Rubber ball off a brick wall: the ID/creationist movement

I just came up with a regular entry theme: "Rubber ball off a brick wall," an attempt to penetrate the mind block people are often so willing to erect in order to avoid reason and rationality.

The first focus will be on the proponents of teaching crationism and intelligent design in public schools. First a quick definition of terms:
-Creationism, the scripture-based belief that the physical universe, including our earth and all its physical features and various species, in their current form, were created in 6 days by god a few thousand years ago.
-Evolution, the theory propounded by Charles Darwin in the late 19th century which, using scientific observation and experimentation, posits that life evolved over millions of years from single cell organisms to the complex organisms we are today.
-Intelligent design, the idea that a force with supreme powers (but not necessarily "god") initiated the process of evolution by providing a spark of life.

First came Creationism which objected to the theory of evolution. It was argued that the theory, though based on physical evidence and scientific method, couldn't be correct because the bible said otherwise. At first they rejected the notion of evolution and fought to prevent it from being taught at all (Scopes trial). Eventually, evolution became accepted as a legitimate theory and became a part of science curriculum in schools. So then the creationists sought to force public schools to put the creation story on par with the theory of evolution in the classroom. The courts interjected and said no, that's a violation of the church/state separation. The creationists grumled, prayed and went home.

A few years later, after having put the bibles out of sight and learned to use scientific terminology, the creationist reappeared as proponents of "intelligent design". The new argument was that the theory of evolution wasn't sound enough to be taught in the classroom without an alternative. The theory they had in mind as an alternative was that evolution was instigated by an unknown and unseen designer. It wasn't necessarily g-o-d, but something kinda like that. Life, they argued, is too complex to have occurred out of nothing, therefore it must have had help by this mysterious benefactor.

This alternative to the purely scientific theory of evolution was proposed and went to court where once again, it was denied a place in the science curriculum because, well, it isn't science, it's an attempt to attach god to evolution.

The ID theory is however taught and believed by a number of people in private schools and home-schooling communities. These are largely religious people who nevertheless are rational enough to accept the findings of science for what they are, observations of the natural world derived from careful experimentation. They are entitled to put their faith in god as a supplement to that which science cannot fully explain. I have no problem with this as long as they stick to private belief rather than try to force it into public education. These are the somewhat rational people.

Then there are the blowhard christian conservatives who read the bible literally and decry even the slightest hint of secularism in their life or anyone elses. These are the people who wish, quite literally, for a religious state to take power in the US. Knowing that the bible isn't a historical or scientific text and that "because god said so" isn't a valid argument, they seek to refute evolution with their own pseudo science which tries to exploit aspects of evolution that are unsolved or unclear. There are numerous organizations which provide resources for "arguing" with evolution. There is even a creation museum with exhibitions on how man domesticated the dinosaurs and tourguides of the grand canyon with creation-based theories on its formation. These people are not stupid, they know how to convince others to join their beliefs. Recent polls indicate that 55% of americans believe that god created man in his present form.

What gets me most worked up is that if people cannot integrate their religious belief with secular science, they probably cannot do so with secular law or life in general. The efforts to erect the ten commandments in every courtoom, re-enact school prayer and the furor over the so-called "war on christmas" are examples of their overreaching in other segments of life. They have built a wall of faith, ignorance and desire for power that isn't easy to penetrate. The rubber ball of reason bounces off it with a ping.