Kevin Reject McCarthy is Lying Again
The leaders of the movement all agree that ID is religious.
Let's take a look-in "The Design Revolution", page 25, Dembski writes:
Intelligent Design has theological implications, but it is not a theological enterprise. Theology does not own intelligent design. Intelligent design is not a evangelical Christian thing, or a generally Christian thing or even a generally theistic thing. Anyone willing to set aside naturalistic prejudices and consider the possibility of evidence for intelligence in the natural world is a friend of intelligent design.
He goes on to say:
Intelligent design requires neither a meddling God nor a meddled world. For that matter, it doesn't even require there be a God.Oops, KevTARD
In his book "Signature in the Cell" Stephen C. Meyer addresses the issue of Intelligent Design and religion:
First, by any reasonable definition of the term, intelligent design is not "religion".- page 441 under the heading Not Religion
He goes on say pretty much the same thing I hve been saying for years- ID doesn't say anything about worship- nothing about who, how, why, when, where to worship- nothing about any service- nothing about any faith nor beliefs except the belief we (humans) can properly assess evidence and data and properly process information. After all the design inference is based on our knowledge of cause and effect relationships.
OK so that takes care of Dembski and Meyer- that is two for me and zero for the lying KevTARD.
"Intelligent Design is based on scientific evidence, not religious belief."- Jonathan Wells "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design"
Three for me, still zero for the lying KevTARD.