Designing minds. A federal judge this week rendered in legalese what most Americans understand intuitively: The intelligent design concept is at heart an expression of religious faith.

For now, Judge John E. Jones III’s ruling affects only Pennsylvania, where the Dover School District wanted to require that students be taught intelligent design as an alternative to the theory of evolution.

Jones wisely recognized, though, that his decision in the highly publicized case would be watched closely by lawyers, judges and educators in other jurisdictions with intelligent design controversies of their own. So he went on to a broader question regarding the belief that a higher power designed the universe and the life structures that inhabit it: Is such a belief science?

No, Jones declared, it isn’t. And school systems that insist on using it to infiltrate science curricula as a counterpoint to evolution are improperly advancing the cause of a specific religious belief. Science derives from scientific inquiry, not sectarian dictum.

This ideological battle isn’t over yet, but Jones’ ruling may help to hasten a reasonable conclusion. In the meantime, some students in some misguided districts will have to endure the confusion of having religion presented as science. Obviously, the evolution process has more work to do.

A man’s House is his palace. Majority Leader Tom DeLay’s public disclosure records reveal a lavish and pampered lifestyle that he’s been able to enjoy thanks to substantial political donations. Now under indictment in Texas on money-laundering charges, DeLay is renowned for his ability to raise campaign money for himself and other Republicans.

In the process, records show, he has traveled, dined and recreated in luxury, jetting around the world and staying at exclusive resorts.

His attorney, Don McGahn, has explained that the expenditures are legal, because the trips and activities were undertaken in the name of raising political funds.

“Mr. DeLay has done extensive fund raising and traveled far and wide to do so,” McGahn said, “but you would be hard-pressed to find someone who has raised more for others, whether for candidates or political parties.”

Assuming DeLay’s money-laundering case goes to trial, McGahn might want to craft a more compelling explanation before addressing the jury.