The conservative view -- that of teaching intelligent design, or an alternative to Darwinism, is antithetical to science. In American public schools, religion may be taught about, but not taught. This means, religion may be presented as an historical or philosophical debate, as long as belief systems or spirituality are neither taught nor given predominance by the teacher. The idea of evolution is central to almost every biological and scientific paradigm in contemporary culture, and must be taught in order to students to be well informed. The idea of taking a non-scientific concept and presenting it as science does not make it science, regardless of how it is dressed up (Polkinghorne, 2006).

Indeed, the idea of presenting fairness in a classroom situation is untenable when trying to teach a religious-based concept next to a scientific-based set of principles. When we teach the Civil War, we do not typically teach the point-of-view of the religious fundamentalists who argued the pro-slavery stance. Indeed, it is not the job of the teacher to "teach" every point-of-view. Instead, the modern teacher should focus on presenting standard curriculum ideas and then the means and ability to find additional materials, analyze and synthesize source materials, and come to a considered conclusion. One cannot argue faith, nor should one. One can, however, ask students to accept that there are numerous points-of-view held at different times in history. These points-of-view, for example, National Socialism, may not be acceptable from a modern moral standpoint....

Therefore, the key to a free thinking and intelligent student is to take responsibility for one's education and thought, research the situation, and then consider what answer might work for the individual. The science curriculum, however, should not be up for debate. The Court has decided that creationism and intelligent design are not science, and any presumption or warning about the teaching of evolution is contrary to the Constitution. Let creationism or intelligent design be taught in the Church, let evolution be taught in the schools. Let students, as they mature, come to their own conclusion or adapt the information for their needs. Above all, teach to think, teach critical questioning, teach ways to find out facts and opinions, and above all, teach to remain open minded. Only in this way will we protect the precious intellectual tradition and responsibility we have towards future our future leaders.
REFERENCES

Epperson v Arkansas, 393 (U.S. Supreme Court December 12, 1968).

Edwards v Aguillard, 482 (U.S. Supreme Court June 19, 1987).

National Science Association. (2010, January). Official Positions: The Teaching of Darwin in he Public Schools. Retrieved August 2010, from NTSA.com: http://www.nsta.org/about/positions/evolution.aspx

Polkinghorne, J. (2006). Science and Creation: The Search for Understanding. Templeton Foundation Press.

Zafirovski, M. (2008). Modern Free Society and Its Memesis: Liberty vs. Conservativism in the new Millenium. Boston: Lexington Books.