Fatheaded Ed condemns ID'ers for differing in opinion

According to Fatheaded Ed Brayton, if proponents of Intelligent Design don't all think alike, then they are all a bunch of hypocrites. Fatheaded Ed wrote on his blog,

One of the things we hear constantly from the ID crowd is their silly claim that they don't want ID taught in public schools, only the "arguments for and against evolution" taught (silly, of course, because ID is nothing but a list of arguments against evolution). In fact, they feign much outrage whenever we say that they want ID taught in science classrooms. Problem is, they keep letting the cat out of the bag. Like this statement from a recent book:

If future courts recognize the many flaws in the Kitzmiller ruling, it may fare better in the courts and the classrooms. Such a scenario, balancing design and chance rationales for the origins of the universe and life, should be proposed in school boards, taught in public school classrooms, and presented in legislation. For legislators or teachers who are truly not seeking to get the "Bible back into school" but simply want fair representation of all competing scientific theories to be presented to students, intelligent design offers a real possibility to achieve that goal.

This is from an essay called Darwinism and the Law, written by H. Wayne House, a graduate of Pat Robertson's law school, in a book called Intelligent Design 101: Leading Experts Explain the Key Issues.

And it was gullible activist judge "Jackass" Jones whose Kitzmiller v. Dover ruling made Intelligent Design a dirty word. And Judge Jones said in a Dickinson College commencement speech that his Dover decision was based on his cockamamie notion that the Founders based the establishment clause upon a belief that organized religions are not "true" religions.

It's no wonder that Fatheaded Ed arbitrarily censors visitors' comments on his blog.