Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

After making due allowance for exceptions and sporadic departures from the normal, the situation here at the present time may be summarized quite briefly. As a general rule the classes that are low in economic efficiency, or in intelligence, or both, are peculiarly devout -- as, for instance, the Negro population of the South, much of the lower-class foreign population, much of the rural population, especially in those sections which are backward in education, in the stage of development of their industry, or in respect of their industrial contact with the rest of the community. So also such fragments as we possess of a specialized or hereditary indigent class, or of a segregated criminal or dissolute class; although among these latter the devout habit of mind is apt to take the form of a naive animistic belief in luck and in the efficacy of shamanistic practices perhaps more frequently than it takes the form of a formal adherence to any accredited creed. The artisan class, on the other hand, is notoriously falling away from the accredited anthropomorphic creeds and from all devout observances. This class is in an especial degree exposed to the characteristic intellectual and spiritual stress of modern organized industry, which requires a constant recognition of the undisguised phenomena of impersonal, matter-of-fact sequence and an unreserved conformity to the law of cause and effect. This class is at the same time not underfed nor over-worked to such an extent as to leave no margin of energy for the work of adaptation.

The case of the lower or doubtful leisure class in America -- the middle class commonly so called -- is somewhat peculiar. It differs in respect of its devotional life from its European counterpart, but it differs in degree and method rather than in substance. The churches still have the pecuniary support of this class; although the creeds to which the class adheres with the greatest facility are relatively poor in anthropomorphic content. At the same time the effective middle-class congregation tends, in many cases, more or less remotely perhaps, to become a congregation of women and minors. There is an appreciable lack of devotional fervor among the adult males of the middle class, although to a considerable extent there survives among them a certain complacent, reputable assent to the outlines of the accredited creed under which they were born. Their everyday life is carried on in a more or less close contact with the industrial process.

This peculiar sexual differentiation, which tends to delegate devout observances to the women and their children, is due, at least in part, to the fact that the middle-class women are in great measure a (vicarious) leisure class. The same is true in a less degree of the women of the lower, artisan classes. They live under a regime of status handed down from an earlier stage of industrial development, and thereby they preserve a frame of mind and habits of thought which incline them to an archaic view of things generally. At the same time they stand in no such direct organic relation to the industrial process at large as would tend strongly to break down those habits of thought which, for the modern industrial purpose, are obsolete. That is to say, the peculiar devoutness of women is a particular expression of that conservatism which the women of civilized communities owe, in great measure, to their economic position. For the modern man the patriarchal relation of status is by no means the dominant feature of life; but for the women on the other hand, and for the upper middle-class women especially, confined as they are by prescription and by economic circumstances to their "domestic sphere," this relation is the most real and most formative factor of life. Hence a habit of mind favorable to devout observances and to the interpretation of the facts of life generally in terms of personal status. The logic, and the logical processes, of her everyday domestic life are carried over into the realm of the supernatural, and the woman finds herself at home and content in a range of ideas which to the man are in great measure alien and imbecile.

Perhpaps I'm the only crazy left around here.

The problem with ID'ers argument is that they're always defending themselves. Perhaps they should speak of the anomolies that evolutionary folks can't argue,

Student touts intelligent design
(By Tatiana Zarnowski, Carlisle Sentinel, June 14, 2006)

A Cumberland Valley High School student wants to reignite the debate over teaching intelligent design in public schools.

Kimberly Fikse says people shouldn't stop talking about the theory that life began with an "intelligent designer" just because a federal judge ruled teaching it unconstitutional.

"Wouldn't it be nice if a student could hear all views?" Fikse said in a prepared speech to Cumberland Valley School Board June 5.

Most high-schoolers "eat up anything they're taught" and don't question it, she said.

School board President Karen Christie invited Fikse to send her speech to the board, but didn't respond to the subject matter during the board meeting.

The teen, who just completed her junior year, spoke about intelligent design at a speech team competition as a 10th-grader and again for her contemporary issues class this year.

"I thought it was important. It's something that I don't really think is fair to all the students," Fikse said after the meeting. "All I really wanted to do was just put the question back in. And maybe in the future something will happen."

She thinks both intelligent design and evolution theories could be taught on their scientific basis in biology classes.

Fikse says she began thinking schools should at least mention creationism when she first learned about evolution in middle school. Then she heard about the new intelligent design theory.

Later, Dover Area School District in York County made national headlines when a group of parents represented by the American Civil Liberties Union sued the district because administrators read a brief statement about intelligent design before students were taught Darwin's theory.

The Silver Spring Township teen attends New Covenant Fellowship Church in Hampden Township.

She says she might someday like to be a physicist or "some form of engineer, but not a biological scientist."

Physics is a science that myself and many other non-christian students agree causes a large break in the Evolution chain.

ALL the attempts at underpinning Intelligent Designs "scientific" basis have met with crashing defeat.

Noone has been able toprovide any decent background in evidence of its prinicple feature :"Irreducible Complexity".

This, the Fed Court District has determined that , by its own admission, Intelligent Design is not science , but is a religious position which, under the First Amendment of the US Constitution, is limited in its inclusion in a science curriculum.

Several hundred scientific organizations in Pa , (including respected scientific organizations at Penn State, had submitted statements of support for the plaintiffs at Dover)

AM I missing something?

Perhaps there s something new there that we hadnt discussed.

I know I am replying to a four year old thread, but I am the girl who spoke at the school board meeting at Cumberland Valley High School. No, I was not prompted at home to speak. I now am a fourth year student in Penn State's school of Engineering where I have taken countless science classes. I still hold firm to my belief in Intelligent design and only confirm it more as I attend those classes. I have found that the laws of science cause impossibilities in the Evolution theory. Physics is a science that myself and many other non-christian students agree causes a large break in the Evolution chain. The debate however is not about which theory is right. The debate is allowing both theories to be heard so the student can then digests the information and choose their beliefs for themselves. I was never forced into what I believe, but my parents gave me opportunities to learn and decide for myself.