I have no particular views on biological models of evolution, because my knowledge of genetics is pretty much layman's stuff. Ever since the pioneering work of Armen Alchian, economists have made a lot of use of evolutionary models, and evolutionary psychology has been, in my view anyway, pretty successful as a field. So I am not inclined to look for quarrels with its use in biology. Lots of people do, though. And they do not seem to get worked up about, say, the notion that the earth revolves around the sun, rather than the other way around. I do not think it is the science that is bothering them; it is what they see as the implied moral propositions. So Huckabee supporter Chuck Norris writes today:

We teach our children they are nothing more than glorified apes, yet we don't expect them to act like monkeys. We place our value in things, yet expect our children to value people. We disrespect one another, but expect our children to respect others. We terminate children in the womb, but are surprised when children outside the womb terminate other children. We push God to the side, but expect our children to be godly. We've abandoned moral absolutes, yet expect our children to obey the universal commandment: "Thou shall not murder."

I agree completely. Creationism is a theological statement, and must be addressed through its theological and moral implications.

Catholics believe the Pope is infallable when formally teaching doctrine. Discussing education theory will not affect their belief.

Mormons believe that God's word was written on metal sheets buried in the USA. Archeology will not affect their belief.

Baptists believe that the creationism is the only valid interpretation of Genesis. Fossils will not affect their belief.