Oh my god! 😉 Poor me, making a witty non-serious comment and now having to defend myself in a theological discussion.
And this with a hangover from being punished by god for committing the sin of alcohol.

Anyway, here goes.

“mental disorder”
That isn’t necessarily a bold statement.
mental disorders exist in a wide range.
From fear of public speaking to smearing yourself with feces or chopping your mother to pieces because a voice told you she is the devil.

Somewhere in that spectrum lies religion.
While I came to that conclusion myself, I have learned I am not alone.
Sometimes labeled as a form of delusion which is a psychiatric condition.

When a majority of humans suffers from this condition it is logical it becomes acceptable and the others will conform, regardless of how crazy their beliefs are.

catholic sins were only defined later

You are making an artificial distinction. Catholicism can be, but shouldn’t be viewed as a thing with a start. It’s part of a continuum. Judaism>Christianity>Islam. Catholic sins weren’t defined later. Like all culture, they evolved from earlier sins. Even calling them Abrahamic Religions as we do is making the same error. The tradition didn’t just emerge, it evolved from predecessors and it has descendants.

I did mention other and previous religions.
Religions themselves make it a point to distinguish themselves from the others, they have specific things that are sins.
Regardless if there are some taken over from the religions they stem from they DO NOT EXIST as sins from their own religion as it hasn’t been invented yet.

It doesn’t care about what is “good” it only cares about what is most advantageous

Obviously, however we humans defined any trait that is most advntageous as good.
Humans needed the group to survive.
So it is good not to just kill someone or steal from them. Even if beneficial to the perpetrator.
Religion has appropriated many of these natural rules.
You are a good follower of religion X if you follow these rules, and breaking them is called a sin.
I see nothing that warrants calling these already existing concepts ‘evolution’.

I also would never place religion in between “golden rule”, “religion”, philosophy, ethics, morality”.

Religious and atheists are seperate cognitive sub-species who can choose to compete, fall into a predator-prey relationship (e.g. inquisition or communist religious purge) or we can coexist in our respective niches or, like all the best stuff in nature become symbiotic and male the system better for all.

Now this is a delusional.
History and present show religions are a huge danger and have awful consequences.
They are imperialist and invariably want to impose their world view.
Even if many of the followers don’t necessarily want this, there are religious zealots that infect others.
Even if there wasn’t any competition the religions try to impose their will on their subjects.

I couldn’t care less what people believe, unless they start bothering others and this is what they do.
Allowing religion is like having a little fire that can get out of control at any moment.
If only sane people would be in charge (as I mentioned it is not the case due to the religious epidemic) it would be forbidden.
Just the same as cigarettes and alcohol if they would be if invented now.
The danger and damages are obvious.
It’s like saying “I can do some cocaine and heroine, no problem. I’m a functioning member of society and no burden to society”
This can be the (individual’s) case, but we know the consequences and examples and therefore do not tolerate this behavior in society.
It would be tolerated if a large portion of society were coke and heroine users.