God-awful education

Not everyone likes Richard Dawkins. I do. I mean, I've never met him or anything, but I found The God Delusion air-punchingly brilliant (if I was the air-punching sort, which I'm not. More the kind of clucking my tongue approvingly and nodding sagely) and The Selfish Gene wrote about genetics in a way that was both accessible and enlightening.

Dawkins' website today has made a story out of this article, about parents in the London Borough of Redbridge being offered either a "faith-based" school or no school at all for their children. This is a debate I've been having with friends for a long while, and is of particular interest to me, as we live within the affected borough.

The whole idea of faith-based schools turns my stomach. It's not a racist, or even culturalist (is that a word?) issue for me; I absolutely want my daughter to grow up in a mixed school that represents the community around her. I want her to be able to mix with people who hold different ideas about religion - and I want her to come to her her own conclusions. But, I absolutely, fundamentally disagree with the fact that I pay taxes for a school that my child either cannot achieve admission to (see: high-performing Church of England schools) or else will receive alongside her education, religious doctrine, which is at its best unprovable, and at its worst, damaging in its attitudes towards women and promoting guilt or intolerance.

"So Laura," you might say, "does that mean that you are also opposed to single-sex education, as if you have a daughter, she cannot attend an all-boys' school, for which you pay taxes?"

Actually, no. I have yet to come across a local authority that has single-sex schools for one gender, and not the other. It's about parity. Where there is an all-boys' school, in my experience, there is also an all-girls' school. That is fine. Other people may disagree with single-sex schools, but that is a separate debate.

I have friends who - despite having been decidedly agnostic as long as I've known them - have suddenly got involved with church activities, in order to secure that all-important place at an (inevitably mostly-white, high-performing) C of E school. And I completely, completely understand that as a parent, you will do almost anything to ensure the best future for your child. I do not judge those parents. Well, I do a little bit. But I try and be polite about it.

But I am pissed off that people are having to declare a faith they do not feel, in order to gain a solid education for their child. I am pissed off that - because I am a card-carrying atheist (they don't actually issue cards, but I wish they would) - my child will never get into a Catholic school (nor would I want her to), despite the fact that my taxes are paying for it. I am pissed off that classroom time is given over to prayer. I am pissed off that no-one else seems properly pissed off about this.

The USA - a far more religious country than the UK - has total separation of church and state in its schools - to the extent that (I understand - please correct me if I'm wrong), they cannot put up Christmas decorations, sing carols, celebrate Hanukkah, for fear of litigation. Many people would say that's taking things too far. Perhaps they are right. But actually, surely school should be a place for learning, for facts, for understanding, for debating, for gaining tolerance. Of course religion should be part of the education - in terms of helping people to understand what others believe - but only as far as facts go. For example: "This is what Christians believe, this is what Sikhs believe etc." and categorically not "This is the truth, now let's pray." And if that means removing the relatively harmless fripperies of religion for a greater good, then so be it.

Some will argue that a faith school is important as they are unable to practise their religion without it, as it is so deeply embedded in their culture (for example, washing and praying several times a day, girls separated from boys in the classroom, needing to learn a religious language). If this is the case - if this is truly the case - I think those parents need to assess whether state education is appropriate for their child. I don't see that the taxpayer has any obligation to provide a religious backdrop for your child - Christian or otherwise. You can do that in your free time, or else pay for it elsewhere. (Actually, honestly, I would rather faith schools were forbidden entirely - even in private education - but I suspect we're a few decades away from that.)

I see Free Schools are on the rise - where a group of parents essentially sets up a school, but it is funded by the government. How long before someone sets up an Atheist Free School, free from doctrine, with the emphasis on learning, questioning, tolerance and empirical evidence? If you do, let me know. We will move to be in your catchment area.

Sod it, I might just start one myself. Anyone want to join?