". . . communism is a viable economic system . . . little angels push the planets around the sun in perfectly circular orbits . . . the entire universe was barfed out by the Giant Sky Raven . . ."Getting a little whacked out, aren't we? In case you haven't noticed, theories of evolution and theories of creation happen to be at the heart of a major debate, this rather lengthy thread notwithstanding. Your introduction of tangential whims does nothing to forward either the acceptance of evolution theories or the rejection of creationist theories. Not that it matters, but what it does do is considerably lower any potential estimations of your maturity level.
I am merely following your argument to its logical conclusion. You decline to differentiate between theories supported by evidence, and theories not supported by evidence, preferring instead to shove creationism and evolution under the single heading of "theories", and then saying "let's just teach 'em all". Of course, that same argument sounds pretty stupid when applied to other areas, doesn't it? But suddenly it's magically persuasive when the theory in question is evolution?
Well, have it your way, but I really don't think you're going to like the consequences...