Echoing similar comments from President Bush, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said "intelligent design" should be taught in public schools alongside evolution.Okay, faith isn’t fact. That’s sort of the whole definition of faith, in that it’s a belief in something not provable. Fact, on the other hand, is defined as something demonstrated to exist or known to have existed. Faith is also not a science.
"I think today a pluralistic society should have access to a broad range of fact, of science, including faith," Frist said.
Meanwhile, the AP manages to demonstrate once again why our media is completely useless, exemplifying both the lazy writing and determination to present both sides of any argument, no matter how ridiculous, as equally viable.
The theory of intelligent design says life on earth is too complex to have developed through evolution, implying that a higher power must have had a hand in creation. Nearly all scientists dismiss it as a scientific theory, and critics say it's nothing more than religion masquerading as science.If one is attempting to clarify what makes intelligent design different from scientific theory, it would perhaps be wise to identify it as something other than a theory. Here’s a suggestion just off the top of my head: Intelligent design proponents say life on earth is too complex to have developed through evolution. Was that so hard?
Secondly, an intellectually honest statement about scientists’ critique of intelligent design would be: All credible scientists dismiss it as scientific theory. Not “nearly all scientists.” Any scientist who recognizes intelligent design as a scientific theory, considering it hasn’t meant the minimum requirements for being categorized thusly, is utterly lacking in integrity.
I don’t really give a flip if someone wants to believe in intelligent design, but it has no business whatsoever being taught in a science class. And my primary concern isn’t even about keeping religion out of schools, but about diluting a proper education with complete nonsense. This is no different than suggesting that a behavioral psychology class ought to include a section on astrology, because there are people who believe that the alignment of the stars and planets dictate our behavior. Fair enough if you want to believe in astrology, but that doesn’t mean it ought to be included in a psych course.
Just because disingenuous jags like Frist want to lower the level of public discourse by pretending that intelligent design belongs in a science class doesn’t mean the media needs to drag us all down with them. I’m not especially keen to live in a country of morons who have no idea that there’s a difference between a faith-based assertion and a scientific theory.