Opinion

ID is domain for more than creationists

James Born
Guest Column

To recognize intelligent design (ID), a person would have to be a member of the insidious “creationism” movement and/or not too intelligent. This is apparently the premise or logic of Mr. Chabin’s argument in a recent guest column (March 7).

I propose that a person can embrace ID and be intelligent as well as not be a religious creationist (RC). At the same time, it is likely that the RC would support the scientific evidence of ID that suggests a creator. However, the RC would most likely believe in a Creator God with or without scientific evidence. A non-RC, who embraces ID but not a Creator God, may be one of those who recognizes a paradigm shift in process as informed and enlightened science can no longer support the core theoretical positions of Darwin.

Darwin’s time lacked the technology to unlock the wonders of DNA and other discoveries that makes Darwin no longer tenable. The dilemma for the non-RC is who or what replaces Darwin. Currently, the honest non-RC recognizes a vacuum exists and is waiting for something more rationally palatable to be invented. I submit that Darwin is being propped up by “flat earth” thinkers. In addition, I submit that competing theories, especially those proposed by scientists who happen to have religious worldviews, are being prejudicially censored from the forum of ideas. How very intellectually limiting and impoverishing for any person, educational institution, and/or scientific community.