It is also exposing the ties from Darwin to euthanasia, abortion, eugenics, racism and the Holocaust.
That's all you have? An appeal to consequence?
antiLIE, perhaps you should think a bit on the difference between a scientific model and moral instruction. Observation of the natural world does not lead to morality. Or do you seriously suggest we should take moral lessons from the Theory of Gravity, as well? Morality is an entirely subjective, human invention and is independent of nature.
The "evolution=eugenics" argument is old hat. There are people who try to use scientific principles like evolution to justify their racism and bigotry...much like the people who use religion to do the same. Hell, science has shown us in the years since WW2 that the genetic difference between the races are so tiny as to be negligible - Hitler's racial extermination programs don't even make sense from the very perspective of a eugenicist (not that there are many of those around nowadays, thankfully).
Mein Kampf, by the way, contains a very large amount of Christian rhetoric borrowed directly from the mouth of Martin Luther himself.
So let's be honest: evolution is a biological principle. It has nothing to do with how society should treat its members. The actions of Hitler had nothing to do with whether or not the scientific model that is the Theory of Evolution accurately models the history of life on Earth.
Your argument (and the part of Expelled that features Hitler) is nothing more than an ill-informed smokescreen, an appeal to the emotions of the uneducated masses who hear the name "Hitler" and disengage their brains.
And this from a person who calls himself "antiLIE?"
your own personal beliefs s being different from others does not give you the right to "kick" people around. That is called discrimination, and is wrong no matter how you try to justify it.
If a physicist does not believe in gravity, should he be allowed to teach physics?
If a geographer believes that the Earth is flat, should he be allowed to teach geography?
Everyone has the right to believe however they would like, but that doe snot mean you always get to keep your job. This is exactly like the freedom of speech: your workplace cannot discriminate you because of what you say, right? Tell your boss that you believe he's a halfwitted shitstain, and see how far you get by screaming about the First Amendment.
The right to free speach, like the freedom of religion, applies to legal consequences for exercising those rights (ie, even for telling your boss he's a halfwitted shitstain, you won't be put in prison), but do not apply when a basic belief prevents performing your job. Just like it's not discrimination to say that a man with no legs cannot play in the NBA - he's simply not physically able to perform the task.
When you claim that one of the best-supported theories in science is bunk without being able to back it up with evidence and having not a single published peer-reviewed paper in a journal for support, you are not qualified to teach science.