Look at history. What you claim is *religious fundamentalism* was just what most people believed several decades ago and further back. There was no theocracy. Reintroducing creation back into the schools like it was taught for centuries is no more going to harm science than it did then.
Creation was removed from public schools decades ago. Show us how science education benefited from it. Show us how it improved our ranking in science education in the world to have only evolution taught in public schools.
That should be easy to do because all you have to do is go back in our own history.
You're getting to be a one-trick pony. You really should realize that its not an either-or situation. There are a lot of other factors in the equation.
To claim, as you do, that the drop in educational excellence over the past 50 or more years is a direct result of the removal of fundamentalist religion from science classes is a delusion of the highest order.
To claim that ignores the vast changes of the 1960s. It also dishonestly cojoins those changes with having "only evolution taught in public schools." Sorry, that's a fundamentalist's delusion.
The surge in science education of the late 1950s and early 1960s (largely brought about by the space program) was severely impacted by the liberal surge of the late 1960s.
Neither of these had any relationship to whether fundamentalist religion was taught in the schools or not.
And no amount of fundamentalism--not even an absolute theocracy--will bring back your incorrectly remembered "golden years." Sorry, Humpty has taken the big fall and he's not coming back. (Remember "The Enlightenment?")
You write, "Reintroducing creation back into the schools like it was taught for centuries is no more going to harm science than it did then."
You are advocating teaching religion as science; your religion in place of science. Creationism is religion--everyone agrees to that. What you want is that your religion be taught as fact, as verifiable evidence, and as science--but I suspect you don't want your claims to be subjected to the scientific method, to testing of the "weaknesses," if you will. To "critical thinking." You are glad to have "weaknesses" and "critical thinking" applied to the theory of evolution, but that's really the last thing you want for your own beliefs.
And you claim not to be anti-science... Sorry, you (and a couple of others here) are the poster children for anti-science fundamentalists.