The point is that according to the supporters of the new bill, this has nothing whatsoever to do with religion. All you are doing is clearly demonstrating that it has. Can't you see that your undermining your own case?
Also, in theory, you could hypothesise any number of religious beliefs that exist in opposition to each & every known physical law & fact. For example, you could claim that God made the moon out of cheese. Obviously the scientific theory that the moon is in fact made of rock is in direct conflict with such a religious belief. However, the only metaphysical implications of this exist in the minds of the cheese moon God believers, they are not an intrinsic property of the moon-rock theory.
Likewise, with evolution, if it is your belief that God created humans some 6000 years ago, then obviously evolution does have metaphysical implications, but again those implications exist only in the mind of the believer who is then confronted with a conflict between evolution & their parochial religious beliefs. It is not a property of evolution.
Finally, many religious denominations manage to reconcile a belief in evolution (theistic evolution) with their religious faith, a position taken by both the Church of England & the Vatican.