If I understand the scientific principles necessary to diagnose and treat patients, then I have the basis on which I can undergo medical training and then embark on a medical career.If I understand and can speak Latin, and know how to conduct a service/counsel the flock, I have the basis on which I can assume the priesthood and then embark on a church career.
Again, both men can "do their jobs". The question is, which one would you willingly entrust yourself to?
If you personally feel comprehension/belief in evolution is irrelevant to medicine, *that's fine by me*.
But *I'd* be loathe to employ a doctor who felt as you do, as I'd avoid a faithless clergyman.
Medicine isn't religion, religion isn't medicine.
I'd choose my doctor on how well they diagnose and treat disease, regardless of their personal beliefs. Evolution isn't relevant to how well they diagnose or treat patients, so what a doctor believes about evolution is irrelevant to how well he will diagnose and treat me.
If you choose a doctor on the basis of their acceptance of a theory irrelvant to how well they practice medicine, that's your choice, but it's hardly logical.
Your analogy to priesthood is flawed. There's no science behind religion. And faith in evolution doesn't a better doctor make.