Steven Weinberg’s statement “with or without religion, good people can behave well and bed people can do evil” is interesting. Another interesting statement is the question “why” either for science or religion. However, Weinberg says that science (physics) has a better explanation than religion can ever be. It is interesting because both compete to explain this world.
I agree with the both statement of Weinberg. The goodness and badness can not be determined by merely religion. It means that people can be good or bad independently separated from religion. Richard Dawkins gives an example how people do in the name of God. Khaled Abu Fadl was shown in his book, Speaking in God’s Name, that many people (Muslims) oppress others in the name of God. As well, many people do good thing based on their belief in God.
Another point is how religion and science explain this world; creation, universe, God, etc. Although science has scientific explanation about this creation of universe, it cannot be proven as well as religion explanation which only requires belief without further explanation. If we realize the character of both science and religion, we can accept both; that it is impossible for religion to explain everything comprehensively and perfectly, because religion explanation was stagnant while the human reason and this world still go on. As well, science although it can explain scientifically has limitation in the rationalizing and observing the past phenomena when science (not knowledge) in the formative age.
Because of this, some believers cannot accept science explanation of this universe as well scientists reject religion explanation. The challenge, I think, is how science and religion explanation can accept each other. It is hard unless one of them revises its explanation or divides each space in the explaining this world.