For Good People to do Evil Things Requires Religion

Quotations related to Steven Weinberg: "'Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."[14]

The Anthropic Principle

In astrophysics and cosmology, the anthropic principle (from Greek anthropos, meaning "human") is the philosophical consideration that observations of the physical Universe must be compatible with the conscious life that observes it. In other words, because a species evolved that can contemplate the meaning of life, the structure of the Universe, isn't is logical that the Universe is designed to account for intelligent life? Did a self-reflecting, contemplative species evolve to the point of understanding the complex world it lives in and yet the Universe is taken by surprise this happened. The anthropic principle has given rise to some confusion and controversy, partly because the phrase has been applied to several distinct ideas. All versions of the principle have been accused of discouraging the search for a deeper physical understanding of the universe. The anthropic principle is often criticized for lacking falsifiability and therefore critics of the anthropic principle may point out that the anthropic principle is a non-scientific concept, even though the weak anthropic principle, "conditions that are observed in the universe must allow the observer to exist",[6] is "easy" to support in mathematics and philosophy, i.e. it is a tautology or truism. However, building a substantive argument based on a tautological foundation is problematic. Stronger variants of the anthropic principle are not tautologies and thus make claims considered controversial by some and that are contingent upon empirical verification. 

Today I was thinking

Is is possible for the universe to have created itself or for it to have always existed? Yes. The other primary explanation is that God created the universe and that God always existed. Nothing created God, God just always was. So, let's call God A. A created the universe but A was not created, A always existed. Now let's replace A with B. B created the universe but B was not created, B always existed. So, if it's possible, or at least believable by some, that A always existed, it should follow that it is possible that B always existed.(God always existed and needs no explanation for his creation or The Universe always existed and needs no explanation.) In other words, maybe the answer to the question: "How could something be created out of nothing?" is that "something" is the norm and "nothing" would be unusual. There has always been "something", whether it's God or some sort of Universe. If "Where did God came from?" doesn't require an explanation, then neither should "Where did the Universe come from?" Fair's fair.