All this talk of "I heard religious people say XYZ" is just ridiculous. Religion is not a universally acknowledged set of ideals and beliefs. It is interpreted and has manifested into multiple different belief systems, that at it's core, preaches ideals of love and compassion to a One and Just God and His fellow man.
On to the topic of Darwinism. Your brazen-toned belief in Darwin makes me assume that you're either a first year, or much like how you tried to present your roommate - you are ridiculously credulous. And that's not at all surprising, the way Darwin has been touted by modern Science is one of the prime examples of a deeply wrong and illogical dogma that goes against the grain of true scientific inquiry itself: that a suggested theory is better than no theory.
If you have read into Darwin's theory of evolution and natural selection, you will understand that there was no root evidence to suggest design by randomness. This was something he presupposed and set out to find in the natural world - but his "evidence" does little to prove Darwinian evolution as such.
Most if not all of Darwinian evolution is a collection of sub-theories that seeks to acclimatise a bigger theory, subverting the fact that it is in itself not a theory but a belief. Look into his work and you'll find befuddled work using an inverted respect for data and theory.
Darwin’s theory of evolution balances primarily on the idea of common descent and natural selection. Natural selection of course being the mechanism that drives linear evolution, running random genes that mutate over time to give new functions to organisms that bear them - effectively increasing chances of survival. His most prized proof however was for his theory of common descent. Check out the controversy of Ernst Haeckel's embryos...get back to me if you're skeptical.
Apologies, I didn't intend to throw a barrage of words at your way...I'll leave you to it to actually look into the flaws in Darwin's theory. Just as a note, the scientific community is actually deviating slightly from a Darwin-centric view to one that is not only conducive to current knowledge and behaviour of genes, but to logic itself. I know I haven't explained much but that's partly because I realise it will be better for you to lead your own personal enquiry rather than be blindly following a heavily-bearded 18 year old (I know at this moment in time your brain is probably forming all sorts of schemas about me: Is he a hipster? Is he religious? Is he a Muslim? Did he go to school? -- answers: No. Yes. Obviously. Can't you tell?)
SUGGESTED READING 1. Why Us by Dr James Le Fanu 2. The Edge of Evolution by Michael Behe (tbh everything by that man is relevant and incredibly insightful...just check him out) 3. https://www.discovery.org/a/10661
On a last note, I am not some anti-science religious skeptical wearing a tin-foiled hat. I actually believe that Science brings forth exclusive empirical faith that cannot be provided elsewhere. I am also a student looking to read Neuroscience at Uni. Furthermore and this should be made very clear: evolution does exist, it has to, there is evidence for evolution. But not in the way Darwin described. Not linear evolution. And that is not surprising considering his horrible science ethic!