In the context of a basic education system that recognizes the existence of knowledge and a body of professionals who have a consensus on some subjects, the introduction of "scientific creationism" into the science classroom would only open a can-of-worms. Soon every crackpot theory that had adherents enough to start a lobby would have to be included. Here's a probable list:
Astrology would be granted equal time with astronomy.
Pyramid power would be matched side-by-side with modern physics.
Divining rod technology would be taken seriously for the benefit of future oil geologists and hydraulic engineers.
The toxemia theory and Christian Science "negative thinking" theory of disease would get equal time with the germ theory.
The flat earth theory would get equal mention with the space program.
It would be easy to go on, but let's stop and detail this last one just to show how serious the issue really is and how similar the demands of these other theorists might be to those of the creationists.
That maybe a good question to talk about but there is another question you should ask yourself first. Should we have public schools? According to the constitution the government shouldn't be a part of any school. But for the sake of the question I would have to say no. Not because I don't agree with it but because I don't think any form of origins should be taught in school because at that point everybody will get offended in one way or another. I think we should just teach what is fact and not get on the subject of theory or what we think happened in terms of how we got here. And yes, that includes teaching evolution in our schools because that is in fact a religion.
Also, separation of church and state is not in the constitution and it's technically a one dimensional wall. That is, the church should always have influence in government but government should not have influence in the church. Otherwise when laws are passed they wont have a standard to what laws should be laws and what laws shouldn't be laws.
@Silas_Cole, 1) The constitution says nothing about education (2) Scientific theories are an important part of higher education: a very large chunk of what you learn in high/secondary school math and science classes are theories (3) Evolution is not a religion (4) While it is true that the separation of church and state is not explicitly mentioned in the constitution, it was stated many times over by several founding fathers that they intended for the two to be separated and has also been a recurring motif in many, many supreme court decisions since (5) No, the wall of separation doesn't mean the church should have an influence on government: that is the whole point of the "wall" and the "separation" part. Allowing the church to influence government is called theocracy (6) That last sentence made no sense. When laws are passed, they become laws. This is called law-making, and it is the most elementary part of civics there is.
Creationism should be taught in religion class along with the rest of the religious beliefs of how man and women got to Earth. Whereas evolution should be taught in a science class. The important part is that the teachers leave it to the children to decide what they believe in and should not push them in any direction and have them talk about the flaws in each choice. That way the children have to think critically rather than follow studies or a book dogmatically.
I don't understand America. Where I live, even in Catholic schools, creationism is treated as nonsensical. It's not taught in science, while evolution is. It's not even taught in R.E. Class. I don't know how anyone anywhere still believes it, there's active evidence that disproves it.