Mike, you've reduced god down to a self righteous son of a bitch ...
Moving back to the
consequences of an intelligent designer, why should we assume any morality or ethics are involved? Look at the way we raise chickens and other "factory" foods.
Perhaps life on earth is designed as a breeding ground to biological warfare.
That would certainly explain more than assuming charity or altruism.
What's in it for the designer? Or do we have competing designers, trying hostile take-overs of other designs?
One major consequence of assuming a designer is that there is no reason to stop at one - it is more logical to assume a race or multiple races of designers, as we are using our design ability as an analogy and there is no evidence of a single entity of any form of living or spiritual existence.
If we use humans as an example then we must assume a pantheon of designers with different abilities, different motives and different ethics.
Enjoy.
Join the effort to unravel {AIDS/HIV} {Protenes} and {Cancer} with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.