Sorry for the delay in my response . . .
First off, while economics is not a precise science, there is reason to it. To use the religion example. You can have a catholic and protestant debate theology all day long, but if neither one understands transubstantions vs consubstantiation or apistolic succession, you're not getting anywhere.
My real problem with the increasingly mainstream economics being tossed around is the gross oversimplification of it. You can have people fire off talking points like "lowering business taxes will let them hire more people" or even the infamous "high unemployment means there wont be much inflation" and then you have people choosing politicians around here half truths.
Granted, economists may not always agree on the best course of action, but they all still understand the relationships between cause and effects within the economy that leads to the rational decision.
For the sake of example, the above used example of business and taxes
Someone may say lowering business taxes gives them more revenue which leads to more hireing. When you lower taxes on business, a number of things can happen. Sure, they might hire more people . . . or maybe they'll invest into more capitol (which very well may lead to layoffs as machines replace people) . . . or they can pocket the revenue as profit and give CEO bonuses . . . or maybe they'll use it to buy another company (which may also lead to more layoffs).
The point is, politicians and people oversimplify things into talking points. Even if it is more of a religion and nobody within the field agrees, nobody I know would agree with such talking points as universal truth. Instead, those within the field disagree based on big, complex models and years of research.
Whenever someone says "let the economy self correct" and you ask them how it would do that (its possible, dont get me wrong) they just go "well . . it does . . . because . . . it does"