florida, non-stop stupid. [Politics/Religion]

I don't think being "created by random accident" and "created by a guiding hand" are necessarily mutually exclusive.

I can be the "intelligent creator" of a random number generator but have absolutely no control over what numbers come up.

werd.  Then, if it's not picking Hot Lotto numbers they way you had envisioned, flood the *fudge*ers, or give them AIDS.  Or Britney Spears.

Just a point of clarification.  I didn't say "created by random accident".  Created by implies a creator in my mind. 

The two choices I mean to offer are (1) is there is some sort, any sort, of creator out there; level of involvement undefined for purposes of my question (2) nobody created anything; everything in existence, including the building blocks of the universe, just popped into existence one day with nothing behind it.  I admit my wording here contains some bias.  Please look past it.

I think I actually agree with you gleek (although you'll probably think not.)   I don't believe each and every happening is dictated according to a plan.  I do believe the ball was started rolling by a being/entity.  From there, who knows who much "guiding" was/is being done.  That gets very religious and that's not what I'm looking for here.  I'm just trying to get a feeling for how many of us believe there was/is a creator of some sort and how many say no way.

If people want to teach their children creation myths involving omnipotent beings, fine do that.  Enroll them in a proper religious school and expose them to all of that.  Or home school them.  Or take them to their fundamentalist evangelical church on Sundays  whispering in their ear that the pastor's words are inerrant and flow directly from the mind of God.  Whatever.   If you have a 'hunch' that it must have started with a supreme being, cherish your hunch.  Nurture it, make what you will from it.  Whatever.  Just understand that this is mysticism, not science. 

What I object to is:

A) A clunky, unimaginative religious-based creation myth reclothed in a modernistic jargon and thunk up by some of the dullest minds you'd ever meet, being foisted upon unsuspecting school kids and their families as if it is some grand alternative scientific theory when, by even extremely weak standards of science, it is not even remotely scientific in scope.  IT IS BAD EDUCATION.  And it is horrible theology because when taken to its natural end, it will eventually demand that the god perform for them in some test they've devised, which is bound to go all wrong and minimize His omnipotence.

B) Repeatedly and at great cost to taxpayers and without any regret, persistently attempting to achieve this in publicly funded school systems, despite the fact that federal courts have repeatedly barred such practices.  They will lose in court in Florida, and the school system will be out a few million dollars in legal costs, and that is money that could have been better spent on educating children properly.

This intelligent design/creationism is not an alternative theory on the origins and nature of life, it is a movement concocted by Christian fundamentalists, one that mimics naturalism, to assert their theology over what they perceive is an invading secular culture.   

Why do you care?

Because we're the only ones who are right, based on what we currently know. Yet, through almost divine irony, the agnostic view is always forced into the margins during the battles between the believers and the believers in non-belief.

'Twas just a little jest.   

diplomacy is for people who are wrong and know it.