Evolution and Creationism: A Speech Against Intelligent Design in the Classroom

Fellow classmates, I stand in front of you today to discuss a matter of grave importance to the future of science education. I believe that intelligent design should not be taught in public schools. I am not here to argue whether or not there is a God. I am not here to argue whether or not God created man and the Universe. And I am not here to argue whether there are holes in the theory of evolution. But rather, I am here to persuade you that intelligent design has no place in a science classroom.

First, intelligent design is not a science. Standards describe science as "the human activity of seeking natural explanations for what we observe in the world." Intelligent design is a supernatural explanation for all things natural. Further, the intelligent design hypothesis cannot be tested by research and the study of evidence. Darwin's theory of evolution can. And let's not forget the first amendment to the Constitution, which made law the separation of church and state. In fact, the Supreme Court reinforced this in the 1980s, when it declared the teaching of the Bible's version of creation in the public classroom to be unconstitutional.

I fear that intelligent design is just another word for creationism. I fear that intelligent design is a wolf in sheep's clothing. The current battle to bring intelligent design to the classroom rekindles a heated controversy that dates back to the Middle Ages. Should the Church have intervened when Galileo said the Earth revolves around the Sun? Using scientific equations, mathematical functions, and direct observation through a telescope, Galileo proved his theory. The Church had no science to support its claims. Once we open the door to intelligent design in the classroom, anything can walk through. A playful graduate student has suggested we include the teaching of "Intelligent Falling." This theory proposes that things fall, not because they are acted upon by a gravitational pull, but because a higher intelligence is pushing them down. He believes that Intelligent Falling should be taught as an alternate to gravity, to enable students to make 'an informed decision' on the subject. And while we're at it, why not give equal time to Flying Spaghetti Monsterism, a sarcastic theory that states the Universe was created by an almighty clump of tangled spaghetti.

C'mon folks; let's stick to the facts! Let's teach only fact-based theories in a fact-based subject.