Sheesh. I don't even know where to start here. Intelligent design is not science. How can anyone test the propositionthat the beginnings of life happened because an invisible omnipotent being started it? Evolution doesn't teach the why, it teaches the how. I don't think anyone would care if this were taught in a philosophy class or a comparative religion class or something, but this isn't science and shouldn't be taught as it.
"As governor of Texas, Bush said students should be exposed to both creationism and evolution."
Whenever I see that, I wonder which creation theory Bush wants taught. There are more than one after all. Maybe we could teach this or would the abstinence education people throw a fit?
In the begining there was only chaos. Then out of the void appeared Erebus, the unknowable place where death dwells, and Night. All else was empty, silent, endless, darkness. Then somehow Love was born bringing a start of order. From Love came Light and Day. Once there was Light and Day, Gaea, the earth appeared.
Then Erebus slept with Night, who gave birth to Ether, the heavenly light, and to Day the earthly light. Then Night alone produced Doom, Fate, Death, Sleep, Dreams, Nemesis, and others that come to man out of darkness.
Oh wait, I forgot, there are only two possible theories. It's either everything Darwin said once in his life was literally true or the Bible must be right. Fallacy of the False Dilemma? What's that?
"I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought," Bush said.
Ok then, I don't ever want to hear anything from Bush about why teaching - say - Noam Chomsky's theories on US power or - gasp - tolerance for same sex marriage is wrong. I sure hope that all of Bush's allies from the National Review that love ranting about liberal professors read that sentence. At least the wackos on the left want to teach their theories in relevant classes.
Current Music: Zero - Papa Was A Rollin' Stone