Demanding equal representation from a government entity is entirely different from attempting to enforce equal time via government means, upon the private sector.
Both have elements of government censorship, and both attempt to enforce an officially sanctioned viewpoint. In the first example, it’s largely to the exclusion of any alternative. In the second example, it’s requiring private resources be spent, in order to further a point of view that the private sector clearly does not desire to support.
So, you’re misattributing motives, and misplacing the taint of liberalism, here.
All I know is that I, for instance, as a skeptic of man caused global warming, do NOT want the issue debated pro-forma in curricula. I don't want some namby-pamby, noncommittal, "some scientists believe this, some scientists believe that," issue oriented bull crap.
No. I want the issue fully joined, investigated and debated in science itself, not in secondary science textbooks. And unless and until AGW proponents can decisively answer, in the professional literature, the skeptics' relevant objections; I don't want one, single, solitary damn syllable of what they "believe" printed in a textbook, whether it's "balanced" by a contrary view or not.