As the Boston Globe puts it
Critics of Darwinism make much of saying it is only a theory. But it is one that has stood the test of intense scientific inquiry and brings together a wealth of observable phenomena. Among scientists, there is disagreement about the pace of species development and about the events that caused the extinctions of species. But biologists do not challenge the basic genius of Darwin's discovery.All this raises an interesting point about the limits of democracy: if the majority of a local community wants to insist in teaching bunkum, should they have the right to do so? Most everyone would agree that there must be limits. For example, if a local community wanted to approve a history textbook that denied the Holocaust, presumably few would rise to defend this move on first amendment grounds.
But if they're not allowed to deny the Holocaust, why should they be allowed to deny the (at least) equally factual theory of evolution?