"But the analogy that DNA is a 'program' Begs the Question that it is one." 
Rubbish. DNA is comprised of A, C, G, and T base pairs. These coding instructions are fundamental to how each unique gene (aka: subroutine) has its own functionality. Genes can be predictably altered, deleted, and copied (and we do this in the scientific lab every day) just as software programming subroutines can be altered, deleted, and copied.
"If it were as intelligently designed as you assert it wouldn't result in two headed snakes, or babies without brains."
Nonsense. Try to SHOW the specific wording that I used that could be interpreted to draw that conclusion (HINT: you can't, because I said no such thing).
Software has bugs. Environmental variables can also affect the output of software. Thus, this evidence is clearly contradictory to your claim above.
"I don't have to provide you with a Base 2 that is created by natural processes because there is a vastly more complex process, Base 4, that has been created by natural processes."
Oh please. Base 4 processes have never been proven to have come from ANYTHING except Intelligent Intervention. The only way that you could even claim otherwise is to be so intellectually dishonest as to assert that we "know" that evolution is true so therefor DNA must have been self-programmed naturally (i.e. a tautology, something that no honest intellectual would like to be caught using).
So it isn't that you "don't have to" provide such evidence, it is that you can not provide such evidence. It simply doesn't exist.
First of all, previously you said,
(reifying per se is never sufficient evidence of a logical fallacy),
Now anybody who asserts that reifying is never sufficient evidence of a logical fallacy isn't someone logical enough to argue with in the first place. This means you can blast through fallacies anytime you wish and simply ignore them, because for you they don't exist. No logic, no reason, no discussion.
Second, you haven't said anything else worthwhile, just denial, denigration "rubbish" "nonsense" because you can't answer the fallacies pointed out in your arguments and you have no other answers.
DNA is not a 'program' and you cannot prove it is without assuming a 'programmer'. Same Begged Question we started with.
I don't have to resort to your wording, which isn't worth resorting to anyway, because the point is made by reality. There is no evidence of an 'Intelligent Design' period. Any assertion there is, is just Begging the Question that it is intelligent, let alone a design. There is plenty of ways to show that it is, in fact, not intelligent, such as two headed snakes and babies without brains.
Oh please. Base 4 processes have never been proven to have come from ANYTHING except Intelligent Intervention.
Oh, go please yourself. There you go, proving negatives again. Facts speak for themselves, if DNA exists, that is your proof, UNTIL you prove the existence of the Designer, not say, "There is no other explanation so there must be" which is all your argument is.
The only way that you could even claim otherwise is to be so intellectually dishonest as to assert that we "know" that evolution is true so therefor DNA must have been self-programmed naturally (i.e. a tautology, something that no honest intellectual would like to be caught using).
Once again, like most of your ilk, you've got it backwards. I don't have to 'know' evolution is true, there is simply no evidence that there is anything else taking place. The issue is still open, someone may find little crosses stamped upon each DNA molecule but until that happens there is no evidence other than the evidence that exists, that DNA exists as it is, and it was created by a natural process. There is no tautology if one doesn't fallaciously apply the concept of 'programming' to something that wasn't programmed, that you have no evidence was programmed, and which you reify as a program in order to make a point that cannot otherwise be made.