[gdani]

.....I'd be willing to bet this is unconstitutional. My reading of the higher courts' creationism cases is that singling something out for criticism because it appears to contradict a particular religious viewpoint is the equivalent of identifying with that religion and thus a violation of the establishment clause. Anybody else have any thoughts?

From memory, I don't believe that the U.S. Supreme Court has ever addressed that topic (criticism of evolution akin to establishing a religious viewpoint). Their ruling in Edwards vs. Aguillard addressed the teaching of creationism as a whole.

It's possible that lower federal courts and/or state courts have tackled that issue however.

[Iota]

I wasn't sure the Supremes had addressed the point either; hence my reference to the creationism cases of "the higher courts". And maybe I'm remembering a line from the Arkansas case (i.e., a district court case rather than a higher court case), but I seem to recall that at least some courts have held that the negative side of creationism --criticism of evolution, rather than just advocacy of Biblical creationism -- can lead to Establishment Clause issues for the reasons I mentioned in my original post.