Comment: Of course children are

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: I fear you're falling into (see in situ)

Of course children are

Of course children are thinking individuals. However, when humans are young, we look to our elders for guidance - it's coded into our DNA that we must observe our elders in order to know how to survive. Hardly any of our functions are instinctive, therefor we must learn how to live, and it's irresponsible and inaccurate to say that a child won't pretty much eat up and believe everything their parents say, at least until they reach the typical rebellious or free thinking ages.

Theology may be one place to begin your child's "knowledge" base, and there are of course other places to begin as well. I've seen no evidence that people who were taught a religion first as a youth lived any better or worse lives than those who were taught... I don't know, language, basic physics, history, mathematics, or philosophy as the foundation of their knowledge base. It does strike me as counter-intuitive to make the foundation of your child's knowledge base a completely unscientific, non-hierarchic, dogmatic system (which can even sometimes be self-contradicting), rather than one that possesses traits like being disprovable if it's wrong or demonstrated if it's correct (an important learning tool especially for children who constantly ask, 'why' or 'are you sure.')

But I guess to each their own. I'd rather educate my children at a young age with verifiable information that works as a foundation for other verifiable information they'll see for the rest of their lives.