Is there really any problem with an infinate regresion of universes?

[Brian37]

Religionists like to claim that there can't be infinite regresses. Therefore the universe must have been starting by the favourite deity because an infinite regress would mean we cannot get to 'now'. However, I'm struggling to find any problems with an infinite regress when it comes to the universe. Basically, I don't see why there can't be an infinite number of (past) universes. There are a few models relating to the death of the universe. For example, one suggests that black holes will force the universe to begin to contract again and then the universe will be reborn.

So, I was wondering:

1. Do you think having an infinite regress actually a problem for the universe we are in?

2. Is an infinite regress really as big of an issue as religionists like to claim it is?

Edit: Rodger Penrose has talked about a 'cyclical universe' [url=Edit: Rodger Penrose has talked about a 'cyclical universe' here (i.e. an infinite cycle of universes dying and being born) here (i.e. an infinite cycle of universes dying and being born).

The way science looks at infinite and finite is not the same as how religion views it. 

I see "all this" as merely a giant weather pattern. No different than knowing less complex factors like weather conditions can build up to lead to a hurricane which is more complex, eventually that hurricane runs out of energy and breaks up.

It is simply a matter of going from one state to another no different than seasons changing.Laurence Krauss has no problem with a universe coming from nothing and I agree. "Nothing" the way science treats the word is not the same as the way laypeople think of it.