Neither statement is accurate. Putting faces of historical Presidents on coinage would not be anti-religious even if some religious people would consider such behavior to be the worship of graven images. Conversely, banning the publication of any an all religious texts in printed form would clearly be anti-religious even if there was a religion whose followers carried on their traditions purely through oral/aural means.
The question of whether a behavior would be 'anti-religious' or not primarily boils down to a question of motive. And I don't think there's enough evidence to support anti-evolutionist's claims, and the proposed remedy is not appropriate in any case.
Let’s try the converse, shall we? The Science teacher, as state actor with a compelled audience, teaches that evolution is anti-religious. Is there a constitutional problem with that?