Both sides of an issue can be discussed intelligently

Let's examine the word "theory" as it's used in discussing the subject of evolution versus intelligent design. According to Webster's Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language, the word means "a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena." Other definitions include "contemplation or speculation" and "guess or conjecture."

Last week's front page story about this never-ending debate illustrates the intolerance common to both sides of the issue. Much energy is spent in attempting to placate all parties as to how the beginning of the universe should be presented in textbooks. The result seldom satisfies everyone.

Individuals who promote the theory of evolution are adamant about its relevance in explaining the progress of life through the ages. Those who consider evolution to be fact often clutch that idea with as much passion as others cling to their faith.

Creationists protest that evolution is taught in classrooms without their point of view being presented as an alternate theory. The problem is that intelligent design, aka creationism, is considered by most textbook publishers to be religious philosophy and not scientific theory.

But often the middle ground is left out in the cold. Many people with deeply felt religious beliefs accept evolution as a tool that God (or a supreme being) used in making the universe. To them, the matter does not shake their personal spirituality and they see it as an issue that shouldn't disrupt the schoolroom.

Last time we checked, the Bill of Rights ensured freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Granted, it's necessary to stick close to the facts when teaching the fundamentals of science to impressionable young minds.

But since a good education trains students to think critically and evaluate arguments, why not at least offer intelligent design in a sidebar or annotation to allow students to make up their own minds?