Uh-huh. I know what you mean...but the world is full of people who belong to no organized religion whatsoever, who are actively hostile TO organized religion on principle, and who yet will swallow anything that their M.D., their government, various people in the the science community, their news reporters, and various other supposed civil "authorities" tell them...and without having personally seen one shred of real evidence firsthand. They take it on external authority, NOT on observation or understanding of the evidence.

They have blind faith in the word of certain others, and they look no farther than that. That's exactly the same problem many people in organized religions have, and it indicates an equal level of faith and naivete in either case. You know what it really is? It's conformity. It's the behaviour of sheep. It is the naive trust that Big Brother (whether he is a priest, a doctor, a scientist, a military commander, or a politician) knows best, and if they simply follow what he tells them they will be safe and secure.

Religion is only one of a great many commonly established ways of leading the faith-based down the garden path to what they know not.

I agree that we do not need to have faith in things about which there is no evidence. And we do not need to categorically believe so-called "evidence" which has emanated solely from statements by other people who have told us that it IS evidence. They may be incorrect. They may be biased. They may be dispensing propaganda. They may be looking to orchestrate a war or land a lucrative contract for their research facility. They may simply be mistaken in their interpretation of the evidence they have gathered.

Neither do we need to categorically disbelieve things which we have no evidence against....but plenty of religious and non-religious and anti-religious people do that here loudly and frequently. They categorically deny many possibilities that they have no evidence against. Why? Because it suits their kneejerk prejudices, that's why. They want things to be a certain way, therefore they choose to disbelieve all kinds of stuff that they have no evidence against (but just don't like), and they believe all kinds of stuff that they have no evidence for (but just like).

That is a stupid attitude, in either case. It doesn't involve thought, it involves an instantaneous reaction based on one's past prejudices, not on evidence.