As a Christian brought up in an atheist household, I musttake issue with AC Grayling.
He appears to believe that it is possible to give a child a value-free education. His "responsible curriculum" would teach children nothing but facts and allow them to make their own choices later.
This rather quaint idea simply equates neutrality with secular atheism.
Children taught his pick-and-mix curriculum do not learn to make free choices: they are actively taught that their teachers believe in none of these faiths, and subtly indoctrinated into the view that religious faith is a minority hobby that only "weird" people follow. That is hardly fair to the 72 per cent of the UK population who at the last census described themselves as Christian.
To turn Professor Grayling's argument on its head, why should my "Christian" tax support schools premised on this atheistic belief? In a multi-faith, multi-cultural society, we do have to allow other people to practise their beliefs (within limits), and that should rule out insisting that only secularists are allowed to set the school curriculum.
Name and address supplied