Raising children with religious beliefs violates the idea of religious freedom.

For the majority of parents, raising a child to share the parents' religious beliefs is something that they feel compelled to do. However, because most children are very impressionable and are easily swayed into believing things, it is an unfair tactic in converting someone to one's religion. Furthermore, because parents have the freedom to punish their children for not believing in what they were told to, the choice in the matter is eliminated, thus taking out the freedom from religious freedom. It has commonly been argued that taking one's child to one's place of worship is "exposure" rather than "brainwashing." However, it is actually the inverse that is true the majority of the time because many parents will take their children to only their place of worship. This would be comparable to a parent offering his or her child any flavor of ice cream displayed on a table, but only having chocolate displayed. The child in this situation is forced into the only choice displayed, but not the only choice available as there is a myriad of other ice cream flavors in existence. The parents simply chose not to put them out because he or she only likes chocolate and wants his or her daughter to like only chocolate. This analogy clearly demonstrates how introducing a child to only one religion is not exposure, it is a method of brainwashing chosen by the parent as a means of forcing the child to believe what they want the child to believe. Children are very impressionable and are easily led astray into believing what they want to be real, rather than what is real. It is for this reason that the belief in Santa Claus has grown into an international, cultural phenomenon. Taking advantage of this piece of child psychology in order to have the child become a believer in the religion that the parent wishes their child to support does not present a choice to the child, as the child will spend far less, if any, judging what they were told as being true or false. Because this does not present a choice, it does not allow for religious freedom to be exercised. Because children often learn about religion earlier than they learn about science and how to determine if something is physically possible or not, the parents plants a seed of religious belief in the child's mind that is not tested by science until the child learns of how to utilize it properly. But despite the child eventually gaining access to the knowledge of science and how logic works, it is because the religious beliefs are taught first that make the person so resistant to questioning the beliefs they were taught as children. This is an unfair tactic as science is the more accurate tool is discovering how the world functions. If the child were taught science first, and then the religious beliefs, he or she would most likely not believe the religion that they were told to believe is true. Because the parents attempt to eliminate the possibility for the child to doubt the religion, they also attempt to eliminate the possibility for the child to change the child's religious affiliation. The lack of possibility to change is the lack to choose. I lack the possibility to change whether or not it rains tomorrow therefore I lack the ability to choose as to whether or not it will rain tomorrow or not. Because the parents attempt to eliminate the choice, they attempt to eliminate the child's freedom in choosing his or religious beliefs, or even lack thereof.