A Byrne of Charlottesville, VA C-Fairer: the first Amendment not only permits free exercise, but prohibits state establishment. Therefore, States may not mandate the teaching of religious ideas, nor may agents acting on behalf of the state (such as teachers) promulgate them while undertaking their official duties.

While Intelligent Design is not inherently a religious idea, its roots have proven (Kitzmiller v. Dover) religious, and ID merely a mutant form of creationism (complete with transitional fossil).

Students should, if they want, be allowed to bring bring up the subject in class and have their questions be answered. Unfortunately, under the philosophical assumptions of science (Logic, Mathematics, and finite relation between Reality and Evidence) and the resulting methodology for testing hypotheses (see the paper "Minimum Description Length Induction, Bayesianism and Kolmogorov Complexity", Paul M. B. Vitányi and Ming Li), Intelligent Design is a grossly inferior hypothesis; Evolution provides for a more concise comprehensively descriptive explanation of all the evidence.

Academic freedom is limited to work within the academic discipline. Intelligent Design cannot claim to be supported by the present evidence under the philosophical assumptions of science. Therefore, it should not be taught in science class. (Deliberate inclusion as a bad example could be argued an attack on religion; best leave it aside.) In Biology, Evolution is the theory best so supported; it should.

As for Expelled, those "persecuted" were generally in trouble generally for reasons of demonstrated incompetence; support for ID was one symptom, but not the only one. As Jack Jackson notes, the "Expelled Exposed" website gives supporting details.report abuse

AimeeP of Jackson, ME Science deals with the natural world - that which can be observed, tested, and the results used to make predictions. Creationism (which ID is) invokes a supernatural being. You cannot test and predict a god. If you want to teach creationism, then do so in a religion class but it is not science.

What disturbs me most is that we have a director of a school board who doesn't understand what science is. How can we tolerate a person who doesn't understand a discipline setting policy about how it should be taught? Do we allow someone who knows nothing about medicine set the rules for how a surgery should be done? Nothing in science is ever "proven". Science is living and what we know continuously changes.

People who don't know what facts, hypotheses, laws, and theories are in science and how they relate should keep their mouths shut when it comes to setting science curriculum. The people being served by SAD 59 should demand Linkletter step down as director of the school board.report abuse

Jack Jackson of Gardiner, ME C-Fairer,

That is not a "documentary", it's anti-science propaganda that trys to create a controversy where no controversy exists except in the minds of religious fanatics and thier like minded "scientists".

http://www.expelledexposed.com/index.php/the-truthreport abuse

Giles Corey of bath, ME Ben Stein's movie has been deemed a joke my many with PHDs. You can google it for yourself.report abuse