Well, the issue with evolutionary biology is that it is truly a basic scientific underpinning (funny how a monk did some of the early work, isn't it?) of molecular biology. While we can't prove man evolves because it would be immoral to do the experiment, it can be proven that every other species we experiment on can be forced to evolve based on natural selection, so I can't see how you can exclude man from the theory just because we don't experiment on our own species. Which gene is the non-evolution gene anyway?

Regarding your statement about not teaching evolution; simply because science contradicts the teaching of a church (albeit a big one) should not mean that a portion of science should not be taught. Were that the case astrophysics would not exist.

Science can prove nor disprove existence of a god (although it's an amusing rhetorical exercise). People should not try to let their view of a god prove nor disprove science theories. Science should prove or disprove scientific theories. That is its core nature. That's what science is, a process for evaluating thoughts by testing them. When a more scientifically sound theory than natural selection and evolution comes around (imho, not likely in my lifetime) then scientific theory will change, as it always has. More correct theories are persuasive in their measurable and quantifiable experimental results. ID can neither be quantified nor measured.

Relativity is a theory, but we had to modify the math of the GPS to take it into account in order to make the system work correctly.

-Zeke
_________________________
WWFSMD?