Robert Pennockは、インテリジェントデザイン運動が生物学的進化を否定する理由は、「人間を動物と決定的に区別するという目標が、人間の尊厳の神学的基礎と背中合わせの関係にある」からだと指摘する。
Thaxton and Meyer say that according to the modern view, "only man's material complexity distinguishes him from the other biological structures that inhabit the universe" (Thaxton and Meyer 1987), and they claim that this is inadequate to ground human rights. They have no truck with the possibility that moral rights could apply to nonhuman animals. Indeed, they don't want to consider man an animal at all; they believe it is critical that there be something that is "distinctively human," for otherwise it would "relegate man to the level of animals"


Their goal of keeping human beings categorically distinct from animals goes hand in glove with their theological grounding of dignity, and from this it is for them but a small step to the rejecdon of biological evolution.


Thaxton and Meyer briefly consider the argument of those who promote "merely reiterating the Judeo-Christian doctrine of creation" as a "useful fiction," but reject it on the ground that no merely fictional doctrine will suffice to "rescue man from his current moral dilemma" (Thaxton and Meyer 1987). So, what will save man? Not belief alone. Nothing less than the truth of Divine creation.

ThaxtonとMeyerは、"有用なフィクション"として"ユダヤ教-キリスト教の創造と言う教義をただ繰り返し売り込む者たちの議論を、"今おかれている道徳的ジレンマから人間を救い出す"には、フィクションの教義ではまたく不足だという考えのもとに拒否している(Thaxton and Meyer 1987)。では、何が人間を救うのか?信仰だけではない。まさに神による創造という真理。

Robert Pennock : DNA by Design

Thaxton and Meyer (1987)は「フィクションが有用なのは、フィクションがフィクションだと見なされていないときだけだ」と述べて、「創造の教義」ではなく「創造の事実」が、人間の尊厳の保証にために必要だと述べている。
In response to such absurd but seemingly inescapable conclusions, some have hoped that merely reiterating the Judeo-Christian doctrine of creation will restore the grounds for preserving human dignity. But no doctrine can give man dignity, let alone one that is no longer believed. No "useful fiction" can rescue man from his current moral dilemma; for fictions remain useful only as long as they are not regarded as such. Even so, Judaism and Christianity do not teach that the doctrine of man's creation in the Divine image establishes his dignity. They teach that the fact of man's creation has established human dignity. Only if man is (in fact) a product of special Divine purposes can his claim to distinctive or intrinsic dignity be sustained.


Thaxton and Meyer 1987()

この考えは、インテリジェントデザイン運動のアジェンダであるWedge Documentの冒頭に書かれている。
The proposition that human beings are created in the image of God is one of the bedrock principles on which Western civilization was built. Its influence can be detected in most, if not all, of the West's greatest achievements, including representative democracy, human rights, free enterprise, and progress in the arts and sciences.

Yet a little over a century ago, this cardinal idea came under wholesale attack by intellectuals drawing on the discoveries of modern science. Debunking the traditional conceptions of both God and man, thinkers such as Charles Darwin, Karl Marx, and Sigmund Freud portrayed humans not as moral and spiritual beings, but as animals or machines who inhabited a universe ruled by purely impersonal forces and whose behavior and very thoughts were dictated by the unbending forces of biology, chemistry, and environment.


The cultural consequences of this triumph of materialism were devastating. Materialists denied the existence of objective moral standards, claiming that environment dictates our behavior and beliefs. ... Materialists also undermined personal responsibility by asserting that human thoughts and behaviors are dictated by our biology and environment. The results can be seen in modern approaches to criminal justice, product liability, and welfare. In the materialist scheme of things, everyone is a victim and no one can be held accountable for his or her actions.

この唯物論の勝利の文化的影響は破滅的であった。唯物論者は客観的な道徳規準の存在を否定し、我々の挙動と信念を環境が支配すると主張した。... 唯物論者はさらに、人間の思考と挙動は生物学と環境に支配されると主張することで、個人の責任感を蝕んだ。その結果は、刑事裁判や製造物責任や福祉の現代的アプローチに見て取れる。唯物論者のスキームにおいては、誰もが犠牲者であり、誰もが自らの行動に責任を持てない。