There is a lot of misinformation in that article.
It's the missing link between creationism and religious instruction masquerading as biology. Yes, class, Ms. Cleary sees a place for missing links after all, and it's not pretty.
Creationism takes a literal view of the Bible, so it holds that the Earth and all its creatures were created in one fell, divine swoop 6,000 years ago. Fair enough, but that's a hard sell as must-have information in a sophomore biology course.
Enter intelligent design (ID), an idea that tries to make creationism palatable to adults on school boards who have no scientific training or interests but have the power to tell adults who do have scientific training and interests how to teach science.
Creationism does not necessarily take this view;Creationism takes a literal view of the Bible, so it holds that the Earth and all its creatures were created in one fell, divine swoop 6,000 years ago.
Some agree with that and some don't. He is obviously pro-evo and anti-anything else. His attempts to lump in ID with creation is just what we see here on these threads regularly. ID is not equivalent to creationism, no matter how many times the evolutionists claim it is. IIRC bboop stated it quite clearly recently on another thread that the theory behind ID is that some aspects of the universe show signs of intelligent design which is not the same as the Biblical creation account. Although most evolutionists vehemently disagree, the understanding I have of ID is that it does not preclude evolution at all. All it states is that it got started somehow, and occasionally needed a bump along, but makes no statement about who the designer is or was. In spite of the fact that most IDers I've seen state this, the evolutionists still like to insist that ID is creation in disguise. There is no doubt that ID helps the creation cause but ID in the form that I originally read about it as, is not creation.
After creation science was tossed, there just had to be another vehicle to carry the message, hence ID was dusted off and reborn. All of the details are laid out in the embarrassing Wedge Strategy, which was promptly leaked on the net.
...the understanding I have of ID is that it does not preclude evolution at all. All it states is that it got started somehow, and occasionally needed a bump along, but makes no statement about who the designer is or was.
In the US, and on these threads, ID is synonymous with creation science and creationism. (However, the exact details of that creation may vary from 6000 to 4.5 billion years.)
Many is the time that posters who disagreed with ID have been challenged for "bashing religion." Many is the time that biblical quotations have been posted to support the arguments of IDers. Few examples come to mind of pure IDers, and at the moment I can't think of any non-theistic IDers on these threads.