[Dimensio]

Evolution is a theory. Intelligent design is a theory.

If Intelligent Design is a theory, then I must ask what it predicts, what observations support it and what hypothetical observations would prove it false.

You can try to complicate the matter with implied definitions and special status reserved only for what you consider "scientific" theories, but that requires you to read more into this poll than its data supports.

The problem is that not reading in the context of a scientific theory creates a false equivocation.

Relax. If the theory of evolution is as scientifically sound as you believe it is, than it will easily overwhelm all alternative theories presented to public school students.

The problem is that presenting non-scientific theories as equal to scientific theories requires re-defining science in such a way as to make any rational inquiry impossible.

[Rokke]

"If Intelligent Design is a theory, then I must ask what it predicts, what observations support it and what hypothetical observations would prove it false."

How you choose to define "theory" is not relevant to this poll. The definition of "theory" is far broader than the limits you impose here.

"The problem is that not reading in the context of a scientific theory creates a false equivocation."

Only if you choose to believe that one theory is superior to the other. The fact remains, both theories share the common characteristics of being unproven and relying on speculation to be believed.

"The problem is that presenting non-scientific theories as equal to scientific theories requires re-defining science in such a way as to make any rational inquiry impossible."

No. It doesn't.