>>10
Yes.
"What people call a 'theory' and what scientists call a 'theory' is a matter of definition."
No. It has the same meaning. Theory cannot be Law.
"A scientific theory is a set of truths that has yet to be put down."
No. You have it the wrong way around. Theory is not truth. It is ideas yet to be proven true (or false).
"Any intelligent person with the most basic knowledge of the mathematics and mechanisms involved can see that evolution is not a theory, it is a solid bloody fact."
No. Evolution is rife with problems. Darwinism cannot explain irreducibly complex systems, the emergence of life, or consciousness in an adequate manner. These are issues commonly sidestepped by proponents of Evolution Theory. Darwinism has useful applications, but as the SOLE EXPLANATION of all biological phenomena, it is insufficient.
"Intelligent design is just these people's way of trying to get the Biblical idea of creationism taught in public schools."
Intelligent Design is Creationism without the dogma. The two are commonly confused. The political interest in teaching Creationism subliminally using Intelligent Design as the "front" vehicle is perhaps true in some cases.
"The government has no business teaching our kids religion."
This can be argued. However, Intelligent Design, as above stated, is Creationism without the dogma. Religious bias might creep into the teaching but this is a fault of teachers, not material.
Darwinism should be given its rightful place as a scientific work in progress. All too often it is regarded as fact and taken for granted, which is not only untrue but misleads students into thinking there are no problems with the theory, and that it has practically no academic opponents. Good scientific attitudes should be encouraged.