Then you haven't looked. But then maybe you wouldn't want to look. You'd be likely to find that your prejudices bear an inverse relation to reality.
It's been a good number of years now, but I was heavily involved in evolution controversies at one point, and talked with many on both sides of the issue. I even attended a couple creationism conventions, including one at a fundamentalist college in Dayton, TN where the Scopes trial occurred.
In my experience I came across many, many pro-evolution/anti-creationism activists who were also deeply concerned about how physiology, ecology and other biological topics were taught, and about the (often abysmal) state of science education and science textbooks in general. Sure there were liberal/left groups like PfAW who were only interested in the evolution issue, but there were always many more with broader interests.
On the creationist side I never (at lest personally) came across a single, solitary activist who demonstrated any interest in anything but the subject of evolution (or the age of the earth, or other subjects perceived as related to religion or biblical inerrancy).
As to not just distancing from, but directly and ruthlessly attacking liberal shibboleths -- e.g. environmentalism and the destructive evils of capitalism -- as represented in texts or curricula, here are just a couple examples from William J. Bennetta. Bennetta was a vociferous opponent of creationism in California and elsewhere. These are from reviews for the Textbook League which was specifically created as a pro-evolution organization.
BTW, I just happened to come up with these examples involving American Indians because of the way I was googling, that is using terms from an article I happened to remember.
Beavis and Butt-Head Do Biology
For many schoolbook companies, fraud is a routine activity, thievery is a daily practice, and the swindling of school districts is a normal way of doing business. Generally, therefore, the advent of another fake schoolbook doesn't seem to be a remarkable occurrence. Once in a while, however, a book appears which is so blatantly and pervasively phony that it achieves historical significance and merits special attention.Addison Wesley Longman's book Scott Foresman - Addison Wesley Biology: The Web of Life is such a product, and I hope that our major education libraries will buy and preserve copies of it. I hope that The Web of Life will be available indefinitely to historians because it illustrates, in exceptionally clear and compelling ways, various aspects of the corruption that has spread through American public education during the closing years of the 20th century. It thus deserves a place in our archives, I assert, alongside Glencoe Health, Glencoe's Biology: Living Systems, Prentice Hall's World Cultures: A Global Mosaic, McDougal Littell's America's Past and Promise, West's United States History: In the Course of Human Events, Silver Burdett Ginn's World Cultures, and other particularly flagrant fakes.
The Web of Life is not a biology book or a science book, by any stretch of the imagination. I think that it can best be regarded as a kind of valentine -- a gaudy, 5-pound valentine that AWL has composed for all the state officials who run crooked textbook-adoption proceedings, and for all the local textbook-evaluation committees who approve books without reading them. The Web of Life is a book by fakers and for fakers, and the fakery begins with the book's very name.
"The Web of Life"! That catchy subtitle looks as if it may actually mean something -- and we soon learn where it allegedly originated, because AWL's writers have put this epigraph on their book's title page: " 'We did not weave the web of life, we are merely a strand in it. Whatever we do to the web, we do to ourselves.' -- CHIEF SEATTLE"
• Yes, folks, he has returned again -- old Chief Seattle, the silver-tongued spokesman for the Eco-Freak Brigade of the Noble Savages. Readers who keep track of phony-Injun lore will recall that the Chief is famously associated with a splurge of mawkish rhetoric titled "Chief Seattle's Speech," though there is no evidence to suggest that he uttered any of it. In short, the speech is bogus. Fanciers of phony-Injun stuff will also know that the so-called speech doesn't contain the sentences that the AWL writers have used for their epigraph. The writers have taken two lines from the bogus speech and have doctored them to make them politically correct. In short, the writers have concocted a fake "quotation" from a speech that was phony to begin with, and their epigraph is fakery squared. [See "Fakery Squared" on pages 6 and 7 of this issue.]
After that, things just get worse.
Since "all" you allegedly hear "out of the evolutionists is a paralyzing fear of ID/creationists," you might want to read the remainder (the substance) of the review excerpted above, noting the wide variety of subjects engaged. Evolution doesn't happen to be mentioned at all (except incidentally in a passing comment about similar heat retention mechanisms evolving independently in sharks and tuna) and creationism isn't mentioned period.
BTW here's more on the fake "Chief Seattle" speech wherein Bennetta unravels the history, notes how Seattle was transformed into a "full-fledged eco-freak" by rewrites of his fake speech in the 70's, and mocks Al Gore and his use of the speech in Earth in the Balance:
The following is a review in which Bennetta savages a different biology text for the inclusion of multiple "clever-aborigine tales," wherein pandering, politically correct (and phony) claims are made or intimated that Native Americans anticipated various modern (or not so modern) innovations, along with bloviations about how modern man has come to appreciate the native American's "oneness with nature" as we recoil from our savaging of the environment:
More can be found on The Textbook League's homepage, including equally energetic and fact laced attacks on anti-Western critiques of the Crusades; a fluffy, apologist textbook on Islam; and (by another author) a review of a textbook on terrorism:
But then comes Part III, "Responding as a Nation," and here the editors display their own confusion while they foment confusion in the minds of their readers. In an article titled "Justice, Not War," an obscure sociologist named Kevin Danaher seems to advocate that we should respond to terrorism by doing nothing, though he recommends that we "demand internationalism rather than isolationism, justice rather than revenge, and love rather than hate." Likewise, Richard Rothstein (in a piece headlined "The Other War, Against Intolerance") endorses schoolhouse "multiculturalism" as a device for combating "rash views," and Laurie Goodstein (in an article titled "The Real Face of Islam") creates the impression that most Muslim religious leaders condemned the 9/11 attack -- an impression that is clearly false.[...]Part IV, "Responding as Individuals," is clearly the worst. It is a bundle of feel-good anecdotes and pop-psychology fancies, with titles like "A Victim of Terrorism Helps Others" and "Should We Be Afraid?" and "Helping Children Understand." (Children? Isn't this supposed to be a book for high-school students?) As a whole, Part IV encourages the notion that a terrorist attack is merely a kind of psychological trauma, and that a citizen's response to terrorism needn't be any different from visiting a shrink.
[...] this book fails to deliver the knowledge that would enable ordinary students or teachers to grasp the global phenomenon of terrorism. Superficial and emotional approaches to terrorism (or, worse, pseudopsychological approaches) help nobody. Students need to know that they, like everyone else, are targets -- but The Challenge of Terrorism doesn't teach this lesson.
[...] One must wonder how teachers who have absorbed the habits of political correctness and the doctrines of "multiculturalism" -- habits and doctrines that now are normal features of American public education and are publicly promoted by the predominant teachers' union, the National Education Association -- might deal with some of the items that are included in this book. For instance: How can "multiculturalism," which demands uncritical respect for whatever non-European people do, be squared with what students will read in the article that fills pages 79 through 89? Headlined "Osama bin Laden on the Attacks," the article is an excerpt from a transcript of a conversation in which Osama bin Laden and one of his followers express their gratitude to Allah for the success of the 9/11 attacks. Political correctness and "multiculturalism" simply are not compatible with any serious analysis of contemporary terrorism, most of which is Islamic and is perpetrated by Muslims