I hardly think the fact that only evolution is a SCIENTIFIC theory and therefore the only one suitable for a SCIENCE classroom is a technicality. It is the crux of the issue, in fact.
I am not one those who has a fit if the Bible is so much as mentioned in a public school. I think it is impossible to teach the other classes I mentioned without mentioning its influence. That as may be, it isn't science. You can read why it isn't on so many posts on this site it hardly seems worth rehashing the arguments. "The Bible says . . ." isn't sufficient. Why should I believe Genesis is the truth in the first place?
Shall we also teach alternate theories of the solar system? Take a look at
http://www.fixedearth.com. There is alternate to the heliocentric model -- shall we teach this, too? If something is clearly wrong, or hasn't a shred of evidence there is little point. Unless you intend to use it as an example of how science works. In my biology class, we used Pasteur's experiments to disprove abiogenesis and Lamarkian evolution for those.
Having mentioned that -- I now eagerly await some to jump on that statement to show I admitted evolution is impossible . . .
Ian