Watching the News Hour this past week, I was entertained to see an out-matched proponant of Intelligent Design get smoked in a debate over its inclusion in public school curriculums as an alternative to the theory of evolution. As likely you know, the topic has come into vogue since W’s endorsement of the largely unsupported theory. “Those zany creationists!” I chuckled as I turned off the television. I thought nothing more of it at that point.

Then, while perusing the headlines this morning, I learned the Kansas Board of Education
“has tentatively approved new state science standards that weaken the role evolution plays in teaching about the origin of life." “What the,” thought an exasperated I. It was quickly determined this required some looking into.

The results of my research were jarring. All I can ask is: where the hell have I been? According to every major poll on the matter gathered by www.pollingreport.com over the past 9 months, the majority of Americans believe evolution had nothing to do with nothing when it comes to humans. In some cases, the numbers approached 2/3 of those polled. This raised only more questions.

The matter was discussed with a friend known for his calm, objective demeanor. He responded thusly:

Am I...out of touch? Isn't there something called "science" and the "scientific method" which tests these kinds of theories, or is that a bunch of liberal hullabaloo?

Had he watched the News Hour, he would have known the answer to all of the above is obviously “yes”.

***************

After the initial blow wore off, I began to see that I perhaps had been too quick to judge. Perhaps my visceral reaction blinded me to the real message the President was trying to make clear; I read his words concerning the teaching of Intelligent Design again:

Both sides ought to be properly taught . . . so people can understand what the debate is about…Part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought. . . . You're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, and the answer is yes.

Perhaps what he’s espousing here really has nothing to do with a sidestepping of Constitutional obligations in an effort to bring creationism in the backdoor. “Maybe he’s really talking about exposure to different ideas,” I reasoned. Further research supported this assertion. I came across progressive statements the President made in subsequent days supporting, in addition to the alternative idea of Intelligent Design, the ideal that students should have the "academic freedom" to learn about the other sides of other issues, such as alternative sexuality and alternatives to a rigged politicoeconomic system that exploits the middle and lower classes.

Clearly I was too quick to judge. There's a lesson here for all of us.