A few thoughts. First, it’s just further reason to remove the federal government from its unconstitutional entanglement in a matter properly left to the states. As long as we’re talking about science, let’s leave it to the laboratory of the states.
Second, Intelligent Design can mean pretty much anything from “God made the world intelligently in six days and rested on the seventh” to the Deist “God set this grand experiment in motion with the Big Bang and has been watching patiently ever since”. It’s hard to really comment intelligently on something so nebulous.
Perhaps the most important issue is removing politics from the sciences. I understand where the Commissar and others are coming from and agree to an extent. I’d prefer to see science classrooms remain devoted to science and leave politics aside. For that matter, all classrooms ought to be depoliticized. Of course, thousands of years of human history from Galileo to Ward Churchill has shown that to be unlikely in the extreme. The second best position? Well, it’s actually actually buried in what the Prez said.
â€™Youâ€™re asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, the answer is yes.
Is Intelligent Design a lousy idea? Certainly some interpretations of it are. But what’s the best way to defeat a lousy idea, censorship or open thoughtful informed debate?