No.
First understand that ID is not a single theory. It is a class of hypotheses with the common features that the motivating force behind universal creation is not random but was created by the deliberate action of an intelligent life form.
ID is a hypothesis, not a proven conclusion. Furthermore, a proven form of ID would necessarily have data to indicate the specific nature of intelligence and method.
Those opposed to ID are closed minded, unscientific, and rule out a hypothesis without any basis for doing so, particularly since several constructs of ID fit all the data we have today. They reactionarily exclude ID as a hypothesis simply because it could be consistent with the Bible in some forms. That is atheistic thinking.
Scientific proponents of ID are not stating ID is the only possibility. (The labels in textbooks did not state that ID was a certainty either)
So ID is not a statement of faith because it does not presume the ID is a god, as required by most religious faiths. It is simply a possible set of solutions.
BTW: In science anytime we brainstorm a set of possible solutions to a problem we do not exclude any possible solution just because something similar may have beeen mentioned in the Bible. That would be unscientific and absolutely bigoted. It would also be stupid.
I agree with that.
A statement of faith does not have to imply it is in relation to "religeon".
The Supreme Court ruled that secular humanism is a religeon and its charictoristic is a belief in the theory of evolution.
I recognize their right to have statements of faith as part of their belief system. To deny them that right would be bigoted.
They call their statements of faith "scientific beliefs". They can call it what they want.