I suggest you find a link to support your statement.
"But the debate in the country's school boards is all around what should go into the science curriculums & textbooks. Whenever somebody proposes a compromise to put ID in a comparative religion class, the ID activists always reject that."
http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1011759/posts?page=25#25
"Ascribing the parameters of physics to mere chance or vagaries of cosmic weather is defeatist, discouraging people from undertaking the difficult calculations that would actually explain why things are they way they are. Moreover, it is also dangerous, he declared to ringing applause."
"It smells of religion and intelligent design," he said, referring to a variety of creationism that argues that the universe is too complex to have evolved by chance.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/1009359/posts?page=386
"At the recent League of Women Voters' forum for the Modesto City Schools board, a candidate advocated teaching intelligent design (ID) in science classes. Intelligent design is the belief that life is too complex to have developed without an intelligent designer."
"While this claim may be true, it is a religious or philosophical belief because it invokes causes not investigable by science. "