.

You see, as early as 1987, our Supreme Court had ruled that states could not require public schools to balance evolution lessons by teaching creationism.

Now, whil

I studied Microbiology and had helped teach (as a T.A.) Physical Science classes to hundreds of college students. It makes nothing short of perfect sense to me, and, may I add, to my professor, that man may be created by a Superior Intelligence.

That is, to say the least, not illogical to think that the world and man’s existence could be planned and brought about by Intelligence. "Intelligent Design," they call it. But I guess all of that is so blatantly non-scientific, offensive, and illegal, that a federal judge barred a Pennsylvania public school district from even reading a statement about intelligent design in biology class, saying, "the concept is creationism in disguise," (AP, 12/20/05).

You see, as early as 1987, our Supreme Court had ruled that states could not require public schools to balance evolution lessons by teaching creationism.

Now, whil

to my professor, that man may be created by a Superior Intelligence.

That is, to say the least, not illogical to think that the world and man’s existence could be planned and brought about by Intelligence. "Intelligent Design," they call it. But I guess all of that is so blatantly non-scientific, offensive, and illegal, that a federal judge barred a Pennsylvania public school district from even reading a statement about intelligent design in biology class, saying, "the concept is creationism in disguise," (AP, 12/20/05).

You see, as early as 1987, our Supreme Court had ruled that states could not require public schools to balance evolution lessons by teaching creationism.

Now, whil

and brought about by Intelligence. "Intelligent Design," they call it. But I guess all of that is so blatantly non-scientific, offensive, and illegal, that a federal judge barred a Pennsylvania public school district from even reading a statement about intelligent design in biology class, saying, "the concept is creationism in disguise," (AP, 12/20/05).

You see, as early as 1987, our Supreme Court had ruled that states could not require public schools to balance evolution lessons by teaching creationism.

Now, whil

d a Pennsylvania public school district from even reading a statement about intelligent design in biology class, saying, "the concept is creationism in disguise," (AP, 12/20/05).

You see, as early as 1987, our Supreme Court had ruled that states could not require public schools to balance evolution lessons by teaching creationism.

Now, whil

.

You see, as early as 1987, our Supreme Court had ruled that states could not require public schools to balance evolution lessons by teaching creationism.

Now, while it’s not my business that people believe that they evolved from apes, ants, and amoebas, when they ban even the mention of a possibility of a Creator in the discussion of man’s origin, I think I feel a fit of fury!

One of my favorite t-shirts reads "Designed by Intelligence" and I wear it to protest, to declare my origin, and to teach the science that has been censored. But I do admit defeat…they truly have amazingly managed to get their theory revered by the world and taught to all children as the scientific law of man’s origin.

To them I say, you’ve earned the right and you fully deserve the privilege to put on your t-shirts "Mutated from Inanimate Molecules, Very Primitive Life Form