To the editor:

Let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that intelligent design theory is objective and merits inclusion in the Kansas science curriculum. While we’re being “objective” why consider only the possibility of just one intelligent designer? Shouldn’t our kids also consider that there might have been two or more?

How about a whole pantheon working since the beginning of time, including some who designed the weather, others certain kinds of animals, and yet others different kinds of people? How would you be able to tell?

The arguments routinely presented for an intelligent designer could just as readily be interpreted as evidence for multiple designers, some that were intelligent and others unintelligent, some good and others evil. In fact, there is nothing in intelligent design theory to favor monotheism (belief in one creator) over polytheism (belief in many creators). Do we really want Kansas schoolchildren to be debating this issue in science classrooms? A caution to advocates of intelligent design in the classroom: Be mindful of unintended consequences.

John W. Hoopes,

Lawrence