If they were really comfortable with Darwinism, they wouldn't be afraid to discuss alternative theories. It means that they believe that Darwinism requires at least some leap-of-faith to be accepted...that "faith" being a nonscientific thing.
If Darwin's theory was ironclad science, they would encourage having unreasonable theories considered alongside it because this would only help show the truth in Darwinism. They would have no problem discussing "flat earth" theory, for instance, because they can make an ironclad case that the earth is a sphere while at the same time show those who believe otherwise are crackpots.
So because they don't teach, say, the ancient Greek view of mechanics alongside F=ma, physicists don't really believe Newton's laws of motion?
They would have no problem discussing "flat earth" theory, for instance, because they can make an ironclad case that the earth is a sphere while at the same time show those who believe otherwise are crackpots.
Yeah, that's how we teach science - by bringing up ridiculous theories and then demonstrating they're ridiculous. What a productive use of teaching time!
Come up with an alternative theory, and we'll discuss it.
Great, using that logic, we'll just go ahead and:
1. Hold some Islamic prayer sessions in the local church.
2. Teach students that some people can;t add properly, and believe 2+2 = 5 ... if the teachers have solid belief that 2+2=4, then it should provide no confusion to tell students that all answers are equally valid (wait, come to think of it, I think this happens already).
3. Psychiatry classes can teach about demons causing insanity ... it'll certainly help diagnoses.
If you are going to allow alternate theories to be discussed, would you be fine with a teacher ALSO stating that ID is not generally accepted as a valid theory, --- that the idea of God, aliens, or a big computer guiding life along is not well supported by science?
Why not wait until ID is considered a valid scientific theory --- if you consider it to be true, you should know that eventually if IDers actually did some work in the lab for once, instead of the courtroom, they could devlop the theory properly. Presenting a half-baked theory in class will only hurt it.