private insurer willing to pay.

    There are plenty of flaws in the British system but basing treatment on financial status is not one of them, we leave that to those who like to think of healthcare as a market.

  11. whheydt says

    And…he’s wrong on the “nearest relative” thing too, since he doesn’t specify nearest LIVING relative (species). Our nearest relatives died out 30K years ago.

    Can you tell that I’ve been reading Svante Paabo’s book about his efforts to sequence the Neanderthal genome?

  12. Chiroptera says

    …while Obamacare will establish death panels that will decide “who gets care” based in part on “how much you’re contributing to the tax base.”

    Unlike our current system, where corporate “death panels” decides who gets care based on how much their payments will hurt their bottom line.

  13. The Gregarious Misanthrope says

    I’ve always thought it odd that conservatives would be more comfortable with a corporate bureaucrat deciding on your care when his bonus depends on him denying you that care as opposed to a government bureaucrat who probably doesn’t really care one way or the other.

  14. says

    The Gregarious Misanthrope “I’ve always thought it odd that conservatives would be more comfortable with a corporate bureaucrat deciding on your care when his bonus depends on him denying you that care as opposed to a government bureaucrat who probably doesn’t really care one way or the other.”
    1. The Free Market does everything better. Even Healthcare which isn’t a Free Market, and pretty much can’t be since you don’t, won’t or can’t “shop around” when you’re having a heart attack.
    2. Rather than handing the power of life and death over to some soulless bureaucrat, it’s better to hand that same power over someone whose Profit Motive is based on denying you care. That’s just common sense, and that’s why I’ve given my jerk of a supervisor who screwed me out of a raise and a promotion and a wife naming rights to my next child. Remember: Kiss up, punch down.

  15. says

    The thing that galls me about people like Thomas is that he’s not even making an evidence-based argument against evolution. He dislikes it because he thinks it may lead to X, where X is whatever social/political hobby horse the right is currently flogging (death panels, abortion, murder, drugs, rape, etc). Just because you think scientific facts may have negative social implications (which it doesn’t), doesn’t give you the right to decide that the facts shouldn’t be taught. Imagine if someone made the argument that we shouldn’t teach chemistry because kids might want to cook meth? Or we shouldn’t teach about the Holocaust because kids might think mass murder is cool?

  16. Michael Heath says

    Gretchen writes:

    Cal Thomas is a nationally syndicated columnist. I knew he was an idiot social conservative, but this goes well beyond that, doesn’t it?

    I wonder if my local paper could be persuaded by this to stop carrying his columns.

    My regional paper of record, the Traverse City Record Eagle, publishes some of Cal Thomas’ columns. George Will and Pat Buchanan are featured weekly. Conservative columnists are at least 50% of what this paper prints in spite of the paper’s editors being liberal/moderate.

    When I complained via letters to the editor, one guest column, and in conversations with the editorial page’s editor about all their conservative columnists’ dishonesty in every single column they print, this is what happened. Within a month of that conversation this paper begin publishing a full page of fact check columns in its two-page editorial section every Saturday.

    Those fact-check columns are predominately covering outrageous lies by conservatives. Not just lies by politicians, but also the lies that are popularized by viral emails or Fox News. The lies by liberals? Most are semi-truths where the core of their argument is true but the person covered wasn’t so much misinforming others, but didn’t have all their facts straight.

  17. hunter says

    1. My nearest relative is living in a retirement community on the Gulf Coast of Florida.

    2. Private insurance companies don’t have “death panels.” They have bean-counters who get bonuses if they let people die.

    3. “death panels that will decide “who gets care” based in part on “how much you’re contributing to the tax base.”” That would solve our oligarchy problem.

  18. Ellie says

    “…and that’s why they like bananas on their cereal…”

    Sounds like he needs Ray Comfort to sit him down and explain how bananas were created especially for mankind, and how bananas are the Atheists’ worst nightmare. Poor benighted Cal.

  19. says

    It’s great that after decades of arguing that the government should not pay for anyone’s health care, conservatives are now terrified that it might only pay for certain types of health care.

  20. says

    Michael Heath “Those fact-check columns are predominately covering outrageous lies by conservatives. Not just lies by politicians, but also the lies that are popularized by viral emails or Fox News. The lies by liberals? Most are semi-truths where the core of their argument is true but the person covered wasn’t so much misinforming others, but didn’t have all their facts straight.”
    Exactly. Both sides are equivalent.

  21. says

    Cal Thomas came out dead last in a study of the predictive accuracy of 26 columnists.

    http://www.hamilton.edu/news/polls/pundit

    Aside from his awful track record of predictions, he really is a morally repugnant little toad. And not that I much attribute character to physical presentation, but just the sight of him puts me ill at ease. Looks like his hair and makeup is done at The Shicklgruber Salon.

  22. ursamajor says

    I worked in managed care for a little while and it was worse than I feared it would be. A big factor in determining if your care would be covered was the weekly profit report.

    But as everyone knows, predatory capitalism is a side effect of evilushunism.

  23. caseloweraz says

    If evolution leads to killing the elderly and the infirm, what are we waiting for exactly? Evolution has been around for 155 years now.

    We’re waiting until global warming raises the sea levels enough, late this century, that those UN bureaucrats can install a worldwide dictatorship as they’ve always wanted to. Then we’ll strike! AH ha ha!!!

  24. eric says

    @10:

    Sounds suspciously like Blue Cross, Blue Shield to me.

    Just to be pedantic, what you described sounds like a HMO. BC/BS runs one of those, but they also run PPOs and other types of plans where many of the requirements you’re complaining about don’t exist. Likewise, the other health providers like Kaiser etc. also offer HMOs that have lots of hoops you have to jump through (but which are generally cheaper per month), and PPOs that have less hoops. Its more about the type of plan than it is about the health care company. Of course, not every type of plain is available to every citizen, because we are hostages to the corporations or government organizations we work for (and for retired people: hostages to what medicare offers). Which is one of the problems ACA will hopefully fix.

    @14:

    …while Obamacare will establish death panels that will decide “who gets care” based in part on “how much you’re contributing to the tax base.”

    Unlike our current system, where corporate “death panels” decides who gets care based on how much their payments will hurt their bottom line.

    As far as I can tell, there is really no (none,zero, zilch) different whatsoever in terms of who makes treatment decisions. If you go on the ACA website, you should pretty quickly be able to find a plan identical or very similar to your corporate one. And you may even find that plan run by the exact same company you currently use. IOW, what you find through ACA is the exact same health care plans that corporations provide. You’re getting the same death panel. The difference between ACA and corporate provided plans is that you don’t need to buy ACA through your employer – and consequently you don’t get an employer discount. But in terms of how the plans work, they work exactly the same because they are exactly the same health plans.
    And if you think about it, this also makes perfect sense from the perspective of the health care provider. Why the frak would they want to create an entirely new set of plans for ACA clients, when they can just offer (at higher cost) the plans that they are already providing to various corporate clients? Why invent a new widget when you can sell the widget you’re already making to a broader customer base, for more money to boot?

  25. Pierce R. Butler says

    Dr X @ # 24: … he really is a morally repugnant little toad.

    Having seen Cal Thomas in person, I beg to differ: he’s at least 6 ft 3 in tall.

  26. scienceavenger says

    I cannot fathom what he’s teaching in American history if he thinks the European colonists did not deprive the Indians of land.

    He probably denies that it was THEIR land.

    As Molly Ivins said, Cal Thomas is one of the great thinkers of the 15th century.

Leave a Reply