ID is the belief that life on earth was designed. The ID movement have not suggested who the designer was, just that they believe life was designed. The simple fact is that science says that life didn't take long to evolve...statisically, life florished at an impossibly fast pace. Panspermia is the scientific name for the belief that life originated on another planet. Panspermia is ID with another name and specifically stating "God didn't do it". To teach ID is to say "Some people believe that life was designed, here are the reasons and evidence to support this theory". There is debate! Even among scientists, some believe that life might not have originated on earth. No need to mention God. No need to mention aliens. The theory and evidence we have is sufficient to warrant mention in science text books.

How about looking at the facts, is that allowed in school? How about debate, is that allowed? So while scientists are studying the theory of Panspermia (ID, which out of hand rejects the possiblity of God), the actual Intelligent Design movement looks for evidence that life was designed without trying to put a name / face to the designer. If you have a problem with ID being "religious", then you know absolutely nothing about ID.

Whatever.I disagree with it.To me anything that staes a higher power created us is religion .period the end.

That's a very skewed view of what religion is. If fact, it's not supported by any definition of religion. I'm afraid that you are allowing your bias to blind you to scientific debate. Panspermia is a scientific theory. It has been heavily documented and has growing support from scientists. Panspermia is ID with one exclusion of the possible source of life (God) and the caveat that life could have been spread accidentally. ID is the belief that life might have been designed (which many scientists would agree with) and includes no references to who the designer might have been. You are rejecting a scientific theory based on the religion of the people preposing the theory. How would you feel if one group of people rejected a theory based on the race, gender or religion of the people who proposed the theory?

Edit:

Your opener "Whatever" clearly shows that you have no interest in the objective truth. You reject it out of hand, because "To me anything that staes a higher power created us is religion". ID does not suggest that life was created by a "higher power", simply a greater intelligence. It could have been God, Odin, the Titans (not the football team) or Xenu. If the evidence points to life being designed, we shouldn't ignore the evidence, simply because it might imply the existance of God.

all i can say is i hope 2012 is real and nibiru is comming to kill us all

To limit choises is censorship,what I beleive is not relevant,But to not open one's mind to all the opions is stupid.Now I agree with BUSH,I feel dirty.Who brought this up?I need a hug now!

Bush don't even know both..... But right on