Rick Perry, the obviously clueless and out of touch governor of our increasingly backward little state, appears to have missed entirely the Dover, PA, intelligent design fiasco.  His abundant witlessness and apparent lack of familiarity with current events is most evident by his recent announcement that Texas should teach intelligent design in its public schools.

Perry “supports the teaching of the theory of intelligent design,” spokeswoman Kathy Walt said. “Texas schools teach the theory of evolution; intelligent design is a valid scientific theory, and he believes it should be taught as well.”

What dearest Kathy missed in her blind obedience and enslaved mentality to her ignorant and theocratically inclined boss is that intelligent design is by no means a viable or valid scientific theory.  It proposes no testable hypotheses, it is based solely and entirely — and undeniably — on religion, and it offers no facts, principles or propositions which solidly rest upon existing scientific knowledge.  It is nothing more than an assumption that we cannot as yet explain everything about evolution, therefore evolution must be wrong and someone must have designed us.  It is advocated by those who are willing to lie openly and under oath to claim publicly that they are not addressing the identity of the designer, yet privately they bellow the proclamation that it can be no other than the Christian god.  Is this the true means to scientific advancement?  Of course not.

Democratic gubernatorial candidate Chris Bell, a former U.S. House member from Houston, said: “Things we teach kids in science class should have a scientific basis. Based on everything I have seen and heard, I fail to recognize the scientific basis for intelligent design.”

That’s better, regardless of whether it comes from a Democrat, a Republican, or an Independent (and it’s important to note that only one little known Democratic contender for the governorship of Texas has sided with Perry on this issue).

Another Democrat challenging Perry for the state’s highest position also spoke out against this announcement with more common sense, something Perry lacks entirely.

Former Texas Supreme Court Justice Bob Gammage of Llano, another Democratic hopeful, said he supports the judge in the Pennsylvania case in that “teaching intelligent design is inappropriate for the class- room.

“There is a difference between physics and metaphysics, and I believe that we should teach the first in schools and the second in church,” Gammage said.

As there is nothing intelligent about the ID premise and absolutely nothing scientific about it, one would hope this idea will simply die on the vine.  Also, note that Texas will not consider new biology curricular text books until 2008, so it would seem Perry should focus on trying to win the gubernatorial race before trying to outline his policies for the next term.

Keep in mind that Perry supported efforts to write into law discrimination against gay foster parents, he told gay military personnel returning from overseas that they were unwanted and should go live in a different state (a state government announcement made from a religious school!), and has repeatedly attempted to woo fundamentalists by pushing religious bigotry and ideology into policy and law.  Advocating intelligent design in the classroom is simply his latest outreach to conservatives as part of his race for the governorship.

The Dark Ages were the result of churches proclaiming science demonic and forcing the state to outlaw all scientific endeavors and studies.  Religion became the new science, and our technological advancement was set back 600-800 years.  Imagine where we would be now if religion had stayed out of it and allowed science to progress normally.  How many diseases and ailments would be cured by now?  How much of our energy needs would be satisfied with clean fuel sources, thereby reducing the threat of global warming and ensuring a cleaner world for future generations?  How much of the world’s poverty and hunger could we have wiped out?  How much progress might we have made in the prediction of natural disasters, thereby saving millions of lives during the most recent era of human existence?

Do we really want to try that approach again?

I vote that we leave religion out of science classes.  Likewise, we’ll leave science and facts out of religious studies.  Our progress as a species has only worked when that separation is enforced.

People go to church to learn mythology.  People go to school to learn facts.  Let’s keep it that way.

[via Pharyngula]