I do wonder if Darwinism is a term for “a lot of faith” in natural selection though I haven’t read Behe’s books.
I agree. Right now, ID is saying - we’re the “god of the gaps” of evolutionary theory as Joe explains so well.
After reading Sanford who decides to make natural selection his victim and pummels it over and over again as I’m beginning to read the book, and reading these shared by @Giltil…
First, balancing selection, the evolutionary process that favors genetic diversification rather than the fixation of a single “best” variant, appears to play a minor role outside the immune system.
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/331/6019/872.3.full
https://www.johnclamoreaux.org/smu/core/s/crabtree.pdf
To understand the extremes of selection that must have occurred when our ancestors went from using speed, strength and agility to survive and began to survive by using thought, we have to consider the difficulty of optimizing 2,000 to 5,000 genes.
…I think the strategy for ID is simple. Stop letting them fight your weakness…bring the battle to their weakness. Start calling natural selection the “god of the evolutionary gaps” or perhaps something more pithy. But “Darwinism” doesn’t cut it because it isn’t specific enough: If natural selection is where biologists are wrong, point out every time it’s used to fill in the gap and make them prove it. Cut where it hurts until it starts to bleed if you want to win the war. 
Rhetorically speaking of course.
What do you think @pnelson?