Tuesday, November 24, 2009

Cal Thomas’ Article in the Spokesman-Review

Cal Thomas, a syndicated columnist, had an opinion piece in the Spokesman-Review today concerning the current health-care fracas. I’ve only posted a few paragraphs from the article, head over to the Spokesman to read the whole thing. The article definitely has a “the sky is falling” ring to it. Here’s what he had to say:

But this is about none of that. This is about liberal Democrats realizing their decades-old dream of complete control of our lives. Every move you make, every breath you take, they’ll be watching you. Except, of course, when it comes to terrorists who want to destroy America faster than the liberals do. A different standard is applied to them.

Now, if you substituted “government” with “liberal Democrats” I’d be right with him. But Republicans have done their fair share of trying to control people’s lives. Regan’s ratcheting up of the war on drugs, Dubya’s Patriot Act and Republicans seem forever concerned with what’s happening in people’s bedrooms.

“This is how I see health care reform working: If you are a doctor who has spent a lot of money and time becoming a responsible and caring physician, the government will tell you how much to charge your patients and, in fact, whether you will be allowed to treat them at all. Bureaucrats, having given themselves the power of God, will decide whether a patient is worth the cost of treatment, thereby deciding who lives and who dies.”

Don’t insurance companies already tell doctors how to treat patients? I’ve heard a lot of how we’ll be in trouble if bureaucrats run health care, but they already do, they just happen to work for insurance companies and hospitals and not for the government.

Despite the Stupak-Pitts Amendment, somewhere down the line taxpayers will be forced to underwrite abortions in violation of the consciences and faith of the majority.”

Two problems with this. Firstly, plenty of Americans are forced to pay for government projects they are morally opposed to. There are a lot of liberals who are morally opposed to the Iraq War, should they not have to pay taxes for it? Secondly, the country is evenly split over abortion, I’m not sure you could say a majority oppose it. A Fox News/Opinion Dynamics Poll asked “On the issue of abortion, would you say you are more pro-life or more pro-choice?”. Forty-seven percent said pro-life, forty-four percent said pro-choice and six percent said both. When you factor in the margin of error, almost all of these polls come out statistically even.

“This is the triumph of the humanistic, atheistic worldview. We are all to be regarded as products of evolution in which the fit and the powerful will decide our survival and worth.”

Yeah and I heard atheists eat babies, torture kittens and pee in the water supply too, ridiculous. As you can imagine this was the paragraph that really caught my attention. I don’t know what type of humanists or atheists he has been talking to but he should really find some new friends. Richard Dawkins, who, if the atheists had or wanted one, could be considered the atheist pope had this to say on the subject:

“I hear the bleak sermon of the Devil's Chaplain as a call to arms. As an academic scientist I am a passionate Darwinian, believing that natural selection is, if not the only driving force in evolution, certainly the only known force capable of producing the illusion of purpose which so strikes all who contemplate nature. But at the same time as I support Darwinism as a scientist, I am a passionate anti-Darwinian when it comes to politics and how we should conduct our human affairs. My previous books, such as The Selfish Gene and The Blind Watchmaker, extol the inescapable factual correctness of the Devil's Chaplain (had Darwin decided to extend the list of melancholy adjectives in the Chaplain's indictment, he would very probably have chosen both 'selfish' and 'blind'). At the same time I have always held true to the closing words of my first book, 'We, alone on earth, can rebel against the tyranny of the selfish replicators.'”

This is from the beginning of the Humanist Manifesto III:

Humanism is a progressive philosophy of life that, without supernaturalism, affirms our ability and responsibility to lead ethical lives of personal fulfillment that aspire to the greater good of humanity.”

If Cal Thomas took a second to actually read some atheist and humanist literature he would think twice before writing such close-minded, dim statements.

I completely agree with the following statement. There is a lot of hypocrisy going on in the Democrat party over the deficit. When Bush was in they couldn't stop talking about it and how great Clinton was for keeping it under control and now that they're back in office they can't seem to put the credit card away.

"When Republicans were in the majority, deficits mattered to Democrats. Now we see that expressed concern was a sham, because if deficits meant something when they were relatively small, they ought to mean something more when we are in hock up to the necks of our Chinese-made clothes."

No comments:

Post a Comment