[Dimensio]

So you thought intelligent design had NOTHING to do with an overseeing intelligent agent.

I said no such thing. It was ID-pushers who tried to claim that the "overseeing intelligent agent" wasn't necessarily a god (or God).

[Luis Gonzalez]

"It was ID-pushers who tried to claim that the "overseeing intelligent agent" wasn't necessarily a god (or God)."

It was this guy:

[jwalsh07]

"(5) The censorship of creation science has at least two harmful effects. First, it deprives students of knowledge of one of the two scientific explanations for the origin of life and leads them to believe that evolution is proven fact; thus, their education suffers and they are wrongly taught that science has proved their religious beliefs false. Second, it violates the Establishment Clause. The United States Supreme Court has held that secular humanism is a religion. Id., at E-36 (Sen. Keith) (referring to Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488, 495, n. 11 (1961)); 1 App. E-418 (Sen. Keith); 2 id., at E-499 (Sen. Keith). Belief in evolution is a central tenet of that religion. 1 id., at E-282 (Sen. Keith); id., at E-312 -- E-313 (Sen. Keith); id., at E-317 (Sen. Keith); id., at E-418 (Sen. Keith); 2 id., at E-499 (Sen. Keith). Thus, by censoring creation science and instructing students that evolution is fact, public school teachers are now advancing religion in violation of the Establishment Clause. 1 id., at E-2 -- E-4 (Sen. Keith); id., at E-36 -- E-37, E-39 (Sen. Keith); id., at E-154 -- E-155 (Boudreaux paper); id., at E-281 -- E-282 (Sen. Keith); id., at E-313 (Sen. Keith); id., at E-315 -- E-316 (Sen. Keith); id., at E-317 (Sen. Keith); 2 id., at E-499 -- E-500 (Sen. Keith)." Justice Scalia in Edwards v Aguillard