This is pretty fluffy, and I guess that's nice, but religion is actually harmful. And as much as religion and science may both satisfy a similar desire to belong to something greater, I think it is dangerously misleading to suggest that the two are equivalent - even in this limited context.

People believing that they are the "true" believers is where the problem comes in

This is incredibly divisive, you're right, but ... you might be due to rewatch the film if you think there aren't foundational problems long before we get to sectarianism.

We all believe in the same shit, just in different ways.

Do we?

Yes. You can't base it on the single species that actually made up religion

I mean recorded history is like, what? 10,000 years? Meanwhile modern humans are about 160,000 years old.

Octothorpe amazing.

And most importantly, the tools we use today are nigh infinitely more powerful than before. Very little has done more for the collective intelligence on the planet than computers.

I wouldn't rule out that we've become smarter since then. Iirc the average IQ did increase over time. We may not have changed genetically, but many explanations think we can foster higher IQs in our modern environment compared to a 100 years ago.

What other guy said, there could be biological predisposition to religion. Many experts believe that it is a natural anti-depressant.

It wouldn't rule out biological predisposition to religion.

I always figured that religion arose from the natural inclination of the human brain to look for order in chaos (and it's then exploited by those with power as a means of controlling people). Since there will always be circumstances outside our control, I would expect people to at the very least have superstitions, if not full-blown religion, no matter how much scientific knowledge they have. Until the fundamental nature of the human brain changes, at least.

Right.

What is law enforcement and when has it ever not been a threat to have someone come knock your teeth in if you piss off enough or the wrong person?

I think the more likely answer is indeed in the picture: baby's first philosophy. There is a lot of wisdom and behavior grooming in it, but I'd argue the reason is the other way around: It was to try and tell leaders and fathers (in patriarchy, anyways) how to not get their teeth kicked in and how to teach and deal with bad people.

It's an instruction set that has been combined with simple history telling, and then corrupted by thousands of years of dogma and constant revision from the selfish and rich.

It's silly to anchor your moral axioms in systems that require obedience to authority or belief without evidence, and that is the only true difference between philosophy and religion.