Answer:
The correct answer is option (B) Parent-child transmission of religiousness is not inevitable.
Step-by-step explanation:
Considering that humans are born without knowledge and that they learn gradually considering external conditions and mostly social environment, then humans learn based on the social experience in which they were taught, even if they accept its fundaments and assertions or if they reject them.
This social experience considers the transmission of two main things that makes the core of a given culture: ideas and actions, mostly about human beings, nature and the fundament of all things, which include mainly a consideration of morals and of a believe or not in a god, which it has a clear concern of ethics, science and religion (atheist or not).
Normally, individuals as they are young, learn by observation and repetition, but as they get older and acquire consciousness and critical thinking that help them internalized their given culture and accept it or not internalized it and therefore reject it.
Now, as family is the first social environment in which cultural experience is given to new individuals of the world, then this is not something that can be avoided. Parents teach in a given culture with specific ideas and actions that are taken as good (even if it is the non-belief of God), but this is not something that always and in all the cases is accepted by their kids in adulthood, as we see that from atheists parents can come really religious adult children, and vice versa.
So, as the transmission of religiousness (and of all cultural ideas and actions) could be rejected or accepted by the individuals but there is no determined acceptance of kids of they given culture, so the parent-child transmission of religiousness is not inevitable and therefore family religiousness is NOT the most powerful predictor fo adulthood religiousness. In any case, there could be found hints that help understand the path of the religiousness of each one by their story.