Creationism a threat to human rights - Council of Europe
Creationism – the belief that God created the earth and man in six days less than 10,000 years ago – is enjoying a resurgence of support in the UK, says a BBC News website item on 15 September, "Who are the British creationists?" Creationism is widely believed in the United States, where, according to the BBC, an estimated 47% of Americans reject outright Charles Darwin's theory of evolution, accepting instead the Bible's account of the creation of the universe - as laid out in the first chapter of Genesis.
Leading British scientist and author Richard Dawkins has warned of creationist "brainwashing" in the UK – spurred on by an unwillingness of the authorities to offend religious sensibilities. His creationist adversaries say their ideas are beginning to gain wider acceptance within these shores as dissatisfaction grows with "materialist" evolutionary explanations of how life began.
A 2006 survey for the BBC found that more than a fifth of those polled were convinced by the creationist argument. Less than half - 48% - chose evolution. Said Keith Porteous Wood, Executive Director of the National Secular Society: "There is no question that creationism is growing. It is increasingly well funded, and well organised." The society says Britain is beginning to follow the lead of the US where supporters and opponents of creationism have joined battle – in the school classroom.
An article in The Independent of 12 September "The Big Question: Why is creationism on the rise, and does it have a place in education?" reports that, according to a More 4 report earlier this year, there are at least 40 schools in Britain that teach creationism in science lessons. Of those schools, five were part of the state system, but defied government guidelines. The report was the result of enquiries to just 50 faith schools, of almost 7,000 in the country (over 99 per cent of which are Christian) – so there may be many more schools doing the same thing.
The Government's Guidance on Creationism and Intelligent Design – to which the Royal Society's former director of education Rev Michael Reiss (see previous blog) contributed – says that creationism and intelligent design should not be taught as part of the national curriculum; but, crucially, it adds that "there is a real difference between teaching 'x' and teaching about 'x'", and argues that questions about creationism "could provide the opportunity to explain why they are not scientific theories".
"Science lessons are not the appropriate place to discuss creationism, which is a world view in total denial of any form of scientific evidence," said John Fry, a physicist at the University of Liverpool. He said challenging evolution scientifically was appropriate in school science classes. But he added: "Creationism doesn't challenge science, it denies it." His views echo those of Dawkins, who said science was being threatened in classrooms because the Government accepts that theories including "intelligent design" (described as creationism's trojan horse) can be discussed "in the context of being one of a range of views on evolution".
Why is creationism an issue? It is partly to do with an increasingly organised evangelical Christian movement and a growing number of Muslims in the UK who subscribe to creationism, explains The Independent. "There is an insidious and growing problem," says the geneticist Steve Jones. "It's a step back from rationality. They (the creationists) don't have a problem with science, they have a problem with argument. And irrationality is a very infectious disease."
On 21 June 2006, the world's leading scientists urged schools to stop denying the facts of evolution amid controversy over the teaching of creationism (Smithers, Guardian, 22/6/06). The national science academies of 67 countries – including the UK’s Royal Society – issued a joint statement warning that scientific evidence about the origins of life was being "concealed, denied or confused". It points out that "within science courses taught in certain public systems of education, scientific evidence, data, and testable theories about the origins and evolution of life on Earth are being concealed, denied, or confused with theories not testable by science". It went on: "We urge decision makers, teachers, and parents to educate all children about the methods and discoveries of science and foster an understanding of the science of nature. Knowledge of the natural world in which they live empowers people to meet human needs and protect the planet."
A year later, on 4 October 2007, the Council of Europe (CoE) urged governments to "firmly oppose" the teaching of creationism as a scientific discipline (Lipsett, Guardian, 5/10/07). Members of the CoE's Parliamentary Assembly voted 48 to 25 against giving creationism the same status in education as the theory of evolution. "If we are not careful, creationism could become a threat to human rights," they said. "The prime target of present-day creationists, most of whom are Christian or Muslim, is education. Creationists are bent on ensuring that their ideas are included in the school science syllabus. Creationism cannot, however, lay claim to being a scientific discipline." The parliamentarians said there was "a real risk of a serious confusion" being introduced into children's minds between belief and science. They added: "The theory of evolution has nothing to do with divine revelation but is built on facts. Intelligent design, presented in a more subtle way, seeks to portray its approach as scientific, and therein lies the danger." They said creationism was affecting "quite a few" CoE member states, including Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Russia, Serbia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and the UK.
As I explained in the blog of 16 September "Royal Society's stance on religion under fire", our campaign in support of human embryonic stem cell research and therapeutic cloning will have a section called "Science and Religion" which will carry pieces about the spread of faith schools; the growing influence of bodies such as the Templeton Foundation; and the prospect of creationism being taught in science classrooms. Because of the addition of this section to the website, I have decided that my model will not be Make Trade Fair; instead, the campaign will initially be loosely based on Greenpeace UK (see, for example, their section on "Climate change"); and eventually, as we get more material and cooperation from scientists and groups, on Greenpeace International (see, for example, their section on "Protect ancient forests").
This is not wishful thinking on my part: the NAC website, which was suspended on 8 March, was loosely based on Greenpeace International – and, in fact, by the time we were made homeless I had uploaded hundreds of articles and photographs on the Vatican and the Christian right and their tireless work to insinuate their values into every aspect of public policy at every level of government. Oh, we also featured books, and had three original campaigns – one of which was titled "The Vatican and the achievement of the UN Millennium Development Goals", incorporating as a Take Action an email to Pope Benedict XVI urging him to stop obstructing family planning. NAC was also interested in gay rights, but we have decided that NAC is exclusively about the public being exposed to the scientific perspective – and this presupposes the separation of church and state and public policies that are based on secular principles, not religious doctrine. We actually stated the following in our mission page: "Science transcends borders and provides the most reliable basis for finding solutions to our problems. NAC maintains that secular, not religious, principles must govern public policy."
