So, if we're going to treat evolution as debatable in American schools -- if we're going to "teach the controversy," as an apparent majority of Americans would prefer -- why stop with evolution? There's lots of "controversy" out there, after all.

Why not "teach the controversy" and give equal time to the theory that HIV doesn't cause AIDS? Look, here's a doctor who thinks it doesn't, and here's another, and here's yet another who's said the same thing, here's a group of doctors and other academics who've said they're not sure, and here's a head of state who's expressed doubts -- why not require teaching that controversy in our classrooms? Why not give equal time (say, in medical-school classrooms at state colleges) to the theory that AIDS can be treated with garlic, lemon, olive oil, and beetroot, as one doctor insists?

Or 9/11 -- there are lots of controversies surrounding that day. The juiciest, of course, says that 4,000 Jews got advance warning of the attacks and therefore escaped death. Here are some Muslims who believe that might be true. Here are some Christians who feel the same way. So this belief is broad-based. We should teach that controversy, too -- no?