Over here, PZ points out how those sneaky little weasels at the Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness Center (or "NAMBLA") have quietly moved their religious requirements out of their "important qualifications" list and into their mission statement. But the weirdness doesn't stop there.
At the IDEA site, we read:
"Does one have to be an expert in science, intelligent design or creation and evolution to start an IDEA Club?"
The answer? "NO! Definitely not!"
More to the point, I'm thinking that you don't really need to know anything about actual, you know, science to want to get involved with a bunch of other scientific illiterates whose mission it is to overturn one of the cornerstones of, well, science. Because learning science is, you know, hard work and everything. (I'm betting it's way easier to just be a "philosopher." Apparently, the entrance requirements aren't quite as stringent.)
You also have to love this part of the mission statement (emphasis added):
We believe that in the investigation of intelligent design the identity of the designer is completely separate from the scientific theory of intelligent design, since a scientific theory cannot specify the identity of the designer based upon the empirical data or the scientific method alone, and is not dependent upon religious premises; nonetheless, we consider it reasonable to conclude that the designer may be identified as the God of the Bible, while recognizing that others may identify the designer in a different way.
So ... the actual identity of the "designer" shall not be amenable to any type of scientific investigation or empirical evidence, but let's, for the sake of argument, call it the "God of the Bible." It just makes things easier.
I'm betting that's philosophy.
AFTERSNARK: I'm fascinated by this "important qualification":
IDEA Club leaders must advocate the scientific theory of intelligent design in the fields of biology and physics/cosmology.
"Physics/cosmology"????? I don't recall the ID nutbars being all that interested in evidence of intelligent design in those fields. What are we talking about here? Are they (like the creationists before them) proposing that things like the cosmological constant and the laws of physics show evidence of being "designed?"
I'm pretty sure physicists and cosmologists are not going to be happy about this.