I'd have said that the distinctive feature of Creationism is the view that the various kinds of organisms were created separately by God doing miracles. What exactly constitutes a "kind of organism" varies from creationist to creationist.
Deists think that God created the universe and then left it alone to run its course. A modern deist would --- perhaps not by definition, but with no exception that I know of --- accept that the universe came into being without life and so would attribute the origin of life to natural causes and the diversity of life to evolution.
Intelligent Design does not have a single coherent definition agreed on by all the people who claim to advocate it.
Theistic evolutionists accept the facts of evolution, including common descent, and see it as the working-out of God's plan, either because God set the boundary conditions of the universe so it should occur, or by augmenting the theory of evolution with divine intervention as an additional mechanism.
Creationism states that humans came from humans, evolutionists can not answer this question so slither from bats to tree shrews to semantic classifications, but cant and wont state who are ancestors werre.
They mock when Creationists say we came from humans, whereas they dont know where we came from or who parented us, except way back when just after their BIG BANG, it must have been a one celled amoeba, or similiar.
while others believe in ascent with modification as the general rule.
So since we believe that all species of cats today came from a common ancestor we do in a restricted sense believe in evolution and speciation. This is why examples of adaptation and speciation are of no particular concern to us.
New species? So what?
And indeed new genera. At this rate we'll have you admitting to new families any year now. "Sure, cats and dogs have a common ancestor, but this is only 'descent with modification', a phrase which Darwin only used twenty times in the Origin of Species to refer to evolution. So it barely counts."