The Stupid Argument Over Intelligent Design

Sadly, the intelligent design debate is back in the courts. I don't really have much to say about this other than to express my disbelief that we, as a society, are still arguing about such things. I suppose this sums up the situation as well as I could:

Brown University professor Kenneth Miller, the first witness called by the plaintiffs, said pieces of the theory of evolution are subject to debate, such as where gender comes from, but told the court: "There is no controversy within science over the core proposition of evolutionary theory."

On the other hand, he said, "Intelligent design is not a testable theory in any sense and as such it is not accepted by the scientific community."

In any event, I wish people could at least be honest about the reasons for their arguments. I don't appreciate comments such as:

"This case is about free inquiry in education, not about a religious agenda," argued Patrick Gillen of the Thomas More Law Center in Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Of course the case stems from a religious agenda; to suggest otherwise is insulting.