Posted by: Mr. C | May 9, 2008

Intelligent Design and Politics

There are those out there who believe that ID is a vast right-wing conspiracy, funded by wealthy Christians, in an effort to get Creationism into the classroom. The fact is, I see this accusation in almost every anti-ID article that I read. The problem is that not a single person has any evidence to back up the accusations.

Here is an interesting article from ID’er, Joel Borofsky at Uncommon Descent, refuting the myth.


8 May 2008

Intelligent Design Myth #486 – “ID is politically motivated”

Joel Borofsky

ID is merely a politically motivated agenda that is meant to further the cause of the far right Republicans.

One common objection against ID is that it is merely a tool of the scary Right Wing political party. As the theory goes, the Religious Right is attempting to get ID snuck into classrooms in order to subvert science, progression, women’s rights, alternative religions to Christianity, secularism, and even wants to attack your grandparents (just like robots).

The only problem(s) with this theory? There are those of us who believe in ID who aren’t Christian, religious, or even Republican.

Now, for myself, I am a very religious Christian…but I’m not a Republican. I consider myself to be independent and even side with the Democrats quite a bit. I believe Global Warming exists and has been heavily influenced by human activity. I believe we need to do what we can – within ethical and practical limits – to help improve the environment. I think the government needs to watch out economically for those who can’t watch out for themselves. I even toy with the idea that state’s have the right to allow civil unions (and everyone now gasps). I don’t want prayer in public school as I think everyone has a right to his or her own religious beliefs. I think we should leave Iraq. Yet, I support ID.

I can think, off hand, of many ID proponents that are Jewish, Muslim, agnostic, or simply refuse to hold to any ideology.

The point is there really is no political agenda. It’s hard to say, “There is a Designer…now vote Republican!”

Instead, this myth is simply a ‘smoke and mirrors’ tactic to avoid the issue of ID. If the opposition can link ID to an already unpopular movement (conservative Christianity of the Republican form) then they feel they can discredit it in the eyes of those sitting on the sidelines. The problem is they’re not really using actual arguments against ID.

In the end, ID is not a political movement, is not part of the religious right, and is merely concerned with discovering scientific evidence that displays design in biological entities. How is that political?



  1. […] Counterterrorism Blog wrote an interesting post today on Intelligent Design and PoliticsHere’s a quick excerptI believe Global Warming exists and has been heavily influenced by human activity. I believe we need to do what we can – within ethical and… […]

  2. ID is politically motivated because the only thing ID really has backing it right now IS politics. ID is not science. That’s why it doesn’t belong in science curriculum. Instead, ID proponents keep trying to push their ideas into curriculum by influencing state standards (by ways of boards of education, etc) and textbook selection.

    Being that these proponents need people who are anti-evolution to get these sorts of things passed in state governments, then that IS a political agenda, in my opinion. Typically (but not always) such people ARE conservative Christians.

    If ID is concerned with science, as you say, then why aren’t its proponents engaging in the scientific method? Why aren’t they attending scientific meetings? Why aren’t they publishing work for peer review?

    No one is avoiding the issue of ID. On the contrary, the issues ID raises have been engaged time and time again–and found to be false time and time again.

    A few places you can see this are:

    Finding Darwin’s God by Kenneth Miller
    The Language of God by Francis Collins
    (these two men are Christian biologists, by the way)
    And the website Talk Origins has many rebuttals and references, etc, on the topic.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: