If a controversial scientific theory ostensibly has no premise in religion, and the public advocacy of said theory has largely expanded to a political and legal matter that's contingent upon having no theological derivation, then it is a fairly bad move to have said advocacy handled by "the sword and shield for people of faith, providing legal representation without charge to defend and protect Christians and their religious beliefs in the public square." See that? "Religious beliefs?"

Most simpletons can recognize that such a political association undermines what has now expanded from ID's scientific merits (which are questionable) and into the realm of public perception and the law. ID itself starts backwards from a central premise, and that premise is "God," or something essentially indistinguishable from God, in human understanding and potence. It is not merely in the interest of the Thomas More center to advocate something that pokes holes in evolution - conveniently, ID also buttresses their faith, a portion of the dual motivation that you conveniently exclude from your comment.

As an example - if a group of scientists wanted to specifically offer the alternate theory (following all of the scientific protocols that ID'ers have followed) that thetans were responsible for the creation of the human race, would the Thomas More Center get involved? No? Why not? It's poking holes in evolution, isn't it?

Is it perhaps because in addition to such a theory poking holes in evolution, such a thetan theory fails to buttress - and in fact contradicts - their Christian faith specifically? Of course. In addition to not contradicting Christianity, ID goes farther than you seem to acknowledge in advocating it, whereas evolution is neutral on the general matter of faith.

Most of ID's advocates, including the legal representation in the Dover trial, are narrowly interested in buttressing their faith, and it's highly arguable that the diminshment of evolution, though necessarily part of the equation, is less of a primary motivation for such religious organizations to get involved. And from a Constitutional standpoint, religious advocacy is a conflict with the "scientific theory" being taught in a public school. Thus, the association is both problematic for and telling about ID in at least a couple of ways.

I think that my assertions about problematic associations have been borne out in the ruling of this case.

A similar logical conflict can be found in the employment of "ceremonial deism" by overtly religious interests as a legal and argumentative hedge against the Pledge of Allegiance's possible violation of the Establishment Clause via the phrase "under God." Namely, since "ceremonial deism" apparently maintains the sanctity of the separation between church and state by stripping the Godly reference of pointed religious meaning, then why are some overtly religious advocates so bent on saving something that's ostensibly meaningless, by citing the argument that it's "protected from Establishment Clause scrutiny chiefly because [it's] lost through rote repetition any significant religious content[?]"

In both issues, arguing for a greater role for religion in the public square via government expression is something that I strongly disagree with, but it's certainly an arguable point of view in an honest debate. That being said, arguing for public expression of religion while gaming the legal system with disingenuous definitions and statements of intent is a losing strategy, in my estimation. At least it proved to be in the Dover case ...

The Politburo Diktat has more.

(Ruling text via Pharyngula)

* The word "most" has been bolded and asterisked in hopes that certain parties predisposed to argue against my position will note the intended qualifier this time around; a qualifier that intends to mitigate my overall argument about contradictions in ID and religious advocacy with the acknowledgment that not all parties engaging these positions exemplify this logical contradiction. Thank you.

Upon reflection, "some" changed to "most."