I am only just joining the conversation, forgive me if I miss something



Actually, when I had a general science class (when we were discussing how the universe may have come to be) - we were learning about other religions views, albeit only briefly. Our teacher stated that 'one possible explanation was...' and from then on we studied the big bang.

Science should be taught stating that there may be other explanations or reasoning, and that this is the best explanation that science has to offer. But teaching that the red shift effect does not exists might be a bit far - or our 'science' books will be full of self-contradicting sentences. "if the red shift did exist, you would use this formula... If not, then ignore this chapter".

But fully teaching ID/Creationism with science I think is not right. They often contradict, as as I said above, it will make the subject very convoluted. And less factual/experimental.