The correct decision is not always right.

A federal judge has just ruled that teaching Intelligent Design (ID) in public schools in unconstitutional. From the article:

`In making this determination, we have addressed the seminal question'' of whether intelligent design ``is science,'' Jones wrote in Kitzmiller vs. Dover Area School District. ``We have concluded that it is not, and moreover'' that intelligent design ``cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents.''

Ugh. While logically sound, this judgement is completely wrong. By 'wrong' I mean that a judge has zero place to be deciding what is or is not science.

Now, I've written in a previous post that ID should not be taught in schools, which is in agreement with judge Jones. However, it is significant to point out that I am not a judge. What I offer is an opinion, which is all judge Jones should offer, and not as a judge.

I could go over again and again about the fact that there is no separation of church and state (as packaged by liberals), yadda, yadda, yadda. But even if we forget that ID is fundamentally a theological theory (as opposed to a scientific one), the government should still have zero right to say what is and is not science.

There have been innumerable "silly" theories over the years that have been taught in schools, because they were the theory du jour, and/or because we were only able to deem them as "silly" after further research. Some still are, especially in the not-quite-scientific areas contained in softer sciences like psychology. The federal government in these cases generally does not, and should not step in to decided whether or not one of them should be taught.

The scientific community has its own checks and balances - the scientific method, peer review, et al. These and these alone are what should determine whether or not ID should be taught as a viable theory alongside evolution, not whether or not it has a relgious foundation, and definitely not by the government. ID would and does fall flat on its face in the light of these requirements even for serious consideration as a viable phsyical theory, let alone one on the order of acceptance as that of evolution.

What if science proved beyond a shadow of a doubt - 'prove' in the true physically scientific sense - that God exists, and everything were as fundamental Christians hold true? Would it still be 'wrong' to teach it in schools because of the religious aspect? It would have been proven as true, so anything taught to the contrary is not true.

All of this is silly. ID is crappy at best as a physical science theory. The natural forces in place within the scientific community will take care of putting ID in it's rightful place. It's only when the Christian fundamentalists try to unnaturally force it to be taught, or the government wrongfully bans it from being taught that true science is being ignored.