Over at the Slate "Today's Papers" message board, someone replied to a reference to the NYT thusly:
I am a Catholic and of an age when Catholic children went automatically to the Catholic schools. My freshman year biology teacher was a priest and taught the theory of evolution, explaining that there is no evidence that God did not begin His creation with amoeba and let evolution take its natural course until He was satisfied that the process could now sustain we humans. At that point said Father Behr, God then--metaphorically--took the lump of clay and breathed into it a soul.
Now what Darwin's theory has to with a person's morals is beyond me. I seem to have studied evolution and religion and come away with my morals intact. As have most of my classmates.
Oh, btw, I was a freshman in 1960 and we even had sex education, albeit gender separate, classes.
My reply ...
I know someone taught in Catholic schools in the 1950s, and she did not receive such an evolution friendly education. But, when she learned what her children were taught in Catholic schools on the matter in the 1980s, she was a bit shocked. Much more evolution friendly.
Science in various ways affects ones morals, though how one processes it is very important. Consider two quotes from today's NYT article:
“I think a big reason evolutionists believe what they believe is they don’t want to have to be ruled by God,” said Josh Rou, 17.
“Evolution is telling you that you’re like an animal,” Bryce agreed. “That’s why people stand strong with Christianity, because it teaches people to lead a good life and not do wrong.”
This doesn't follow, unless we dissect what is meant by "rule" etc. Many "evolutionists" believe in God. Likewise, many "lead a good life" etc. OTOH, evolution might lead one to question the literal word of the Bible, Koran, etc. If one believes this leads you to the road to perdition and such, evolution can be deemed to be dangerous to morality.
I also think science can affect our morality. If we respect equality, for instance, a scientific understanding of the lack of difference (in core respects) between various groups can be an important factor. Science can also end suggestions certain things are caused by "the devil" or whatnot, and this can have affects on morality in various respects. Respect of the scientific method in everyday life will likely affect how you interact with your neighbor too.
Morality should in some part be based on our natures and science plays a part in setting up good morals. The scientific evolution most probably affected morality in various respects. It also is a matter of being able to handle science. A rejection of a very literal understanding ("seven days") need not lead to immorality or even no belief in God. Darwinism need not lead to Social Darwinism.
After all, we still are "animals" but a special class, who can work past what nature gives us more than your average bear.