"To me it only makes sense to teach--in a science class--what the prevailing beliefs were up to the acceptance of evolution. Why are people so afraid of that?"
Because this would necessitate teaching that evolution replaced creationism. That'll flip some wigs around here.
As we've seen already. I think what's most amusing is that those who share MY view--evolution, as opposed to ID--are the ones who are flipping out the most. Presenting an idea in the context of what it helped replace is so basic to teaching that I can't figure out these people. To deny that evolution was a REvolution in thinking is just plain dumb; not explaining the essence of the thinking it replaced is also just plain dumb when we see how the power of organized religion has been eroded in large part due to scientific explanations for what were previously thought to be "miracles" or acts of God.
There's nothing about ID that can't be explained without preaching it; and there's nothing anti-religious about explaining the importance of a scientific breakthrough in terms of the ongoing debate between ID and scientific evidence, theories and ideas as to how we got here. It's amusing to see how scared people from both sides are when it comes to TALKING about this stuff. I see religious people who have no fear of discussing Darwin in the context of teaching ID; I guess the pro-Darwin crowd are just afraid to bring up the competition, for some reason.