one could ask what are Evolutionists afraid of in letting the Theory of ID and or Creation, be exhibited?
Creationism and ID aren't theories, they are opinions.
You have every pulpit and every parochial school in the nation to advance your "theory", you have media and even the public square to advance it.
That does not seem enough to ID proponents, they now demand that publicly funded schools be forced to promote the religious belief of their choice.
Conservatives (and many non-conservatives as well) are afraid of lowering academic standards. Since creationism or ID has not (yet at any rate) achieved anything remotely approaching the standing in professional science that would normally be expected of any idea included in science curricula, it can only be included on the basis of what amounts to intellectual affirmative action.
If the precedence is established that this can be done even in "hard" subjects like the natural sciences, so much more is the door opened (or further opened) in "soft" subjects like the social sciences, the political left's favorite play pen.
Furthermore the call for creationism or ID in curricula is associated with an "identity group," namely theologically conservative religious persons. This is how much of the leftist pap, pablum, revisionism and other unworthy junk gets into the curricula: it's deemed to be necessary to appease various identity groups, or to support their "self-esteem".
If even some conservatives (creationism/ID supporters) are arguing for academic/intellectual relativism and the validity of identity group politics in determining curricula, how can other conservatives attack these same tactics at the root when they are used by the left?
Methinks thou doest presume too much.
Science is not afraid of ID or creationism. Scientists spend a great deal of time trying to eliminate extraneous effects from corrupting the outcomes of experiments. ID and creationism are simply some of those possible extraneous effects. Should they get special dispensation and be allowed to colour not only the results but the process of science?
Methinks not young buddy.