These two statements by the NAS go beyond science advocacy:

“Acceptance of the evidence for evolution can be compatible with religious faith.”

“Attempts to pit science and religion against each other create controversy where none needs to exist.”

http://nationalacademies.org/evolution/Compatibility.html

The fact that some religious people accept the evidence for evolution does not make the first statement any more an empirical proposition than the second. They are both philosophical positions.

The NCSE does not have the institutional stature of the AAAS and NAS but it is a pity that they lack Darwin’s confidence in the ability of his science to speak for itself:

” I would give absolutely nothing for the theory of Natural Selection, if it requires miraculous additions at any one stage of descent.”

“There’s a far bigger point here: In my view, we’re not nearly so secure in our defense of evolution in this country that we can indulge in the luxury of alienating the vast number of evolution defenders who hold something like the above belief.”

Do you really think that these religious “evolution defenders” would get alienated from science if societies advancing science would be strictly agnostic? Will they turn to creationists, if these societies do not continuously reassure them that religion and science are compatible?

As for diversity, we can certainly respect diversity in views. But that does not mean we let all views influence public and education policy equally. There has to be some yardstick by which we have to gauge the contribution of every viewpoint or paradigm to progress. One can hardly doubt that teaching skepticism, questioning and the search for rational and natural explanations- which just turn out to be hallmarks of science- are important and necessary for human progress and mutual respect.