Is Creation by Design or by Mistake?

I love to hear atheists and theists argue on the matter of origins; the origin of the universe, the earth and life. Atheists have diverse views and most of them are naturalists whereas theists are creationists though some are naturalists and creationists at the same time.

The base reasoning behind theism philosophy is that which considers design in nature. To theism, nature is so ordered that origin of nature from some 'natural' occurrences such as the big bang theory of origin would not explain the complexity of order nature has.

To atheists, order is not an answer to suggest reasons of believing in intelligent design. They argue that if looked carefully, there would be more disorder than order in nature, that intelligence designer could not actually think of doing such a disorder.
But whatever both sides argument base their reasoning on, what would we define order to be? What is it that we could consider disorder? Sometimes we might confuse one with the other. The fact that we did not see anyone 'disorganize' our sitting room does not mean that it was not disorganized. And the fact that after every two black pens on the floor, we find a red pen perpendicular to the two black pens cannot necessarily explain intelligent design. This simply means that both disorder and order can be achieved by an intelligent being. Actually human beings are considered to be intelligent beings but what fractions of order to they do as compared to disorder witnessed from these very beings? Someone is thinking about the difference between an intelligent being and a perfect being but that is a topic for another day.

And it boils down to me. Which side should I lean on? As a matter of fact I am not buying any reasoning as far as design is concerned. Neither am I going to bow to whatever pressure that comes with any of such reasoning. But it's safe to think about an Intelligent Being who originated both order and disorder as we would prefer to call them, but to Him both are 'ORDER'.
Consider this for a moment; atheists have their reasoning of origin to natural changes that explain what we see. But must matter really change? What if there was a time when nothing changed but remained static as from the day they were created (originated)? What if the second law of thermodynamics becomes applicable only when what theists consider to be the origin of sin period? And what if the origin of the sin period has mesmerized the kind of findings in nature, and that nature at its perfect state at the beginning is beyond our reach?

The context of believes in both the theism and atheism philosophy does matter. After all I have nothing to lose if there exists nothing as intelligent designer but I believe there exists, rather than believing that the designer doesn't exist, yet he does.
Not only is it important to base belief according to safety and future security (future means after death status of existence), but also it gives the work of research and explanations of difficult questions such as those of injustice, human behavior in creating much disorder than order, death and origin of untreated diseases the likes of HIV/AIDS a more appealing reasoning than would be provided by atheists. Would atheists explain why others love whereas others chose to hate?