Yeah!
And it's not like they've been caught in a pattern of lying about their true inten....
Never mind.
"Why do you favour teaching non-science alongside science? What rationale is there for such a thing?"
Well, I thought I wrote down my rational for it in my post...
"What do you mean "Christian thought"? The major proponents of ID claim that it is not religious in nature. Or are you referring to "creationism"? If so, why do you think that Christian creationism would necessarily be taught, rather than the creationist story of some other religion? And what has a lack of moral teachings to do with evolution in the first place? I hardly see an alleged lack of moral teaching -- if such a thing is happening -- to be justification for lying to students about the fundamental nature of science."
Well, since this is an English, Christian, Western based society, I just assumed if a Creationist story ought to be taught, it should be the Judeo-Christian one. For the same reason only English should be spoken in schools. A lack of moral teaching doesn't neccesarily have anything to do with evolution, if you knew how to read well you would have seen my validation for teaching ID or Creationism and how it might help with values. I also said that evolution AND ID/Creationism should be taught. That means ID etc. could be taught as philosophy or something else other than science too. I really don't want to be a jerk, but I'm tired of people replying to my posts and saying things where if they actually READ what I wrote, they would get what I was trying to say and it would negate the questions they ask in their reply. For somebody who knows what a "complete and total non-sequitur" you really don't have good comprehension skills.