Evolution is not atheism, it's a reliable discovery of science. The separation of church and state required by the constitution rigthfully prevents you from corrupting or censoring proper science education, including biology. But it doesn't prevent teaching religious cosmologies and mythology in their proper context, like in a theology or religion course, where it belongs. It also doesn't prevent you from teaching your doctrines at home and church. And it prevents you from forcing your own particular doctrine on other Christian and religious groups. Not all Christians reject reality.
You're whining of double standards while confusing reliable knowledge and dogma, a false equivalence. You pretend that evolution is dogmatic when it is not. You use the word "freedom" to mean the corruption of education and knowledge. The right to education includes the right to not be misled.
It's like the right to a clean environment. You call pollution "freedom", except that in this case it's the pollution of the mind with confusion. Science belongs in science courses, religion belongs in religious courses. Pseudoscientific creationist evolution denial arguments are not science. If you really did science, you would have a possibility at affecting the scientific consensus by doing science. In fact, even including ID material in theology or religion courses surveying religions and Christianity would be inappropriate, because it's an attack against rational thinking, science and knowledge, using straw men, trying to strip its victims of the capacity to reason. It taints good Christianity with dishonest, malicious deception.
If your particular cult expects you to reject facts of the world to manipulate you, consider the fact that it's abusive. It even attempts to corrupt education, another red flag. If it was intellectually honest, it would learn and improve its teachings. If they don't, at least don't let them abuse society at large by imposing authoritarian obscurantism.
Comment IRT Danielle's comment above:
Because as mentioned above, ID is an attack against knowledge and reason, I doubt that it could be done properly. The details are missing, but it also gives the impression that students who failed general exams may have passed because of a "religious exemption" statement. I hope that this is my erroneous interpretation and that if they passed, it's also because they passed their exams. It would then also be unacceptable to fail a student because of a personal faith statement, of course. It still may not be the ideal course for a multiculturalism-centered activity, there are many other opportunities to do that. Another potential issue is that if it's not a well planned course and that the teacher mostly applies their own, one also teaching ID may not be very likely to properly cover the actual scientific material (and to stress it a third time, ID is a collection of misleading arguments attacking non-controversial established knowledge and evidence, with laundry lists of false claims)... In a science class, it's best described as corruption and sabotage.
