The Emmanuel Foundation is Lying to us!
And Tony Blair's Government doesn't care

The claim that the Academy was oversubscribed is no surprise; in fact, it would have been amazing if it hadn’t - given the PR Campaign they mounted. On the face of things, where would you send your child: a glistening, £25M state-of-the-art building or some broken-down 1950s concrete eyesore? Implying that Emmanuel was effecting something special is disingenuous to say the very least. But they’re pretty good at spin as I discovered; Alistair Campbell would fit right in. From the King's Academy official prospectus.

Children of all faiths and of none are welcome but traditional Christian views form the starting point for these discussions.

When we last met, too briefly for my liking, I questioned Principal McQuoid on this very issue and was rewarded with a typically righteous smile of one who knows the truth. “I understand that some of my students don’t share my belief and encourage debate.” He went on to dismiss the ubiquitous posters declaring “CU There!” – The Academy’s “Christian Union” as nothing more sinister than the chess club. Time constraints forbade me from digging deeper, but from what little I could gather, the CU is a Christian debating society; just another example of dogma sanctioned from the highest levels. I hardly think the Chess Club (if such a thing exists) discusses philosophy.

For a child, debating theology with a superior is akin to pitting Mike Tyson against Gandhi in a physical fight.

Let me address these issues directly:  I do not believe young, impressionable and receptive minds are sufficiently developed to debate philosophy or any religious dogma when delivered expertly by an adult; particularly, an adult that has a vested interest in a singular belief and is innately in a position of absolute trust (by parents and children alike) to deliver unbiased, truthful facts.

Parents who care, the majority of us, instruct our children from an early age to listen to their superiors (teachers, priests, doctors, etc.) and take their words as gospel: pardon the irony. For a child, debating theology with a superior is akin to pitting Mike Tyson against Gandhi in a physical fight. The child is outgunned emotionally and intellectually.

But you don't just have to take my word for it. Look here for a pro-Creationism argument where the writer says:

It isn't necessary for you to publicly debate teachers or professors who believe in evolution. Through greater experience, they usually have clever, though erroneous, arguments to smooth over the weakness of Darwinism or to make disbelievers in the theory appear ignorant.

And of course, he expects us to believe that the pro-Creationists don't have precisely the same arguments! This writer is obviously fully convinced in his version of the truth in putting Darwin aside. But Darwin isn't alone - and his theory has gained not just momentum but credence too. After all this time, if Darwin was indeed in error (as this claims ) then his theory would have been long-since debunked by respectable scientists. Not only has Darwin's basic principle stood the test of time, it has solidified as brilliant minds such as Professor Richard Dawkins apply modern techniques and cite recently discovered specimens to lend credence to it.

6