I think the difference lies in the difference between "discussion of" and "advocacy of".
When I was at primary school we had religious instruction, a very Presbyterian hellfire and brimstone version of Christianity, and the hell with you (literally) if you weren't a WASP.
Even then we could tell that our teacher hated it and everything to do with it; she flatly refused to do the teaching and they got some nong in who ranted and raved at us for 40 minutes every week. We saw it as time out.
But it is very hard to discuss topics like this without being seen to be advocating them rather than raising them as topics for discussion. I found, when I was teaching ethics, that some people simply cannot grasp the idea that it is possible to discuss something without actually taking sides on its legitimacy, especially if there is an emotive element to it.
Staying away from politics and religion on this Board makes a lot of sense ...
