"Evolution describes..."
And what leads you to believe this is what is taught as "evolution" in American schools? What you said may be true about the theory of evolution, but it is not true about what is taught under the banner of evolution in the American school system.
The interesting thing about this is that I, quite frankly, don't trust the Left-leaning American public school establishment to teach science of any kind. I remember being taught in 8th grade that satellite orbits were due not to the balance of forces between rotational acceleration and gravity, but rather, that the satellite was moving so fast that it managed to "miss" the Earth as it fell. It's bad to teach things that are untrue, but much worse when those untruths have significant consequences. Here in the US, evolution is the only scientific theory taught which is not experimentally verifiable, has no predictive power, and has significant gaps in its ability to explain the origins and forms of life, and relies on an astronomically improbable, random event in order to get started. With science misrepresented as some pseudo-intellectual voodoo, it should not surprise anyone that the US lags the industrialized world in accepting the authority of science on subjects such as climate change. In the US at least, the debate over teaching evolution is not a debate about the implications of a scientific theory, but about teaching atheism. As a Christian, I'm content to regard evolution as an explanation of how God created what Genesis describes. But I recognize that what is called "evolution" in our public school system discredits both faith and science.
As for evolutionary theory itself, even at its best it is still an explanation of how things could have happened, not necessarily how they did. Given that humankind has almost reached the ability to engineer life in a mere 10,000 years, it seems to me more likely that life on Earth is the vestige of the genetic engineering efforts of another. Of course, I can't prove it, but life more closely resembles something engineered (or, more accurately, programmed - with all the code reuse and cruft that entails) than something directed by random events. And the problem evolution encounters - as does any theory about past events, even an engineered life hypothesis - is that the past can't be experimentally verified. At best it will be only an explanation - one of many. An explanation which could be disproven, but never proven. 200 years from now, evolution theory will have changed so much that today's biologists would not recognize it as such.
100 years ago, evolutionary theories implied that racism was scientifically justifiable. Today, it reveals (or rather, genetics does) that racial distinctions have no significant scientific basis. Imagine if you had lived in the 1800s - would you want your children to be taught racism because it has a scientific basis? If not, perhaps you can understand the objection Christians have to teaching a theory which implies that God does not exist. Even though I can appreciate the distinctions between revealed truths and scientific speculation, such distinctions are difficult for even the general population to make, much less primary and secondary students. As a result, students taught evolution will be inclined to believe that God doesn't exist, in spite of the philosophical problems with such a position. We in America are still dealing with the consequences of racism a full century after scientific racism was discredited, largely due to the fact that science in the 1800's had such a large impact on the culture, and taught things which were not only untrue, but justified immoral behavior.