Comments on: Intelligent Design and the Family

By: Nigel Depledge

Nigel Depledge — Fri, 18 May 2007 11:30:32 +0000

Or, (6), Dembski says “ID is not that kind of theory”

By: vetiver

vetiver — Fri, 18 May 2007 02:52:02 +0000

Or,
(5) Dave Scot bans the poster.

Unless the lesbians agree to make out and let him watch.

By: TorbjÃ¶rn Larsson, OM

TorbjÃ¶rn Larsson, OM — Thu, 17 May 2007 20:52:44 +0000

Or,
(5) Dave Scot bans the poster.

By: Austringer

Austringer — Thu, 17 May 2007 17:25:05 +0000

If the IDC advocates were smart about this, they’d simply make a comment about how “ID has become a culturally pervasive term; look out, you Darwinists!”

I expect that they won’t be able to leave it at that. So, let’s have a pool on possible responses:

(1) Casey Luskin complains that the SF adoption people “do not understand ID”.

(2) John West complains that the SF adoption people are stealing the DI’s valuable intellectual property.

(3) Bruce Chapman complains that “ID theorists” are “no friends of” alternative lifestyles.

(4) David DeWolf sues the SF campaign for mental anguish.