The Origin of Religion

I've got a project to do for school, and I thought I'd get anon's input. The topic I've chosen is The Origin of Religion. Now, don't get the wrong idea, this doesn't mean I think all religion came from one source, I just haven't been able to come up with a better title. Basically, I'm going at this with a purely scientific standpoint, looking at the reasons religions are formed, how they evolve, and why they've lasted so long. I'll also include some of the first instances of religion and why were how they were.

So far, I have the most functions of religion as:
To help give moral support.
To keep a stable social structure.
To "motivate" people.

These are, of course, a bit simplistic, but I think I've come close. If anyone has objections, changes, or anything else regarding this project, I'd be very much obliged if you'd submit them in a civil manner.

>>7 makes a suggestion that is perfectly reasonable given the topic being discussed.

Religion seeks explanation for what science cannot explain, primarily consciousness.  Why is the universe anything more than a mindless void?  Do you believe others are capable of thought process?  You have NO FUCKING EVIDENCE for that (do I really need to say who I'm talking to here?).  Yet most everyone believes it.  I fail to see a significant difference between that & what you call religion.

Religious theories have been disproved & amended over & over again?  Strange, so have scientific theories.  It's not like there has ever been completely unanimous opinion towards any theory.

Some of you seem to forget that you don't have to belive everything some book says to be religious, & not every religious person does think that way.  Science has yet to disprove god, and does not seem to be approaching that point anytime soon.  Thus, it IS possible in this era to believe in a god & still bow to what science teaches.

Let's say person A believes a god definitely does exist, but cannot elaborate further.  Person B believes a god definitely does not exist.  Neither one is looking at this as scientifically as an agnostic.  In fact, in this situation, person A seems more reasonable, because his theory could attribute it's inspiration to that god.  Person B just does not believe.

Atheism is a perfectly legitimate belief, but people who proclaim atheism as the only thing an intelligent person could possibly believe are assholes who are looking for a reason to think of themselves as being above the masses.

I am not remotely religious but I can respect the belief of any person who does not proclaim superiority over all who do not share in it.

tl;dr RedCream is an arrogant piece of shit who likes to imagine that he is the only one to attend science courses & thus the only one that can present legitimate arguments about anything ever