Evolution revolution?

At the White House, where intelligent design has been discussed in a weekly Bible study group, Bush’s science adviser, John H. Marburger III, sought to play down the president’s remarks as common sense and old news.
Marburger said in a telephone interview that “evolution is the cornerstone of modern biology” and “intelligent design is not a scientific concept.” Marburger also said that Bush’s remarks should be interpreted to mean that the president believes that intelligent design should be discussed as part of the “social context” in science classes.
Marburger said that it would be “overinterpreting” Bush’s remarks to say that the president believes that intelligent design and evolution should be given equal treatment in schools.

But critics saw Bush’s comment that “both sides” should be taught as the most troubling aspect of his remarks. “It sounds like you’re being fair, but creationism is a sectarian religious viewpoint, and intelligent design is a sectarian religious viewpoint,” said Susan Spath, a spokeswoman for the National Center for Science Education, a group that defends the teaching of evolution in public schools.
“It’s not fair to privilege one religious viewpoint by calling it the other side of evolution.”
Spath added that intelligent design was viewed as more respectable and sophisticated than biblical creationism, but “if you look at their theological and scientific writings, you see that the movement is fundamentally anti-evolution.”
The Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, called the president’s comments irresponsible, and said that “when it comes to evolution, there is only one school of scientific thought, and that is evolution occurred and is still occurring.” Lynn added that “when it comes to matters of religion and philosophy, they can be discussed objectively in public schools, but not in biology class.”
Gainesville.com | The Gainesville Sun | Gainesville, Fla.