Religion doesn't need evidence

[Angrboda]

Religion survives with all its corruption only because its postures itself as a guide on how to become less greedy and lustful and become a more compassionate person. Its the core. If you think that your living a noble/right/caring life, then what religious doctrine is behind it and especially scientific evidence dont matter at all. Because your living a "perfect life".

In conclusion, blind faith is supported in average sane religious person by noble motives, which legitimize the whole doctrine. And I agree with sane believers, compassion is really painful to accept and "sin" is what keeps me going.

I'm told by ChadWooters that theists struggle with the argument from the problem of evil. I rather suspect it's not an uncommon concern among the religious. I also rather suspect that your one dimensional characterization of the religious is also amiss. Doubt and crises of faith are common themes for the religious. This betrays the supposition that the religious don't concern themselves with the truth of their belief, but only its consequences. Even if they justify their belief on the grounds that it is making them a better person, the theists I've seen on this forum aren't unconcerned with whether or not that general claim is true. Many are just ignorant of the evidence for or against it. I think the drive for virtue is not substantially more important to the average theist than is the truth of their belief, and with that comes a concern for evidence.