Did I say somewhere that I wanted to outlaw the teaching of evolution? I'm in favor of teaching facts, not promoting a particular theory.
Since relativity and quantum mechanics are both presented in college physics course, I'm presuming from your post that you're in favor of teaching the merits of both intelligent design AND evolution. If not, then why not? Why is it okay to present conflicting theories for physics but not for the origin of life?
QM and SR give reasonable results for the regimes in which they are valid. Outside their respective areas of validity, they aren't very good at explaining things. QM is especially good at explaining the physical behavior of atoms and molecules, while SR is especially good at explaining things that move closer to the speed of light. So, while they conflict in some places, there is a good consensus that they explain things very well.
Compare this to ID and Evolution, where one has a consensus that it best explains observations, and ID has really not had time to formally present a few ideas. Perhaps when ID has had a chance to be fully developed and if ID can explain things to a greater degree than evolution, then it deserves a spot in the scientific classroom. It has a long way to go first.