Open or expose mind?

The US federal judge just announced that teaching "Intelligent Design" theory in schools in Pennsylvania is a violation of the Constitution.
"Intelligent Design" as an opponent of Darwinism in explaining evolution has been supported by the church. It argues that lives are too complicated to be created "by chance". Penn's teaching ID in school is considered as trying to mix church and state, thus a violation of US Constitution.
The proponents of ID argue that ID as well as Darwinism are all theories cannot be proved true or false, schools should teach the pupils both theories so as to make them 'open minded'.

Here comes an interesting problem: we all accept that science is open and can accept argument. Theories can be proven wrong no matter how prominent and popular it has been. Then can we teach the next generation an alternative theory which is not accepted by most people and could very possibly be wrong? To what extent can a state choose a theory and announce others as wrong? Here we can see that the state can well interfere arguments between theories, though the argument is mainly within scientific field and the result cannot be altered by government orders.

I do not really believe teaching ID to primary school students can make their mind open. At most, they will accept another kind of view on evolution and follow that all their lives. They may be too young to be critical.

I myself support DARWINISM as I do not want an 'architect' above us. Though, argument in the academic areas should be allowed and encouraged.