More on ID

From New York Daily Record
" Intelligent design, as Judge Jones made abundantly clear in his 139-page ruling, is not science. ID has simply not earned a place in high school biology curricula as an either/or alternative to evolution.

The ruling reflects that evolution by natural selection is backed by mountains of evidence while ID has produced not one peer-reviewed paper.

That doesn't mean God doesn't exist.

It doesn't mean the world wasn't intelligently designed.

It just means that in science you can't invoke the supernatural when you don't fully understand a natural process.

Judge Jones is to be congratulated for ruling broadly on the matter rather than taking the easy way out with some cramped, nondecision decision.

Unfortunately, this ground-breaking ruling is unlikely to become the settled law of the land because the new board seems unlikely to appeal it to the Supreme Court. Not that we advocate an appeal. Even the judge laments that so much money and time has been wasted on this "legal maelstrom."

In short, Judge Jones got it exactly right, eviscerating the pathetic case put forth by the defense. The district's policy was religiously motivated and espoused religion, thus violating the constitutional separation of church and state."

This is more to the point I was making in my comments to neb, this isn't an issue of teaching an alternate idea, it's an issue of teaching science in science class.
Our students deserve to be taught proven theories that have valid evidence. They do not deserve to be spoon fed a particular religious view because some people don't agree with evolution. Right now, many schools teach about controversies surrounding Darwinism, and I think many good points can be made in that arena. However to enter into cirriculum a theory that has no substantial scientific proof is just asking for trouble. For those that are a little too close to the issue, consider it this way... Let's say there was a community of Hindu worshippers in middle Ohio that disagreed with evolution and instead wanted to teach about reincarnation in school. the "proof" they presented was tons and tons of opinionated articles and statements by other believers that reincarnation of the soul from a well of souls that has remained constant throughtout time is the source of life on this planet(I'm stretching here a bit, because I really don't know that much about hinduism, I apologize whole-heartedly to any of that faith who read this). Well if this were to happen, it wouldn't be accepted very easily and would probably eventually be shot down as religion and not science and therefore in violation of church and state seperation.