It is not a time to give evidence for one or another; it is also not a time to refute one or another. It is a time to understand the existence of them all and why it is Irrelevant to attempt to refute anyone’s religion. One’s mind is their own and their own only. It is unreasonable to say that a mind besides one’s own exists with evidence in the world. As Thomas D. Davis provides reason for, one cannot say that they have ever experienced the mind of another, the way one would experience emotions or sensations. The work of another can be experienced from what their mind has produced, but that is not to say that one has experienced their mind. Religion is defined as the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods. When a mind reasons with itself, if given a chance to do so by other minds not actively imposing a thought; minds would decide that either there is no such thing as a God, or that there is such a thing as a God or gods with analogous features and variations. If one decides that there is no God, then content arises from the understanding of life and either is weariless or uncaring of the afterlife or one is content with the thought that no such being exists. If one decides that there is a God or gods, which through the time of humanity, since such concepts were put forth, has been the most accepted view; then the question one has to ask themselves is how such a being would be. There is the creationism view and the view of chance. The view of chance states that such a thing, through the nature of its existence, would have no choice but to create all possible things including human beings. Those who hold the view of creationism must answer a few questions to figure out why they were created. Creationism is defined as the belief that the universe and .living organisms originate from specific acts of divine creation, as in a biblical account. Some argue that creationism is not by natural processes such as evolution, while other creationists argue that the process of evolution was a part of creation and not solely by chance. Both views however, must answer the question of why and to what extent they were created if the creator did in fact act to create. This moment in the process of thought is where, as in the beginning of thought, it is Irrelevant to refute the thought of another. To argue that there is an existential being is to argue that it has to do with human existence. If you are human and exist, you would think to yourself that you are thinking which would assure you that regardless of what physical extent you hold, you exist. Unable to experience the mind of another, we would truly never have absolute reason that their mind is there, but would accept that there is through some evidence. It would then follow that all of one’s belief on a non physical concept would not affect the mind of another. Then the question rises, why all the controversy. If one mind cannot affect another, where does the conflict come from? Human beings, in particular, have mind and body. When a mind decides to act, using physicality, in conflict, it is due to another minds behavior using their physical form. When one mind disputes another on the basis of Religion, or method of explaining their mind’s existence, does another feel the need to act? A few religious concepts that will go nameless, for certain purposes, differ slightly and have analogous basis and foundations of origin and purpose. What is it that causes one mind to want to act to sway another? Suppose that the foundation and basis of the concepts is the promotion of peace and the highest intrinsic good, happiness. In this case especially on Religion, the concept of Irrelevance again is put forth. If the basis of any concept ever possibly formulated by a mind is the most absurd but promotes the peace and happiness of all physical beings, then no other mind should find any impulse within itself to attempt to cease and disallow the thoughts behind that mind. If the only perception one mind can get from another is of the physical plain, then no mind should concern itself with the thought of another if no negatively physical acts follow.