Replies

==Intelligent design is a religious concept being promoted as science by the Discovery Institute and others in a dishonest attempt to get religion taught in science classes.

What on earth is dishonest about it? Their premise is built right into the name. Were you somehow duped into thinking that ID is the search for unintelligent causes? If anything, Darwinian evolution has metamorphosed into a dishonest attempt to preach materialist religion under the guise of science, while at the same time using the power of government to stifle scientific inquiry into evidence for Intelligent Design. If you truly believe in a separation of religion and state, then the state (to include state and federally funded science) has no business promoting Darwinism. If, on the other hand, you believe Darwinism should be taught in our public schools, then ID should be taught right along side it.

If anything, Darwinian evolution has metamorphosed into a dishonest attempt to preach materialist religion under the guise of science, while at the same time using the power of government to stifle scientific inquiry into evidence for Intelligent Design.

False, on several points.

First, the theory of evolution has progressed a great deal since Darwin's pioneering efforts.
Second, the theory of evolution is not a religion. (I did six years of grad school, with half my time spent in evolution and closely related subjects, and not once did anyone pass a collection plate! That proves it!) Naturalism may be a worldview, but it is not a religion.
Third, there is no scientific inquiry into ID. There is only religiously-motivated apologetics. If ID offered any explanatory power in science, and if it were amenable to the scientific method, it would have no problem being accepted.
Finally, the court cases have all come as challenges to attempts by ID and its kin to sneak back into science classes. You think excluding ID from high schools is "stifling scientific inquiry?" High school students are there to start catching up with science, not to do research. Until they actually learn some science they are not going to make any contributions at all.

If you truly believe in a separation of religion and state, then the state (to include state and federally funded science) has no business promoting Darwinism. If, on the other hand, you believe Darwinism should be taught in our public schools, then ID should be taught right along side it.

The fact that a small minority of religious believers disagree with the results of the theory of evolution does not discredit it as a science. It follows the scientific method.

On the other hand, ID is not science--it does not follow the scientific method--and it has no business in science classes.

But I am sure you disagree. So, a couple of questions:

What is the single most powerful argument you have for ID?

How many intelligent designers were there? Please explain the basis for your answer.