Smug no more
It wasn't so long ago that we in England could look, with smug superiority, across the pond and laugh at our backwards cousins who insist on teaching non-scientific fantasies as science. I mean, of course, Intelligent Design and Creationism.
But now this dangerous and unhelpful nonsense is making headway here. Let us be clear: religion and science may not be in opposition (as Scientific American argued in their most recent issue) but they should not be confused in education. Science is that which can be tested; religion is not.
Of course I do not believe that religious education should be taught at schools at all — they already have creative writing classes — but if it must waste children's time, it should only be in RE classes, not science.
But now this dangerous and unhelpful nonsense is making headway here. Let us be clear: religion and science may not be in opposition (as Scientific American argued in their most recent issue) but they should not be confused in education. Science is that which can be tested; religion is not.
Of course I do not believe that religious education should be taught at schools at all — they already have creative writing classes — but if it must waste children's time, it should only be in RE classes, not science.