The article was interesting, but I disagree with their claim that, "TurboGears is more community-driven than Django because it was built with pre-existing, open source components." From everything I've seen, Django has a strong community behind it. I don't think I've ever seen an open-source project whose maintainer is as helpful to users and contributors than Adrian Holovaty is. He's extremely respectful and responds quickly to bug reports and suggestions. In addition to its clean, unified feel, the community is one of the main reasons I was attracted to Django.

BYU, the university run by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (the Mormons), incudes evolution in it's biology classes. I had a professor last semester who specifically said "evolution is biological change over time. if you look around, it does happen. that doesn't mean we necessarily descended from monkeys, but it's possible, and a lot of people believe we did."
The fact that the school teaches it doesn't mean that the church (or the school) is saying that it's true. What they're saying is "This is a theory that many people believe. You can make your own decision as to whether you believe it or not."
As others have mentioned, the people who think that evolution is impossible within the realm of LDS belief are actually incorrect. The church authorities have not made any authoritative statements on the matter, and it is left up to the individual beliefs of the members. As such, some believe it is true, and some believe it isn't. However, some of the ones who believe it isn't true still agree that it's useful to learn, if for no other reason than to understand what other people believe.
Personally, I've never understood why some religious people think that things like this should not be taught. Regardless of whether I agree with a scientific theory, I think that it's essential for people to learn what the theory is, and why some people believe it to be true. This is particularly essential, imho, in cases where the majority of people believe the theory to be true.

This stuff makes my blood boil. I thought of an equivalent analogy to help non-tech people understand what is really wrong with this system Suppose the government bowed to the pressure of some corporations and decided to hold a land rush in your home town. Anybody who could afford to hire several lawyers to go and physically stake a claim, fill out a lot of paperwork and pay a small fee, would be given title deed to as many lots as they liked, regardless of: the current owners now disputed deeds; buildings they owned on said land; years spent in residence; improvements made on land; and cash value of property stolen by political and legal maneuvering. This process can be perpetrated secretly and will only be brought to your attention when the new owner files suit against you for trespassing on "their" property. The only way to stop the theives from throwing you out on the street after they've sued you for damages to "their" property is to hire numerous lawyers to prove that Kodak film, Smuckers jam, or some other firm currently guilty of extorting money from smaller firms and individuals has never had any interest in your home. Good luck outlasting them in court. If you manage to make it through the months of trial and lose, you'll still be out on the street. After all they followed legal proceedings to steal your property from you, and were successful just because it happens to be similar to some other property they've already acquired.