Is Darwinism science or religion?

Evolution as science would need to be proven via experimentation. That a single cell can be made to spontaneously exist by the free flow of several hundred known amino acids in a colloidal suspension of dirt should be a testable hypothesis. That it hasn't been reproduced would suggest that Darwinism is an unproven hypothesis. As such, teaching it as scientific law would seem more shortsighted than teaching Newtonian physics as proven fact was. Do you think treating Darwin as a prophet is stultifying biology's Einstein? Why do proponents of Darwinism seem to believe that creationism is the only alternative? Should scientific discourse in this country be reduced to a pale reflection of the partisan political establishment?