Dawkins then goes to the heart of his argument against religion presented in The God Delusion when he makes the claim that children should not be taught any religion at all but should be able to search for truth and make a decision when they are older. One of the main points that he makes is by defining faith as something that is believed to be true without any evidence. He is proposing that belief in God is a blind faith without regards to reason and evidence. I would fundamentally disagree with him on this definition and view of faith. I would argue that Dawkins seeks to define faith in such terms as a blind faith so that he can further support the dichotomy that he constantly presents with faith being on the side of religion and reason being on the side of science. This is the fundamental flaw of Dawkins argument and The God Delusion as a whole. I do think that people should search for the truth and have a faith in whatever they discover to be the truth, whether that be religion or the evolutionary process of natural selection, founded on reason, evidence, and facts. This however should not stop the teaching of religion to children until they are of age. From my personal experience growing up in a Christian home and school, I have seen myself and my friends seek to determine if what we have been taught our entire lives is actually true.