ID people say we should teach the "controversy" should we ??

Sure, why not.

Of course, we'll have to teach REAL controversies in biology, not the invented ones the Discovery Institute and pals come up with.

Students leaving highschool informed enough in biology to understand current controversies would be far too well informed to ever again fall for evolution-denier propaganda.

Of course, I somehow don't think the ID crowd would be happy with the massive shift in emphasis towards biology in secondary education that would be required in order to teach current controversies.

There's no pleasing some people, really.

EDIT: Come on people there are too controversies! Is the transmembrane potential maintained entirely by the activity of ion pumps, or is the majority accounted for by adhesion of ions to the cytoskeleton? Are protein plaque deposits in degenerative brain disease a symptom or cause of the illness? Do heavy metals exert their toxic effects primarily by substituting other metals in protein complexes, by binding permanently to active sites in enzymes, by catalyzing reactions that generate other toxic compounds, or by some other mechanism?

Teach the controversy!

Of course not. In scientific terms, there is no controversy, none whatsoever. The only place there is controversy is in the minds of ID/creationist people, who generally have no idea at all how science works, or even what science knows nor how it is known. Scientific proof is definitely not a matter of public opinion, to be decided by the will of the majority. It's a matter of evidence, which is something else that creationists don't generally know how to define properly.

We should introduce ID into the Science classrooms when we find some kind of evidence that would suggest not only that a creator was involved- but that it was intelligent.

So far they have NOTHING but a few arguments (irreducible complexity- a rather argument). Until there is evidence that shows this, it is NOT a SCIENTIFIC claim.

I think we should teach science in science class. ID doesn't meet any of the requirements for science. There is no controversy worth mentioning.

I think it's hilarious when people say we should "teach both sides of the issue and let the students decide." There's still a very large faction of people in the world who claim that the holocaust never happened. Does that mean we should teach "both sides of the issue" in history class? Of course not, we should base curriculum on what is true, not on what lots of people believe.

I beaver is the final ghetto term used to describe the area yet i in my view want taco.. sounds lots extra appetizing.. And yep, in the event that they want identity in colleges then the two aspects of each argument might desire to learn, gay and as we communicate, technological expertise and magic, each faith on the face of the planet. in spite of the undeniable fact that quickly colleges will might desire to the two reperesent the two heterosexuality and homosexuality and not prepare the youngsters that homosexuality is incorrect.. this is a stable step forward b/c homosexuality is an innate area of human nature in basic terms like heterosexuality. yet faith or magic and issues that are actually not actuality yet are opinion do no longer belong in public colleges. they seem to be a place for infants of each form to bypass and to learn approximately their worldwide. no longer a palce to be indoctrinated with a faith. And no, homosexuality isn't an opinion. Homosexuals have continuously existed and could stay to tell the tale whether you like it or no longer. So it stands to reason that public colleges might desire to be the two representing it on account that in basic terms like heterosexuality this is a real sexual orientation.

ID should not be part of any science education.

If it's part of a comparative religions class, fine.

ID isnt a scientific theory. It simply doesnt follow scientific method. Thats its flaw.

There is no scientific controversy to teach. There isn't a single peer reviewed article in support of it. So....exactly what would we teach?

There is no controversy. Evolution is a confirmed fact, and ID is religion in a cheap tuxedo.