Why religion should not pretend to be science

I am occasionally accused of attacking religion when I teach evolution. I try to do the exact opposite. I emphasize that many believers and religions have no problem with evolution. I emphasize that it need not be one or the other. I at least encourage them to look at the variety of views on the topic, although I do not consider it my place to discuss them at length or to endorse any one view.

However, just saying that evolution happened goes against some religions. Saying the earth is old goes against some religions, even if you just state the science and give the evidence.

Here is where the creation science/intelligent design movement has made things difficult for believers. Creation science and intelligent design claim to be science and that's why they can be taught in the science classroom. I do attack that science, because it is bad science. I make it clear that science is a process of organized skepticism and attacking each others ideas. In other classes, I strongly attack other scientific claims, such as those of alternative medicine or UFOs. There are examples of evolutionary biologists attacking other evolutionary biologists very strongly. I emphasize that science is a gauntlet of attacking each others ideas. If I take the claims of ID at face value, then attacking them is in no way attacking religion, it is attacking science. If anyone wants to make scientific claims, they must be willing to go through this process. If on the other hand, someone sees this as attacking religion, then it is admitting that creation science and ID are not what they claim to be. They are religion and not science, so at the very least they do not belong in the science classroom. The minute they stop making a claim to be science, I will stop addressing their scientific claims in a scientific manner.