“Who is supposed to shape your children’s character – her parents or her teachers?”

“To stay ahead in the modern global economy, which discipline is more important — science or religion?”

Here’s a typical question you’ll be hearing more about:

“Who is better suited to shape your children’s character in the classroom — her teacher or a Federal judge?”

That is a question I expect to hear. Here’s the response I, and I hope many others, will ask in return:

“Who is better suited to shape your children’s science education – her science teacher or a school board focusing on religious beliefs instead of science?”

The fact is science teachers are not clamoring to teach ID and being held back by school boards. Science teachers are being forced by school boards to teach this anti-scientific “theory”.

Red state America will be whisked into a froth over whether or not we owe our existence to science or to God.

Here’s a typical question you’ll be hearing more about:

“Who is better suited to shape your children’s character in the classroom — her teacher or a Federal judge?”

Make no mistake. These people will be back.

But Judge Jones, an appointee of President George W. Bush, ruled that the board was trying to mask religious teaching in the guise of science. He used unusually strong language for a federal judge, going so far as to excoriate some members of the school board for lying.

“Repeatedly in this trial, plaintiff’s scientific experts testified that theory of evolution represents good science, is overwhelmingly accepted by the scientific community, and that it in no way conflicts with, nor does it deny, the existence of a divine creator,” the judge added.

Doesn’t he say “classroom”? And where were all the news agency reports making this distinction you note. They didn’t say it was only saying not in science classrooms. It was in a classroom. Sorry you feel I made a false overgeneralization.

Here’s the lead from the LA Times story. You should contact the paper immediately and tell them they got it all wrong:
A federal judge in Pennsylvania ruled today that it is unconstitutional to compel teachers there to present “intelligent design” as an alternative explanation to evolution because it amounts to establishing religion in public schools.

U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III wrote that the Dover, Pa. school board cannot require teachers “to denigrate or disparage the scientific theory of evolution” or “refer to a religious, alternative theory known as I.D.”
Next time I’ll have to read the lead paragraphs of the stories and the body of them a bit more carefully, I guess…

The judge in effect said: “No dice. This is creationism and an attempt to bring the Bible into the classrooms.”

No, that’s exactly what Judge Jones didn’t say. He said that science classrooms are for science and that ID isn’t science. He did not say ID is creationism (although it is religion) and he did not say religion can’t be in the classroom, just not in the science classroom.

The false overgeneralization you use is exactly the same false overgeneralization that the Bible-thumpers are using to oppose the decision.