Does Darwinism matter?

On Tuesday the Board of Education in Florida adopted a curriculum change that will force public schools to refer to evolution as "a scientific theory." Nearly 200 years after the birth of Charles Darwin, teachers in Florida will be required to acknowledge the legitimacy of evolution as a scientific theory.

In 2005 a federal court declared that intelligent design, previously considered a scientific alternative to evolutionary theory, was in fact a religion rather than science. But it doesn't seem that the case (Kitzmiller v. Dover) made specific requirements as to what must be taught. Thus, schools in Texas, Florida and Arkansas have simply opted to refer to evolution as one theory, among other alternatives.

I have to admit, I'm a bit awed that this is a debate that persists within American public schools in 2008. Then again, it turns out that Romney, Thompson and Huckabee believe in Creationism and deem it worthy of note in scientific discourse. I suppose it is to some degree our inclination to impose a tenet so central to a persons world view on most aspects of experience. Still, I find myself far more comfortable with Nancy Pearcey's assessment of the implications of Darwinism.