The idea that Evolution is science while Creationism is religion might go down well with the general population, but every so often, you'll find a glimmer of honesty from those at the scholarly level. One example is Michael Ruse, who happens to be a philosopher of science, which is the ideal position for analysing whether or not Evolution is a religion. And he admits that it is.
In 2,000, Ruse was quoted in an article called "How Evolution became a religion: creationists correct?" in which he said "Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion—a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality. I am an ardent evolutionist and an ex-Christian, but I must admit that in this one complaint—and Mr Gish is but one of many to make it—the literalists are absolutely right. Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today."
Skipping over Ruse's claim to be an "ex-Christian", it is significant that he is an Evolutionist, and a prominent one at that. Specifically of note is his work in Arkansas, where he argued vehemently that Evolution was not a religion, convincing the court to rule against the balanced treatment of Evolution in schools. Were it not for Ruse arguing the opposite of what he later admitted, Evolution may not have as much of a foothold in American schools right now.
Ruse admits that Evolution is a religion, and always has been. He says "Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science." With statements like "Evolution is the backbone of biology", he's clearly not wrong. (See also this article). Evolutionists don't view Evolution as just another theory subject to the evidence; it is the very lens through which evidence is viewed! Evidence which seems highly contrary to Evolution is censored, ignored or questioned, but Evolution, in the best case scenario, is ever so slightly bent.
For example, Evolutionists used to admit that certain structures couldn't be produced by Evolution. J.B.S. Haldane, for example, claimed that Evolution couldn't produce "various mechanisms, such as the wheel and magnet, which would be useless till fairly perfect" (1). But now we see wheels in molecular motors, and magnetic navigation sensors in turtles and monarch butterflies.
Imagine if, in 1949, Christians found Biblical proof that God wouldn't ever put magnets in His animals. Forget the legged version of the Christian fish, Evolution would be symbolised by a turtle! "Christians, your Bible says that animals can never have magnets. Turtles navigate with magnets, your Bible is false, sit down and let us get on with scientific study." But because it's Evolution that made this claim, Evolution is unaffected. Evolution magically gained the ability to create mouse traps piece by piece. Evolution isn't just religion, nor is it a blind faith. It is a blindfolded religion. It is no longer something we can just say has no evidence for it, but that is still believed despite positive evidence against it.
References
1. Is Evolution a Myth? A Debate between D. Dewar and L.M. Davies vs. J.B.S. Haldane, Watts & Co. Ltd / Paternoster Press, London, 1949, p. 90.