Faith is belief without evidence.
That is believing something despite not having any proof. Religious faith is only one type of faith, it can be applied to things such as science, morals, philosophy and many more things.
Children are being taught that faith is a GOOD thing. Not only a good thing but the HIGHEST virtue.
Anyone who cannot see a problem here is clearly insane.
This is a fairly common statement. The "believing something despite not having any proof" is generally the feel that people have with what faith means. I have always understood faith to mean trust. When people are told to have faith in Jesus/God/your friend they are to trust in him. Trusting someone or something shouldn't be done without any proof, that would be "clearly insane". You wouldn't trust (or have faith in) a random guy off the street to baby sit your children, you would trust (or have faith in) someone you know to be reliable and have a history with. You might not trust a 19 year old car with a broken radiator to get you from Sydney to Canberra and back again on a hot summer day. Based off the evidence and using your reason you might consider another travelling option.
I just don't understand why people who make the above quote make the assumption that faith is based off no evidence. I would say "science, morals, philosophy and many more things" do come from reason and evidence with trust in both. Granted that they are open to rejection due to faulty assumptions or new evidence, but the sciences, people's behaviour and philosophy are at leased based off something.
I'm not saying that you don't need faith to follow Jesus, because even if someone was raised form the dead, some people still would not be convinced. But I just don't see how people can discredit historical writings as an absence of evidence.