Religion is or should be a choice.
A choice is being asked for which is a problem when many scientists do not believe in free will. And if they do it is not part of their science. Science can do nothing to show if we really have free will. It is outside its expertise. Thus there is no verification that we have free will or that God could have it either. If we do not have it then it is evil that we suffer and do wrong but not our responsibility. And if God does not have it he is not worth worrying about. God cannot be God for science for God is not a theory so much as that alone which matters. The choice for religion then is anti-science.
The fact that free will is only assumed by people means that you have every right to tell God on judgement day, "I will answer to you for nothing for I never had reasonable evidence that I was really responsible for what I did." God is no good then. He has no right to hold anybody to account even if they are.
Thus science cannot verify free will or assume it so it is anti-God even if it does not realise it is.
If religion worries that people are compelled to choose between religion and science then it should not worry if choice is an illusion!

Free will is foundational to religion.  Christianity preaches against sin which it calls the violation of free will.  Thus the core of science and the core of religion are in combat. 

To support religion is to work against science.

No Copyright