Education about LIFE? while we can!

You seem to think that decisions on education curriculums should be some kind of democracy. That would certainly be a good way of ensuring that future generations will never know more about biology than the average person on the street, which is close to bugger all!The only way to decide what's taught in schools at any particular time is to ask the experts, and get a consensus of opinion from them. What's taught changes over time as new discoveries and observations are taken into account, but that's inevitable, and the process of updating things is well understood by academics.Let's look at a subject that you might know more about than biology. Say, history.Should we go out and ask the lay public what our kids should be taught?You ask person one for what he thinks should be a priority and he says: "I think the kids should be taught about how we defeated Napoleon in the 18th century."Then person two who says: "I think they should be taught about Henry the Eighth, and the six wives he beheaded, and how the Romans invaded Britain in 1066."And so on. Do we really want to waste time and money teaching kids about things that didn't happen? That would probably be about the level you'd get from quite substantial numbers of the population. So ask the experts, I say.And if you ask the experts in origins of life, you'll get evolutionary biology in schools, the reason being that evolutionary theory has 100% of the available evidence behind it at this moment in time.There are many creation mythologies from many different cultures, and collectively, they share the remaining 0% of the evidence.

Sorry if it seems like ganging up, but it's nothing personal! I've noticed that, because your O.P. makes it clear that you're from the U.K., that a lot of Brits have responded, even though the teaching of evolution/creationism has never been such a big issue here as it is in the U.S. Actually, it's a bit more complicated than that. Science doesn't actually have any essential conflict with a belief like:"God created the universe"Science cannot give an opinion on whether or not such a statement is true, because it is confined to studying the natural universe, and cannot deal with the supernatural, because supernatural propositions like "God" cannot be tested for, proven or disproven.For all practical purposes, you could regard science as being agnostic on the question of such a God.However, the confusion comes in with types or interpretations of religions which have their Gods creating imaginary universes, or false realities.Examples of these are the flat earthers and the young earthers.The former interpret various verses of the bible as meaning that the earth must be flat (they still exist, religious faith is a powerful force!), and the latter believe that the earth must be less than 10,000 years old, based, again, on interpretations of the bible.What happens here is that there is an inevitable conflict between evidence based science and these false realities, and therefore, indirectly, with the clearly imaginary Gods that are supposed to have created them.So, you see, it is possible to be both a believer in a creator God and a supporter of the theory of evolution, but only if your God created reality!