Teaching Intelligent Design

On the morning of New Year's day I was watching--or, at least, listening to--a television show that purported to review--or at least mention--the important news stories of the year 2005 of the Common Era. (I suppose, in order to let you know where I am coming from, that I should confess that I have a tendency when I pronounce that phrase that it often comes out sounding like "the Common Error.") And it thus came to pass that I heard a newspaper columnist named "George Will" pronounce, in a most authoritative voice, that "Intelligent Design" should be taught in the schools, but not in science classes.

That, naturally enough, got me to wondering about where exactly Mr. Will thought that Intelligent Design should be taught: in Home Economics perhaps?

Since the proponents of Intelligent Design claim that it is a scientific subject, it is hard to conceive how it could be squeezed into a religion class, where a discussion of the term "God," for example, would hardly be improved by mentioning that some people have argued that there is scientific evidence of an intelligent designer of the world who is not absolutely, necessarily, what the term "God" refers to, anymore that it would be helpful to refer to polyester science in a study of Leviticus 19:19: "Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woolen come upon thee."