I shouldn't need to point out the obvious, but "religious" describes a category of belief. It is therefore absurd to categorize anything as "religious" that is, by definition, not a belief.Members of the Atheistic Church of Darwin have a belief. It is that God does not exist. It is a religious belief because it is in reference to a Supreme Being, which is a religious notion. For some mysterious reason the ACD members are afflicted with a compulsion to convice everyone their religious beliefs are science, and are not religous at all.
tortoise
You are projecting. The question of god's existence is irrelevant to science. It is possible to study nature without ever invoking the god hypothesis. This does not imply any particular belief about god, it simply means that the god concept is unnecessary and useless here.
When some folks invoke a god during their uninformed intrusions into science they are usually doing so based on their belief not in God but in a book about a god. Their entire faith is in the book which they foolishly think is literally true. If they actually trusted their god they wouldn't be afraid to examine nature and rely on their own ability to understand. Instead they want to hold god to a contract precisely because they have so little real faith in this god. Throw away the book and have trust instead of blind faith in a book.