What is ironic is that I've always considered a sort of intelligent design approach plausible. In fact, I don't see any need for it to reject ANY of the science done so far. Evolution is not really at odds with Creationism...I worked that out on my own when I was fourteen.

The problem is that Intelligent Design and Creationism are not science, they are theological constructs. You must rely on faith, rather than proof for either of them.

I don't know about others, but I want science and the courts to work with concepts of reason and proof, rather than faith.