Assertion 7.3: Natural processes cannot be the cause of things like love; the cause of love must itself be loving.
Analysis:
Whether true or not, the creationist argument does not establish it.
(i) As Michael Ruse points out, if it were a rule that the cause of x must be x-like, this would imply that manure, one cause of the growth of "tasty and nutritious" rhubarb, must itself by tasty and nutritious (Ruse 1982:305).
(ii) As Michael Shermer points out, if the principle that the cause of x must be x-like were true, it would be a deathblow to creationism, since it would entail that nature must have a natural cause rather than a supernatural one (Shermer: 4).
References
Ruse M. Darwinism defended. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Shermer M. 25 Creationists' Arguments & 25 Evolutionists' Answers. Skeptic 2(2). Skeptic magazine, 2761 N. Marengo Ave., Altadena, CA 91001. Phone/fax: 818/794-3119. (Pamphlet)