Quote Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh View Post
Professing a belief in Intelligent Design is, functionally, little more than an assertion that you still believe in God despite God being outside the rubric of Science.
Not quite true, as I understand it. ID posits that life is too complex to have evolved by natural means, and therefore supernatural intervention is not only possible, but necessary. Also, ID proponents usually want their religious views taught in public schools. ID can be legitimately described as a new iteration of creationism. Many biologists are theists without being ID adherents, so I find your definition kinda incomplete.

Did anybody actually watch last night's debate? I was traveling. Morning reports are that T-Paw did himself no favors.