In response, among those who had never lost their traditional fundamentalism, an active creationist reaction began, slowly accelerating to its present prominence. According to a series of polls taken over the last twenty-five years, about 50 percent of Americans believe that "God created man pretty much in his present form at one time within the last 10,000 years."[5] There have been repeated recent attempts in Minnesota, New Mexico, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Arkansas, and Kansas to make the study of challenges to evolutionary biology part of the mandated public school science curriculum. These have so far not succeeded, but Kansas seems on the verge of passing a statewide requirement that a new variant of the Creation myth, "intelligent design," be part of the discussion of evolution in public secondary schools. Intelligent design (ID) has itself been intelligently designed to circumvent legal challenges to the teaching of biblical creationism, challenges based on the constitutional requirement of a separation of church and state.

God, the Bible, and religion in general are not mentioned in the doctrine of ID. Rather, it is claimed that an objective examination of the facts of life makes it clear that organisms are too complex to have arisen by a process of the accumulation of naturally selected chance mutations and so must have been purposefully created by an unspecified intelligent designer. An alien from outer space? But the theory of ID is a transparent subterfuge. The problem is that if the living world is too complex to have arisen without an intelligent designer, then where did the intelligent designer come from? After all, she must have been as complex as the things she designed. If not, then we have evolution! Otherwise we must postulate an intelligent designer who designed the intelligent designer who..., back to the original one who must have been around forever. And who might that be? Like the ancient Hebrews the ID designers fear to pronounce Her name lest they be destroyed, but Her initials are clearly YWH.

That's just it barney, while the precursor organisms cannot be explained by materialistic processes, these parasites, pathogens and genetic defects can be accounted for by random unintended evolution from constructive or neutral forms. 

I think Barney makes a good point. You really need to take the good with the bad. There are several parasites with more complicated life cycles than their free ranging counterparts. Parasitism does not always involve the devolution of already existing forms. Take the blood fluke (please), a parasitic cousin to the planarium. It is a multiple host parasite with two different phenotypes in its life cycle. One to infect the intermediate snail host and one freeswimming variety to infect the final human host. There are dozens of equally or more complex examples.

Since ID Theory precludes the increase in genetic information through mutation and selection leading to the evolution of these more complex forms we can only conclude Design for these organisms.

I don't understand. I think all theisms offer explanations why god looks like a jerk but isn't, and if ID doesn't have theism there is no problem with the designer being a jerk. So saying the designer looks like a jerk doesn't advance the anti-ID argument. Why are parasites an issue?

Precisely what new form and function do these supposedly more complex worms have over the precursor forms?  Without this information you invent yet another "just so" narrative as an article of faith.  Just as Lewontin proclaims, your prior commitment to materialism compels you to create yet another construct in this case one that attempts to falsify the competing explanation