Science education took a hit from religionists in Florida today when the Florida State Board of Education decreed today that evolution must be taught as "a theory rather than a settled fact." Science teachers and experts had pressed for the view that evolution is the basic "concept underlying all of biology."

The Florida board's 4-3 vote now opens the door for teaching creationism, or, as it's become known in stealth language, "intelligent design."

A federal court declared "intelligent design" is religious in nature and therefore unconstitutional in the landmark Kitzmiller versus Dover Area School Board case.

Nine of Florida's 64 counties petitioned for the change. These rural counties are heavily populated with fundamentalists, but hold a lot of sway in state and national politics because the GOP has become beholden to religious zealots.

Florida is not isolated in this extremism. Texas is undergoing similar pressure by the Religious Right to shun science and include religious teachings in the classroom. Christine Comer, a veteran teacher and almost decade-long director of science for the Texas Education Agency, was pressured to resign after sending out an e-mail informing colleagues of a speech by one of the witnesses against "intelligent design" in the Dover case. She quickly retracted the e-mail, asking recipients to disregard it, when her boss became upset and said it was grounds for termination.

Texas and Florida account for nearly 20% of all textbooks in the US. These two states alone exert tremendous influence on publishers to produce books that will end up in other states whether those states follow suit with wanting less-sound science in their curricula. It's not isolated to one or two areas, it affects everyone.

Those who object to evolution generally don't understand what it is. It is not incompatible with religious thought. It is not unprovable, nor is it without evidence. It's unconscionable that educators are being forced to either not teach science or to treat every "theory" -- whether it's based quantitatively in the sciences or borne out of faith-based notions like "intelligent design" -- as equivalents. They aren't equivalents. One is based in faith, the other in observation. The courts have made this very clear. If you want your child to be ignorant of science, teach him your superstitions at home. You'll be doing him a tremendous disservice, but at least you won't be inflicting other children with your ignorance.

"Intelligent design" is neither science nor an accepted theory. It's the name chosen by "creation science" activists in the 1980s and 1990s when the Supreme Court ruled in Edwards that creationism could not be taught in public schools under the First Amendment's establishment clause. The Dover case included testimony about the book the board there proposed for use from Discovery Institute called Of Pandas and People. During the trial, Professor Barbara Forrest, who reviewed manuscripts turned over during discovery, showed the court that the book had been revised following Edwards so words like "creator" were now "designer" and "creationism" were now "intelligent design."