I don't think "majority rules" should be used to purposefully harm a minority for no reason. We still have left-handed people in this country. The right-handed people have no risen up to persecute lefties merely because the majority rules.

This reactional, evangelical, paranormal preachery crossed the line from a quaint backward movement to intellectual barberry with supposed "grass roots" movements to put creationism/intelligent design into school curricula, but for the President of the United States to take a stance on the side of the scientifically-challenged is ludicrous.

If the Church of Scientology (recognized by the US as a religion) stated they believed that all organic life in the universe was created by L. Ron Hubbard, should this be taught in schools as well? The president stated that, "Part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought", does this school of thought not pass muster? It should, like intelligent design ? which is pseudo-science for creationism ? it offers no proof whatsoever.

The creationist movement seems to hide behind calling intelligent design a theory and stating evolution is also a theory. If this statement is derived from one's unbiased search for truth and is honestly spoken, then in my estimation the speaker lacks the intelligence to be in a position to set policy for anything. I think this is a rare case most often associated with those who hear and reiterate the message without analysis, making them as useful as a parrot. More often, as I believe is the case with President Bush, people who use this argument are trying to fool people into believing that the word theory used to describe creationism and evolution means the same thing in both instances. It does not.