In some circles there is great conflict about “creation versus evolution”. The debate is a Vietnam. (While some see the Vietnam War as a civil war between communists and non-communist factions, it may also be seen as a Cold War conflict between the U.S. and the Soviet Union.)
As Wikipedia points out, “other fields of science, such as cosmology and earth science, also conflict with literal interpretations of many religious texts”, yet, “evolutionary biology has borne the brunt of these debates”. Considering evolution is obviously harder to accept than its necessary preconditions, I often think it makes more sense to shift the discussion to the Age of the Earth instead.
Consider this quote from Augustine (apparently the originator of the phrase “Love the sinner and hate the sin”), written around the 5th century CE:
Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, . . . and this knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking non-sense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn.
A more thorough quoting can be found on Wikipedia, the version I used, I found in one of the responses in the Index to Creationist Claims on The TalkOrigins Archive.
Of course, Augustine was arguably a Young Earth creationist, but you can’t blame him, living in the 4th/5th century. His warning from 1600 years ago applies as much to our knowledge as it did to theirs, and our knowledge includes “the world is 4.5 billion years old”. It also applies to physics, chemistry, geology, astronomy, cosmology, molecular biology, genomics, linguistics, anthropology and archaeology, all fields that have some conflict with Young Earth creationist perspectives.
Some people do not realize there is such conflict, due to not being educated on such matters, and can therefore not be blamed for believing what they do. (Some may be blameable for some related things though: shunning education or critical thinking, or arguing about things they really know nothing about.) In some cases, then, it should be useful to educate people on such matters. I think it is also important to point out that there really shouldn’t be a conflict between their Christianity and their acceptance of science. (Of course, the anti-theist might disagree. The anti-theist might prefer it if all religious people were literalists, as literalistic religions really are such easy targets. )
I am also certain that accepting evolution does not decrease your chances of going to heaven.
A note about my context: What I see most often in my town and among friends that reject evolution, is Biblical literalism and Young Earth creationism. As such, that is what I will be discussing most often. Similarly, with respect to other religions, I mostly write as a “Christian”, with an audience of Christians in mind. I do also know people that do accept that the earth is old, but still doubt or reject evolution – they seem to be a minority however. We do not have a strong intelligent design movement, I suspect that is mostly limited to USA? (And yes, I placed “Christian” in inverted commas. There has been, for close to two millennia, some disagreement about what that label exactly means. Some of the more than 30 churches on Stellenbosch claim there really are only a small handful of these that are “real churches”.)