What I find rather puzzling about the entire debacle is that the article state that the judge prohibited the couple from exposing their child to "non-mainstream religious beliefs".

Would it have been acceptable if the couple had been Christian? Jewish? Muslim? Hindu? What exactly constitutes a "mainstream religious belief"? Do you have to register with an authority who keeps track of these things? Have a certain number of priests and religious establishments?

I went to a predominantly Jewish elementary school where it was the norm for most of the kids to go to Temple after school on certain days. I wasn't overly confused by the fact that they went and I didn't, or what the symbols on the dreyle meant. In fact, I found it to be an interesting learning experience even though I didn't share their religion.

I really don't see it's a problem in this case.