Barbarian offers:
No. According to the guys who invented it, it's a religious doctrine. Would you like me to show you?
From the "Wedge Document", meant to be internal only, accidentally released:
Governing Goals
• To defeat scientific materialism and its destructive moral, cultural and political legacies.
• To replace materialistic explanations with the theistic understanding that nature and human beings are created by God.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wedge_strategy
For example, the question of why whales swim with up-and-down motions, while fish swim with side-to-side motions:
Scientific explanation: Whales evolved from legged mammals which swam in a modified running motion.
ID explanation: God designed them to swim that way.
The first depends on evidence and leads to new discoveries. The second is a religious belief.
There are many IDers (mostly the few biologists in the movement) who acknowledge the fact of evolution, but add their religious ideas into it in various ways. Michael Behe, for example, says common descent is a fact, but God had to step in and make a few miracles every now and then to make it work.
IDer Michael Denton, who seems to be a deist of sorts, says:
It is important to emphasize at the outset that the argument presented here is entirely consistent with the basic naturalistic assumption of modern science--that the cosmos is a seamless unity which can be comprehended in its entirety by human reason and in which all phenomena, including life and evolution and the origin of man, are ultimately explicable in terms of natural processes. This is an assumption which is entirely opposed to that of the so-called "special creationist school." According to special creationism, living organisms are not natural forms, whose origin and design were built into the laws of nature from the beginning, but rather contingent forms analogous in essence to human artifacts, the result of a series of supernatural acts, involving God's direct intervention in the course of nature, each of which involved the suspension of natural law. Contrary to the creationist position, the whole argument presented here is critically dependent on the presumption of the unbroken continuity of the organic world--that is, on the reality of organic evolution and on the presumption that all living organisms on earth are natural forms in the profoundest sense of the word, no less natural than salt crystals, atoms, waterfalls, or galaxies.
In large measure, therefore, the teleological argument presented here and the special creationist worldview are mutually exclusive accounts of the world. In the last analysis, evidence for one is evidence against the other. Put simply, the more convincing is the evidence for believing that the world is prefabricated to the end of life, that the design is built into the laws of nature, the less credible becomes the special creationist worldview.
Michael Denton
Nature's Destiny
Both of these biologists are members of the Discovery Institute, which is the organization promoting the doctrine of ID. Obviously, a creationist of the normal YE variety could not consistently support ID. But few of the faithful know about the deistic roots of ID.
