Nothing good can come from venting exchanges. The discussion can't be had, this is also why the ID debate is failing, by falling into litigation, neither side is willing to put down their rocks and clubs and listen to the other -- and we are supposed to be a modern, enlightened culture.
Yes, and if it weren't for the damn partisan wrangling of the 17th century, phlogiston theory would still be here today, serving all of mankind. We can only imagine what grand phlogiston-based inventions and devices have been sadly lost. Think, were it not for the politics of destruction in the early 20th century, of the of the benefits society might be enjoying from now never-to-be-seen technology based on the unfairly discredited N rays!
Come on now. ID is going down on merit. Read the available court transcripts. (One place to get them is http://aclupa.blogspot.com. If you're worried that the Vast Liberal Conspiracy is corrupting and manipulating the transcripts available there, you're welcome to seek out another source.) When forced to answer questions in the structured environment of a courtroom -- which does not afford easy opportunities to duck and evade difficult questions the way a message board does -- IDs supporters, even prominent leaders in the field like Michael Behe, offered up a very weak defense of ID.
In Behe's own words he had to admit that only changing the definition of science would allow ID to be considered science, and that such a change would make astrology science too! That's a leader in the pro-ID side saying that, not a partisan detractor.
Of course, the US Constitution doesn't have one word to say one way or the other about the quality of science taught in science classes, or the quality and accuracy of anything taught in any subject in public schools. If a school board decided their school should teach that penguins are native to Death Valley and that the Civil War was a dispute over Less Filling vs. Tastes Great -- so be it. That would be an issue for voters to deal with.
But if the Constitution, or applicable state and local law, had requirements for the accuracy and merit of what is taught in public schools, ID wouldn't stand a chance. The Dover trial demonstrated this quite well. The defense team itself admitted that what they essentially were looking for was a kind of "affirmative action" plan for ID: the big, bad, closed-minded world of academia wasn't giving ID a fair shake, so they needed to use public schools to create a generation of ID-friendly students to help them along with a bottom-up, rather than top-down, scientific revolution. And, again in the words of the defense, this special dispensation isn't supposed to be granted based on the current merit of ID, but based on what they imagine the future merit might be, if only we give poor, down-trodden ID some special consideration.
ID would be the only part of the curriculum that has to ride the short bus to school.