Tony's theory, that it's all about getting religion into school, has some interesting consequences that don't seem consistent with what we're seeing. Otherwise, religion would be cropping up in all kind of other classes where it arguably really does belong, like the basis for the modern legal system.

Nope, I see this creation science and its derivatives as an attempt to fight back against science. These folks really don't like it when the progress of science challenges their religious beliefs.

Side note: I'm amused when they talk about "teaching the controversy" in science classes as if there's any scientific controversy. The discussion of this particular controversy belongs more properly in classes that consider religion and society. And, for that matter, one place where "teaching the controversy" would be truly appropriate in school is economic theories. My (boring!) high school economics class, once it got into macro, taught a very watered down version of Keynsian macroeconomics. This would have been a fascinating place to present Keynes vs. Hayek. (I really hope modern economics teachers are leveraging these cool videos.)