Intelligent design should not be taught in science class because it is not science. It belongs in debate class. As far as I understand it (and I could be wrong, please enlighten me if so) Intelligent design simply finds the gaps in evolution and goes, 'See- must be a designer here. No other way to explain it!'. That's not science. There is no way to prove it, and no experiments provided to prove or disprove that hypothesis.

Intelligent design advocates prey on the misunderstanding of the use of the word 'theory' in everyday conversation, and its use in science. They are very different.

What really irks me in this whole debate is that much of the arguement is supplied by people who have no idea what they are talking about, and don't understand evolution or science at all (this comment is not aimed at anyone here, just a general observation). It is kind of irritating to have a couple of lawyers/politicians go "Yes, I think ID should be taught along with evolution. It is good science." , while a bunch of scientists, who, you know, understand what they're talking about, take the opposing position.