Many evolutionists have expressed great concern that, in their belief, Intelligent Design and Creation Science are trying to take over science, and control it under a religious framework. At present science has a priori decree that the possibility of intelligent design or a creative god must not be considered, all science problems MUST be solved by technical research, or paradigms, that excludes any possibility of ID or a god, since both require an intelligent entity beyond our understanding, who cannot be repeatedly measured in the science laboratory.

How did modern science come about?
In ancient times Egypt worshiped the dung beetle because it seemed to miraculously appear as if created out of the mud to swarm on any dung, and the frog was produced from the mud of the Nile. The Greeks had many "gods" who acted capriciously, and none who gave real meaning to life. It was the christians who first took it to heart that if God created, as the Bible claims, then it must be possible to work out the rules which govern everything, and to fully understand the workings of the world around us, the solar system, and beyond. This lead to discoveries that started the Industrial Revolution.
But then came Charles Darwin, spouting much the same things as his grandfather Erasmus had already published, and many devout atheists jumped on the bandwagon and attacked the view that God created and insisted that it was all a series of accidents, and natural selection. Lenin and Hitler based their ideology on evolution. The belief became widespread, and slowly it was claimed that God could not be considered in science because it precluded any natural explanation.

For the Egyptians life continuously evolved out of the mud. For the Greeks life just was and the "gods" had no purpose, just random purposeless fighting among the gods, and no ultimate purpose for mankind.The Christian era came, man had a purpose, there was a God of order, so things could be understood, science could be based on fixed laws and processes. Then came evolution and humanism and we are back to random mistakes, natural selection and no god of law, order and morals. Life becomes pointless as in Greek and Roman times. Would you prefer to have meaning and purpose for your life, or a purposeless aimless existence?
But just supposing that God did create as the Bible claims, how then can evolutionists ever come to the truth, since whenever something disproves evolution, it MUST be ignored or refuted, at least on the grounds that it will take further study. There are many things like that, such as the accidental natural start of life is impossible, because random chemicals will never form into a useful chain of instructions on how to feed, grow, and divide to produce an extra copy of itself, the minimum size requires thousands of instructions on feeding, making enzymes etc, and a fully functional copying system the very first time, to be able to reproduce. Proper science should try every possibility to see what the best explanation is.

One evolutionist who is prominent in opposition to Intelligent Design and Creation Science is Massimo Pigliucci. In his web page he is hotly against the possibility of Intelligent Design and Creation Science getting taught as part of science. Massimo says "the underlying idea (of Wedge) is essentially to turn the United States from a democratic republic into a theocracy dominated by conservative Christian groupthink." This is a deliberate misrepresentation, the intention (of Wedge) is to bring honesty to science, and discuss things of nature that evolution cannot explain, could these indicate an intelligent source? If there is a God it is important that we should know it. The USA was founded on christian principles, that is why it has been so successful and prosperous. He is saying in effect that it would be a terrible thing for science if religion gets a hold on it.

He then lists the evils of evolution in the USSR, without realising that Lenin's evolutionary views started Stalin's regime, and that this same view is constricting science in the western world, where everything must conform to the evolutionary hypothesis, but we are in some ways more liberal than in Stalin's Russia.
Then he says "The real danger does not seem to be either religion or atheism, but blind commitment to an a priori view of the world that ignores how things really are." But this is the main problem with evolution, it has a priori commitment to ignore and dispute anything that indicates that intelligence is required to produce the first life, and the vast specifications in the DNA for even the most simple replicating life.

BUT HE IS TOO LATE!
He doesn't realise that science is already in the clutches of a narrow minded religion.
If he could only read his own page honestly he would see the answer! Humanism is registered as a religion (in USA) and gets tax exemption on that basis. Evolution and humanism are basically the same thing, humanism is the "spiritual" side (not Gods Spirit, but a different one) and evolution is the practical, science side that should provide the "proof" that there is no god, and everything is accidental.
Dr. Massimo Pigliucci advertises on his web page that he is an evolutionary biologist and outspoken rationalist. and has a "Skeptic and Humanist Website". Therefore it follows that as he believes that science is controlled as humanists want it. (that is controlled by the dogma of humanism and the religious belief in evolution) then by his own standards science is already controlled by a narrow minded religion!