I don't necessarily think that ID in schools is a bad thing. Assuming nothing changes, I would simply object to the idea that it belongs in a science class.
ID is religion lite, creationism with the serial numbers filed off in the hope of fooling school boards and legislators. It is a direct descendant of the
creationism --> creation "science" --> "What do we do now?" problem as those previous attempts failed to fool the courts.
If you look at it, the impetus for ID is not from scientific research, such as private industry or the universities. It is from a few scientists already committed to creationism, and from organizations such as the Discovery Institute, staffed more with lawyers and PR flacks than research scientists. And the Discovery Institute's whole approach was shown to be dishonest by their
Wedge Document, when it leaked to the internet. Their goal is not to do better science, but as follows:
We are building on this momentum, broadening the wedge with a positive scientific alternative to materialistic scientific theories, which has come to be called the theory of intelligent design (ID). Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions.
See anything remotely like the scientific method in there?
No, you don't. Their goal is not to follow the data wherever it leads, but to end up with science as we know it eliminated, and a new science subservient to Christian and theistic masters in its place (sounds like they would favor a theocracy, eh?).
So no, ID is not science. It is anti-science from its beginning, a deceitful Trojan horse aimed at the science classes first, and the general population afterwards.
Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.