I'm so tired of this debate, mostly because I don't see why there even is any debate. Intelligent Design and Evolution are two completely different things. Evolution is a scientific theory backed up by research and evidence, and Intelligent Design is a belief. Furthermore, they don't even really contradict each other, there could be an outside force that created the universe including the process of Evolution, so there is no reason people can't believe both. But they are not equivalent ideas. And Bush's remarks only further confuse that point. He makes it sound like they are two different opposing views and since we don't know for sure which one is correct, we should teach both. But in reality, one is a scientific theory that is and should be taught in science class, and the other is a belief that cannot be proven, and which has no evidence behind it, and therefore has no place in a science class. And the ongoing debate that Bush references isn't about which one is correct, and therefore we must present both sides of it. The debate is about whether or not Intelligent Design should be taught along side Evolution as science. And of course it shouldn't. If we did that, we'd have to also alter the science curriculum to stop teaching the scientific method, since it would no longer make any sense if we are teaching Intelligent Design in the same classroom. No matter what your thoughts or beliefs about Evolution or Intelligent design, there is no logical reason to teach Intelligent Design as science. How would the people pushing Intelligent Design feel if they were required to hear about Evolution at Church? Clearly, discussions about Evolution are a little out of place at Church, the same way teaching Intelligent Design does not belong in a science class.