Having been brought up in a context where traditions were strong I came to an understanding that scientific methodology was based on answering the "What, When, How, (and to a lesser extent, the Who) questions; it was also good at answering the more trivial aspects of the Why question.

Religion, according to many, started off with a bent that could be described as scientific in the sense that it tried to explain the Why in terms that might have been rather simplistic (to some) but delved into the depths of what it was that made us human; for me, its best aspects still attempt to address the existential aspects of "Why".

To me, any deity (monotheistic or not, Mosaic/Abrahamic or not) shows considerable evidence consistent with it being a human creation.

Does this make me an "And"?

Cheers, Rowan