Nicely put.

As an aspiring philosopher, I'll repeat again that the greatest thinkers of the past have always taken a step back or above, and viewed whatever they were contemplating in a different light. Although some were restricted by unjust assumptions, most did exactly what I appreciate the most in any wise person: they broke free from commonly held views and came up with something new, interesting and valuable. Most of their views are still actively being considered and discussed, and rightly so. Some of those people were scientist-philosophers, others took a more spiritual approach and yet others were entirely on the sidelines of this debate. More often than not this kind of 'choice' or of (apparently) picking sides reflected the nature of human thought during their time in some way. Mostly, their approach sought to break the arbitrary division of science and religion, instead of strengthen it. And I hope that people will eventually drop this random barrier so we can move on to a new, and more interesting, controversy that begs to be dealt with.

I would like to make an addition, both to this and Phoenix's last posts, considering the word 'religion', because it can be understood in various ways. When you read religion as 'organised' or 'traditional'  religion, it can be easily seen as something that works to limit the furtherment of human development and human understanding (and to my opinion, this view is correct in many cases). 'Religion' understood as a free (and individual) quest for spirituality and meaning does not carry that negative load and has, throughout history, undoubtedly freed more people than it enslaved. The latter definition should be read (although this is only an assumed for Phoenix's post ofcourse), not the former. Likewise, for 'science' I understand the process of furthering human understanding of and through the physical world, without referring to a system of bureaucratic rules, rethorical puzzles and the like.

People who are eager to pick sides generally forget that those negative aspects of any system are not the essence of it, but the result of flawed systematization and traditionalization that people commonly build around an essentially healthy concept. You can usually tell when this has happened, when the word 'politics' comes to mind (another one of those beautiful words that had its meaning thrown about a few times).

--
Edit: Shambler: If you look for something that you expect, you will usually find it - even if it isn't there.. :]