Was Dover about Science or Religion?

A number of friends have asked me about the Dover decision, and I am moderately positive about the whole thing. The judge is an educated man and cleanly saw through the bullshit to the core issue, that ID is religion not science.

I'm just gravely dissapointed that we've come to a point in the history of the country where sceintifc literacy is so low, we need to debate what is and is not science in courts. That is a clear shot across the bow for those who want to see it. We're (one of) the most scienifically advanced civilizations in the most technological times and yet we still want to run back into the caves and have the chief tell us scary stories of the ghost in the woods.

So while I am heartened that the judge was a clear, sober guy, I think the fact that we are here at all is pretty sad.

And, least you think the ID case was really a legitimate one of new, cutting edge science vs the heirarchy, this post-trial comment sums it all up for me:

In his opinion, Judge Jones traced the history of the intelligent design movement to what he said were its roots in Christian fundamentalism. He seemed especially convinced by the testimony of Barbara Forrest, a historian of science, that the authors of the "Pandas" textbook had removed the word "creationism" from an earlier draft and substituted it with "intelligent design" after the Supreme Court's ruling in 1987