A federal judge ruled Tuesday that "intelligent design" cannot be mentioned in biology classes in a Pennsylvania public school district.

The Dover Area School Board violated the Constitution when it ordered that its biology curriculum must include "intelligent design," the notion that life on Earth was produced by an unidentified intelligent cause, U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III ruled Tuesday.

Read more.

FNC wants to hear from YOU!

Do you agree with the judge's ruling, or should intelligent design be allowed in the classroom?

E-mail us at speakout@foxnews.com and jump into the debate.

Here's what your fellow FOX Fans are saying:

“It never ceases to amaze me how people of religious faith are so adamant about believing something just because someone else told them to. And for those of you who are obviously oblivious to current happenings in the world around you, make no mistake, the missing link HAS been found AND linked.” — Juanita

“Yes, we should teach intelligent design in the schools! Are we a free country, or not? How can you say that it is unconstitutional to teach it when the founding fathers, who wrote the constitution, believed in intelligent design? Evolution is just as much as a religion as creationism is.” — Phil (Dunbar, WI)

“No wonder our education system is in a downward spiral. Intelligent design is a repackaged version of the Judeo-Christian creation story attempting to masquerade as science. When it can with stand the rigors of the scientific method, teach it. For those who continue to say evolution is ‘just a theory’ remember gravity is also ‘just a theory.’" — John (Rio Rico, AZ)

“What's the big threat to the backers of the evolution theory? Teach both and let kids learn from their own experience as they grow older. My experience has been that evolution comes up far short of answering most questions. We need to get past the intellectual snobbery of pretending that evolution alone is the answer.” — Gary

“If one is taken out, why not the other? To rule out intelligent design is forcing a belief.” — Steve

“I am shocked by the amount of misinformation surrounding this issue. Evolution and intelligent design are not competing theories, and cannot be compared. Intelligent Design is logically inconsistent, and is not supported by empirical evidence. No amount of passionate debate can change these facts.” — Jay (Atlanta, GA)

“The ACLU and all of its liberal members should be deported for ruining our country and every basic concept it was founded upon.” — Daniel (MA)

“I do NOT think that so called intelligent design should be taught in schools, or anywhere else for that matter. It is archaic and based on ancient stories that were made up by people at the time they thought the earth was the center of the universe and that it was also flat. They made up stories because they were confused and scared about the world in which they lived, and they had no way to understand it. They resorted to creating myths to help them cope with their existence. The stories continue to be held today by those still afraid to die.” — Peter

“Intelligent design should be taught in all schools. The Christian community has been battered because they will not stand up. The three things that built this country are GOD, GUNS, and GUTS. If not for the guts ,you lose the other two.” — Roger

“The ruling was made by a church-going Republican judge, appointed by a Republican administration in 2002. He listened to both sides of the story and made a decision based on the arguments presented in court. Just because you don't agree with the ruling does not make him an "activist judge." — Sam

“I wouldn't worry about teaching intelligent design in school. What they should teach is how to read and write and do simple math: That would be intelligent design!” — N. (Baltimore, MD)

“The day doctors can explain the miraculous recovery of their most hopeless cases, is the day the theory of intelligent design should be banned from our schools. Until then, insisting on teaching our children half of the story is ensuring that we increase the rate of half-wits that are already graduating.” — Patricia (Long Island)

“While I am a Christian, I think that public schools should NOT be held responsible for teaching our ideals. All that I ask is that they at least make it clear that evolution (as it's currently presented) is not 100% fact and is still a theory. As parents, we should be responsible for teaching our kids about the ideals that we feel are important. If you don't want your kid taught evolution, send them to a private religious school.” — Amber (IA)

“The folks that say intelligent design should not be in the classroom do not understand science. Good science says that you need to investigate all possibilities. The sad thing is that some professors are so afraid of intelligent design that they demean it without understanding it. That is the opposite of good science.” — Chuck (CA)

“I agree with the judge's decision that intelligent design does not belong in the science classroom. People who say that it should be taught, since evolution is ‘just a theory,’ need to go back to basic science class to understand the scientific definition of a theory. According to dictionary.com, a theory is: ‘A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.’ When intelligent design can meet the burden of proof to qualify as a scientific theory, then it can be taught as science. Until then, it should stay in religion classes where it belongs.” — Cheryl

“Both theories should be taught. As a church-going child, I was confused by the mixed messages.” — Marilyn (KS)

“I live approximately 20 minutes from Dover school district, so I am very familiar with the area. The fact that they keep mentioning that the school board was voted out is misleading. The majority of the individuals in the Dover area support intelligent design, its just the fact that the few who don't are the ones who spoke up. This is how America is today, the minority screams louder and get their way.” — Nate (East Berlin, PA)

“The judge made the correct decision. We need to keep religious fanaticism out of our schools and government!” — TM

“Both intelligent design and evolution are theories that require faith, because neither can be reproduced in the laboratory. I would prefer that my children be taught all reasonable theories (with their criticisms), and then help them think critically for themselves. For those who are so dogmatic, claiming evolution is the only ‘right’ theory: What if you are wrong?” — Sondra (Alpharetta, GA)

“If intelligent design is such a great theory, how about asking the intelligent designer to tell us how he, she, or it went about the process? In fact, why not ask for a complete theory of the universe? That way, you could put all of those nasty skeptical experimental scientists out of business! Strange, isn't it, that religion has told us nothing about how the world works.” — Roger

“This is absolutely ridiculous that our country has come to the point where it mandates which ‘theory’ our students must learn. Evolution is a theory! It has not been proven, and cannot be proven. The fact that school systems are mandating certain curriculums be taught is absolutely ludicrous! Students should be able hear both sides of the argument and choose for themselves. “ — Brock (Johnson City, TN)

