The Teleological argument, or, is DNA a code?

Code: Noun- A system of words, letters, figures, or other symbols used to represent others, esp. for the purposes of secrecy.

“Information, transcription, translation, code, redundancy, synonymous, messenger, editing, and proofreading are all appropriate terms in biology. They take their meaning from information theory (Shannon, 1948) and are not synonyms, metaphors, or analogies.” (Hubert P. Yockey, Information Theory, Evolution, and the Origin of Life, Cambridge University Press, 2005)

• Skeptic statement: "In human language, symbols are arbitrary. ..."
• Rebuttal excerpts: The information in DNA is independent of the communication medium insofar as every strand of DNA in your body represents a complete plan for your body; even though the DNA strand itself is only a sequence of symbols made up of chemicals (A, G, C, T). We could store a CAD drawing of a hard drive on the same model of hard drive, but the medium and the message are two distinctly different things. Such symbolic relationships only exist within the realm of living things; they do not occur naturally. If you disagree, all you need is one example."

There are no symbols in DNA. We assign symbols to represent the different molecules (G, A, T, C) and in that sense, DNA can be represented by code.Simply being a pattern is not enough to be a code.

Here's the difference: Computers are machines based around channeling electrical impulses from the hard drive through various electronic switches to generate a specific pattern of impulses as output. The electrical impulses themselves are put into the system using specific interface devices that translate an arbitrarily created code designed to interact with the specific hardware.
However, the code itself doesn't particularly matter, because the code could be written in ANY made-up language. All that matters is that the input follows the pattern that corresponds to the desired output. The input and output languages don't even have to be the same. The only thing that matters is that every output is a specific pattern of impulses that necessitates a specific pattern of input impulses.
The difference? You can't do that with DNA. DNA is ACTUALLY analogous to the circuitry and impulses themselves (the difference being that the operation of DNA is inherent in the properties of the chemical bonds, whereas electricity simply flows through the circuitry), and although DNA can be represented by a code, you cannot substitute Adenine for Amphetamine as you could substitute the letter A with a Batman symbol.
That's the difference between a code and a mechanism.

"The information in DNA is independent of the communication medium insofar as every strand of DNA in your body represents a complete plan for your body"

If DNA contained a complete plan for our bodies, there would be no mutations, genetic defects or inherited diseases. Our DNA only contains a 99% complete recipe for our bodies and its functions, but it also contains some of the patterns left over from our fishy ancestors, and subsequent mammals. much of our DNA was implanted by viruses millions of years ago:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/12/science/12paleo.html?pagewanted=all

While we're on the subject, viruses are little more than relatively short RNA or DNA strands, sometimes protected by a protein shell. But all they do is replicate. Their function (message) is inseparable from their structure (medium), because the function directly results from their structure. 

Bananas are relatively simple organisms, but they have 24 chromosome pairs, while we only have 23. Are Bananas more complex? If DNA is a code written by a divine artificer, then why do we have junk DNA? Did someone get lazy during the debugging process?

One thing is for sure: Our DNA was NOT arranged specifically to make humans as they appear on Earth right now, that's just what comes out of the prevailing combination. You can't even go back 200 generations without finding "humans" that look quite a bit different than you and I.
DNA is a remarkable, self-replicating molecule that can be represented by a 4-bit code because of its exclusive, patterned makeup, but it is not a code, no matter how intransigently anyone says otherwise.