This is a hard one. The report I heard on CBC Radio while driving home from work today indicated the custodial parents--mother and step-father to the 7-year old, mother and father to the 2-year old--are neo-Nazi white supremacists, but it wasn't clear whether both parents are laying this on the kids or just one of them. Either way, that's a pretty ugly ideology to be teaching children, but it's far from clear to me where to draw this line. At what point does teaching your children what you believe become abuse? Richard Dawkins has argued that teaching children your religious beliefs is abusive, but while I agree with Dawkins on many things I can't buy that one except in the extreme, e.g. your religious beliefs legitimize killing anyone who disagrees with them. This is what I think of as the "ignorant idiot" factor, based on cases like Ernst Zundel's and David Ahenakew's: you can believe whatever you want, and in private express whatever views you want, but the state will stop you from being an ignorant idiot in public.
But who gets to define what that means? As an atheist I disagree strongly with all religiously based opinions, for instance, but I'm not arrogant enough to attempt it and I'm not sure I want the state to attempt it on my behalf.