Columnist plans to become a bacterium: Would success support Darwinian evolution or intelligent design?

A reporter/columnist I know only as "Fred" (who claims to be "looney as a tune" and is clearly a reliable hack journalist) has written a hilarious sendup of the ID-evolution debate, "Fred Plans to "Devolve:

(Note: If you came here looking for the story about the Pope using the term "intelligent design" to describe the Catholic view of origins, go here. Other frequently sought stories (academic freedom, museums fanatically promoting Darwinism, lawsuit over use of public funds to promote liberal religious views on evolution) appear at the bottom of today's post. )

Why, oh why, are the curricula of the schools the business of the courts? If Pennsylvania wants to mention Creationism, or to require three years of French for graduation, it seems mightily to me that these things are the business of parents in Pennslyvania. Yes, I know: In practice, both freedom of expression and local government are regarded as ideals greatly to be avoided. The desire to centralize government, impose doctrine, and punish doubt is never far below the surface, anywhere. Thus our highly controlled media, our “hate-speech” laws, our political correctness and, now, Evolutionary Prohibition. The Catholic Church once burned heretics. The Church of Evolution savages them in obscure journals and denies them tenure and publication. As a heretic I believe that I would prefer the latter, but the intolerance is the same.
I note that Compulsory Evolutionists are fellow travelers of the regnant cultural Marxism, though I don’t think that they are aware of it. ...

Save this to read on your break, and, if you can, help feed Fred.

If you like this blog, check out my award-winning book on the intelligent design controversy, By Design or by Chance?. You can read excerpts as well.

Are you looking for one of the following stories?

"Academic Freedom Watch : Here's the real, ugly story behind the claim that 'intelligent design isn't science'?".

Roseville, California, lawyer Larry Caldwell is suing over the use of tax money by Darwin lobby groups to promote religious views that accept Darwinian evolution (as opposed to ones that don’t). I’m pegging this one as the next big story. See also the ruling on tax funds. Note the line that the “free speech” people take.
How to freak out your bio prof? What happened when a student bypassed the usual route of getting frogs drunk and dropping them down the chancellor’s robes, and tried questioning Darwinism instead.

Christoph, Cardinal Schonbon is not backing down from his contention that Darwinism is incompatible with Catholic faith, and Pope Benedict XVI probably thinks that’s just fine. Major US media have been trying to reach rewrite for months, with no success.

Museum tour guides to be trained to "respond" to those who question Darwinism. Read this item for an example of what at least one museum hopes to have them say.

Blog policy note: Blogger software now permits me to moderate comments before they appear, so I am re-enabling comments on a trial basis. Regular readers may recall that for a while I disabled comments due to persistent problems with defamation and obscenity. One person, who is probably not in the running for Brilliant Rocket Scientist of the Year, made a defamatory remark about an American attorney who has demonstrated his willingness to sue in cases of defamation! After that scary episode, a legal advisor strictly warned me to either permit no comments or else make no effort to moderate them - and advertise the fact that I don't. For a while, I simply chose the first way because the second sounds completely unacceptable. Now that Blogger software has very recently enabled me to screen Comments prior to publication, let's hope we can have a lively Letters to the Editor column. As usual, no one need go to the trouble of bothering me with profanity, blasphemy, defamation, naked URLs, solicitations or appeals, threats, insults, or any material that a Canadian grandmother who has been in the news business for thirty-five years would be unlikely to publish. The Internet is the last free country in the world, and someone, somewhere, will surely publish such rubbish, so even if you think I am a prude, your rights are not violated thereby.