The debate about evolution/creationism teaching in schools must be about religious education lessons, not just science lessons. This is my blueprint for better RE

From time to time there are concerns raised that some state-funded religious schools teach creationism, or intelligent design, in their science lessons.

The last Labour government and the Conservatives in opposition have always denied this is a problem and have always said that they will not stand for the teaching of creationism in science lessons. Ministers always say that creationism can't be taught in science lessons

Whenever this issue cropped up in parliament I was always concerned that the debate was missing the point. It is no good teaching about evolution (which is a scientific fact) in a science lesson at 9am then at 10am, in a religious education lesson, instructing pupils not to believe it.

The whole problem with RE lessons is not that they exist but that they amount to religious instruction in some schools. There is no basis for allowing state-funded schools to indoctrinate their pupils, even if that is what their parents want. They can provide this in optional after-school (or lunchtime) classes or clubs. They could even have something on a Sunday where children are taught to be believers. They could call it Sunday School!

The recognition that RE lessons can be proselytising is reflected in the right that parents have to withdraw their children from these lessons. In contrast, they can't withdraw their children from biology lessons even if they have profound religious objections to their being taught about sexual reproduction or evolution – these subjects are recognised as non-proselytising.

Secularists like me believe that RE is a valid subject for study in the curriculum but should be about what different religions (and other world views like humanism) believe; it should not be about what ought to be believed. So Catholic schools should be allowed to use RE lessons to teach that the Catholic church opposes contraception and believes that homosexuality is a sin, but not that the children ought to believe those things. The lessons should set out contrasting views on that subject.

It is reasonable that a school with a large proportion of children of parents with a particular religion might spend more time learning about the beliefs and practices of that religion, but not to the exclusion of other beliefs.

At the moment, however, all RE falls outside the national curriculum – for no good reason. In schools other than voluntary-aided faith schools the curriculum is set by a local Standing Advisory Committee on RE (SACRE) made up of religious representatives.

Many faith schools can decide their own RE curriculum and it is not subject to Ofsted inspection but by an inspector of their own religion. This is hardly a bulwark against instruction and indoctrination. There is no requirement to have a humanist or atheist on such committees. And many refuse to have them even as non-voting members let alone as full members as the religious members are.

10 commandments – sorry, suggestions – for RE teaching 1) Religious education should be about what different people believe, not what pupils should believe. 2) It should be in the national curriculum and inspected by Ofsted. 3) Non-religious people should not be excluded from helping to draw up the curriculum. Under current arrangements of local determination non-religious people should be included equally and allowed to be full members. 4) It should teach about a range of world views, both religious and non-religious. 5) It should not pussyfoot around controversial religious views (on sex and gender, for example) but tackle them head-on. Pupils should learn what the doctrine is but be encouraged to question and debate it. 6) In those communities with a high proportion of children whose parents are of a particular religion, the curriculum can be skewed towards more coverage of that – but not to the exclusion of other religions and world views. 7) End the right of withdrawal from RE classes, which would no longer be needed because the subject would be academic not proselytising. 8) Offer optional religious instruction classes after school if parents want that from a particular school. 9) End collective worship in state schools. 10) Worship opportunities made available on an optional basis for children if they or their parents want it.

All ten of these proposals were in the Liberal Democrat manifesto at the last election. It remains to be seen if any of them emerge intact from the coalition, and if so whether the plans survive attacks from the Labour opposition and from the bishops in the House of Lords.

This article was amended on Tuesday 31 August 2010. The original implied that the problem of RE being effectively religious instruction affected all faith schools. This has been corrected. It has also been made clear that some SACREs exclude non-religious people altogether, and that many faith schools set their own RE curricula because some follow the SACRE ones. Please see Evan's comment below.