I get you're going for the "AI is a tool" thing, but the problem with your analogy is that LLMs hallucinate and many students use them in lieu of doing reading and reasoning about the content.
LLMs are to english class as a car would be to running class. Yes, the tool exists and is useful but it prevents you from getting the intended benefit.
How do you teach students how to reason around AI before you teach them how to reason, period? I think the problem is trying to teach the basic logic and philosophy of the fundamentals of subjects. I'm talking how to think mathematically. How to analyze critically. How to argue coherently. AI can be a boon to people who already have the capacity to reason around it, but first we have to reach un-developed brains how to reason.
I absolutely would be. At least a grounding in understanding pitfalls, and using good prompts. My kids have been watching me make a browser game where the design decisions are all mine/ours, but the programming is augmented by GPT-4o. As I go, I explain why I'm using the prompts I am, and how I integrate the code: wary that GPT has gone off-course the further into remembering the origins of a function that it is. The game is not where it is purely because of GPT-4o, but it has been a key component given I barely know the language being used. (They already do game making as part of STEM components at school.)
LLMs are to english class as a car would be to running class. Yes, the tool exists and is useful but it prevents you from getting the intended benefit.