Scientists often assert this separation [between science and religion] as a fundamental truth — Stephen Jay Gould certainly did with his “nonoverlapping magisteria” arguments. But it is in fact a doctrine of political compromise, an argument about the nature of science that has successfully persuaded courts as well as many school boards and legislatures that intelligent design creationism cannot be fairly applied without reference to religious principles. …

But science has been transgressing its own sphere for over thirty years. Scientists have clearly crossed a boundary into the investigation of the moral and spiritual. Scientists actively seek rational explanations for miracles, naturalistic explanations of inspiration and spirituality, evolutionary explanations of moral principles. …

Intelligent design creationism may be an underground conspiracy by some religious believers, but it is not a tunnel under an impermeable border separating religion and science. Scientists blasted the border defenses long ago. Intelligent design is a rearguard defense for a retreating viewpoint.