Why should non-science and religion be taught in a science class? What do you mean by "weaknesses" of the theory of evolution?
In other words, you do not really wish to leave the decision as to what will be taught in science class up to the individual teacher. You would put some group, or perhaps just yourself, in charge to decide what is science and what is non-science and religion.
That's a defensible position, but if it is yours please don't inaccurately portray yourself as a defender of teachers' rights to decide what to teach. You are just as determined to force teachers to say only what you agree with as are some of the Creationists and ID'ers.
You may even be right. But the issue between you and the IDers is not one of freedom for the individual teacher. You are both opposed to that. The issue is merely one of what the teacher will not be allowed to teach.
Probably much the same as what was mentioned in an earlier post as "undermining the theory of evolution."
This is all very odd. Nobody gets upset if a teacher discusses the possibility that string theory and other proposed theories may someday be shown to "disprove" our present understanding of relativity and quantum mechanics.
Yet any discussion of the facts of life that appear to be difficult to explain using evolution get peoples panties in a serious twist.
Of course, the opponents of evolution don't generally explain the difficulties by anything but an "Intelligent Designer" having done it, which isn't really an explanation at all.