Of the many issues surrounding the November election in Ohio, one I was surprised to read about recently was the issue of intelligent design being taught in public schools. I realize this issue is one that has sparked much debate across the country, but I had no idea it had relevance to this state election. Apparently, Ohio is a prominent figure in the ongoing feud between proponents of evolution and those that believe in creationism, and this puts pressure on Ohioans to possibly set the bar for the rest of the country.

In 2002, the Ohio Board of Education adopted science standards that encouraged students to seek evidence for and against evolution. While the standards were retracted earlier this year, many scientists viewed them as an attempt to have intelligent design taught in public school science classes. In order to prevent similar standards from developing, scientists have formed a group called Help Ohio Public Education. HOPE was founded with the purpose of giving support to candidates running for the Board of Education that will fight to uphold the constitutional ban on religion in public schools.

Ohio also has innovations on the other side of the issue. In 2007, a museum dedicated to the creation story set forth in the Bible will be opening outside of Cincinnati. The Creation Museum will attempt to offer a new interpretation of scientific evidence by strict adherence to Biblical scripture, and will make claims such that the Earth is only around 6,000 years old and dinosaurs were passengers on Noah's ark.

The claims made by the Creation Museum really show how much of a danger religion can be to science, especially when it is disguised as science in an educational setting. But the issue of intelligent design (ID) is one that does not appear to be so black and white. ID is said to be an idea founded on scientific data, and its proponents claim that it is a scientific theory that should be regarded as equivalent or even superior to other scientific theories, such as evolution. The basic idea is that the complexity of life and the universe is so great and so specifically dependent on incredibly small variables that the only reasonable explanation is an intelligent cause.

But ID is not a scientific theory, and it is just as dangerous to science as any other form of creationism. While the arguments appear to be scientific and non-religious, there is actually no data to support any of the claims. Evolution, while created as a theory based on similar observations, has genetic and fossil evidence supporting what it proposes. ID has no such evidence; there are no instances, except within dated religious doctrine, that suggest there must necessarily be a creator and any belief otherwise must be made on faith alone.

It is true that one should not jump to accept all scientific theory as fact'just look at what environmentalists are saying these days. But what should be accepted is a clear distinction between faith and reason and a realization that faith has no place in a public school classroom, just as science has no place in a church. Organizations like HOPE understand the dangers of faith-based theories masquerading as science, and the Democratic candidates they support may be what is needed to protect Ohio's educational system.