“This wacky judge apparently does not watch FOX News. Hasn’t he ever heard of being ‘Fair and Balanced?’ I’d love to see an FNC documentary presenting both sides of the story.” — Jen

“If intelligent design is taught in biology classes, then Santa’s Christmas Eve travels should be taught in physics class. The church is for religion and schools are for science.” — Mike

“I cannot be more happy about Judge Jones' decision! He upheld the law, and I have confidence that his decision will help other judge's facing the same questions. As an atheist and an American citizen I have no problem with people choosing to believe false information, but I refuse to have it shoved down my throat! I pay taxes, and at no point was told that my money was going to religion. If I belonged to a church and I wanted them to have money, it is MY CHOICE to give them money.” — Maggie

“It may seem old fashioned and out of date, but I was under the assumption that schools were a place where students are supposed to learn. Regardless of your religious beliefs, schools are the exact place where ALL aspects of learning should be explored (even those that are politically incorrect). What a shame that some educators refuse to allow students to learn all theories because it does not fit their own personal belief or political agenda. Our kids are definitely worse off as a result.” — Scott (Palm Bay, FL)

“I am a college student at the University of Michigan who is in favor of allowing intelligent design to be taught in schools. As a grade school student in Michigan, I was taught about evolution just like most children. Coming from a religious family, I became confused and started to have doubts about my faith. The things I was learning in school seemed to conflict with the things I learned in church. I even confessed this ‘doubt’ to a priest because I thought it was a sin. I’m not saying we need to teach religion in schools, I’m asking that we not destroy it with schools.” — Wayne

“I disagree with the ruling. Schools have an obligation to present both sides of an issue, especially if one side is only a theory. If they don't, then it's indoctrination, not education. Plus, give me a break on the whole religion thing. The first amendment of the U.S. Constitution says that ‘Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...’ A teacher isn't Congress, a textbook isn't a bill, and a passing grade isn't the president's signature.” — Jason (Grand Rapids, MI)

“Intelligent design is not science, it is religion. It should be limited to religion classes and church, and not permitted in science class.” — Frank

“It is a sad day when a federal judge gets to decide what topics can be discussed in an intellectual/educational setting. The judge is wrong and should be overturned on appeal. Neither theory (and evolution, too, is just a theory) should be taught to the exclusion of the other. Liberals should fear this decision because it is actually an attack on freedom of speech and thought.” — James

“Some say that intelligent design is not science and cannot be subjected to scientific investigation. Not so many years ago, the same would have been said about many of the accepted scientific discoveries of our day, such as laser technology, fiber optics, brain waves, etc. Just because we cannot see it or touch it, because it does not fit into our finite understanding of science, does not preclude it from investigation.” — Doug (NC)

“Next you’ll tell me there’s a ‘war on Christmas,’ right? If intelligent design is taught in biology class, I propose Harry Potter 101. You would think this country would be a little more grounded in reality. The judge made the right decision, just accept it.” — Mark

“Intelligent design should be taught in religion class where it can be compared to the creation stories of other prevailing religions and beliefs. It is not now, nor ever will it ever be, science. It has no place in a biology class.” — Ellis

“Ignorant people are the ones who think they are the only ‘intelligent’ ones.” — Greta (Walsh, CO)

“I agree with the judge's ruling. To the best of my understanding, the intelligent design theory was not originated by biologists to explain data which they observed as scientists, but instead it was created by religious individuals, some of whom were scientists, who could not accept Darwin's theory of evolution because of their beliefs. This alternative theory was religious in nature, and although its followers denied it, actually presupposed God as the ‘higher intelligence-designer.’ To force such a theory into a biology class is intellectually dishonest and legally inconsistent with the constitution.” — Jim (Washingtonville, NY)

“It is amazing to me how frightened and filled with rage these people are. What are they really afraid of except the fact that maybe if evolution and creation are held up side by side and studied, evolution won't stand the test.” — D.

“The judge should allow the mention of intelligent design, as it has serious scientific backing. This is judicial activism and it is wrong!” — J

“Considering how theoretical the origin of the universe is in the scientific community, it is alarming to me that the court system would consider blocking anything. An open mind must consider all possibilities.” — PL (Gilroy, CA)

“The theory of evolution is just that, a theory. If you believe it as truth, that is a matter of faith. The idea of Intelligent Design does not demand teaching about God or any other type of higher power. If science is to be taught correctly, then everything must be questioned and reevaluated. And frankly, I have seen much evidence against evolution to ignore the possibility that the theory is flawed.” — Richard (Des Moines, IA)

“If one is to be taught, then so should the other.” — Jim

“Intelligent design has no place in a public classroom, just as Darwin has no place in church.” — Chris (Groton, NY)

“Intelligent design is thinly disguised creationism, and should remain in the church. It's NOT science!” — Kelly (Austin, TX)

“To only teach evolution is not only wrong, it is irresponsible. In fact, it's a brainwashing of young American minds. I feel that intelligent design is a fact, the proof is all around us. In most other areas when there is a ‘theory,’ all possibilities are presented. I don't know how the minority who believe in evolution have been able to market it in our schools. We don't want to offend anyone, so we refuse to even hint that God exists. I am very offended over the theory of evolution. It seems the only people that it is OK to offend are Christians.” — Angela

“Seems to me like this ruling violates freedom of speech. Why can't students hear both sides of the issue?” — Steve

“If you study the premise of the intelligent design movement, it makes a very compelling argument for inclusion alongside Darwin's theory of evolution; it has just as much plausibility.” — Greg (Conway, AK)

“The origin of the universe will always be a theory. None of us were there and none of us can recreate the process. It is wrong to be dogmatic about something we can't prove. All we are doing is closing the minds of the next generation of progressive thinking.” — Bob