Or photosynthesis?
The Point: There isn't a single theory in the typical secondary school science textbook, out of hundreds covered, that is taught LESS dogmatically or "matter of factly" than evolution. Most are taught so "factually" that they aren't even identified AS theories (although they certainly are). Yet we never, ever hear complaints from creationists/antievolutionists about teaching any of these other theories (except maybe those related to the age of the earth/universe) "as fact". Even though they are taught that way much, much more commonly than is evolution.
Why is this?
The Truth: Creationists/antievolutionists aren't really in favor of teaching science in general less dogmatically, any more than "peace activists" are really in favor of peace. Their protestations on such matters are completely cynical. In fact they prefer that all theories excepting evolution be taught as dogmatically as possible, and taught as fact, so that evolution can be made to seem weak or uncertain by contrast.
And the same can be said of most of the scientific community.
Accepted scientific thought has become just as much of a religion as judeo-christianity. It is every bit as dogmatic and has more than it's share of mindless zealots. Those from either side of that argument who posit their theories and ideas as fact, not to be questioned or challenged, are equally worthy of being run out of the classroom, and ridiculed by all thinking people.
Consider the theory of "dark matter". Star observations have observed that the universe is indeed expanding, however, in violation of existing Big bang theory, and all Newtonian Physics, the expansion is ACCELERATING. Lacking any explanation for it, many scientists have latched onto a theory called "dark matter" for which there is even less that can be said to be evidence, than can be presented supporting the existence of a God. They observe an effect(accelerating expansion), and cannot explain it, so they just make up something out of thin air to explain it. Yet they think the theory is worth exploring.
So how is THAT theory, purely made up, with zero evidence, any MORE worthy of exploration than another theory, such as a Creator? How many scientific minds are saying that since we do not have any evidence to prove the existence of "dark matter", that we should not bother exploring it? Are they trying to ban discussion of "Dark matter" from H.S. classrooms?