I think when it gets down to it, what most people religious and non-religious alike, fail to realize is that god (and to a lesser extent, religion) is just the anthropomorphism of an ideal(s). Many fundies/not so fundies look at god/religion like they are absolutely literal and infallible. Many non-religious people likewise look at it the same way, that way when they read works such as the bible or contemplate the idea of god, they draw an equally flawed conclusion that its all a bunch of fairy tales. It is a flawed conclusion because they are using the model of infallibility/literalism as the backstop, taking off from a non-believer/hater point of view. Does that make any sense? Likewise it is flawed from a believer point of view (regarding literalism) as it shifts focus from the ideals which the god(s) or religion(s) represent, to the ideas (heaven, another life after the physical, etc etc) which the previously mentioned promote and operate under. Obviously here, I am speaking only of dogmatic religions.
I find it nothing short of laughable that there are people (not naming names) who lump all religious people and religions alike, in the same category as having no merit, and in fact worthy of insult and prejudice. I find this is abhorrently rampant in people who, when talking about said religion/god, only seem to be referring to christian based faiths, or at the most judeo-christian and islamic based faiths, and usually have in fact, NO intellectual basis or experience regarding said faiths outside fundies coming to their door, watching TV evangelists, or from other flawed individuals who act inappropriately based on their faith. Some use the excuse "I've read the Bible cover to cover", which is as unlikely as any other experience/knowledge they claim to have regarding other faiths, as it is unlikely they actually read it cover to cover for one, and for two because even if they have read it cover to cover, they don't have ANY insight to any of it, are likely incapable of deciphering messages and intent, and because they read it with the presumption that its just stories to begin with. This does not facilitate intellectual growth or understanding. Not all faiths are the same, not all religions are the same, not all of them are dogmatic, not all of them hail to an all powerful being(s), and most of all, not all people who claim a similar faith are necessarily similar in their beliefs, intellect or actions.
As for my personal opinion, I'll try to summarize;
1. The idea of god/god(s) becomes as literal/representative/non-existent as we recognize it to be, as individuals.
2. The idea of god is meant to empower us and assert our dominance in the world. It is meant to give insight into our existence, behaviours, origin etc etc, and does so, no less effectively than (and with the same intent as) other forms of philosophy and even science, though obviously with different mechanisms and implications.
3. Religion evolved out of a need for community and peace within a people. People gathered together to learn, interact, and to be part of a unit, which gives security and was especially important in early human history. Religion (like everything else in this god forsaken, hate filled sad excuse for a world) has long since been corrupted and manipulated by the elite in order to use the inherent properties of faith, trust and community, to control the masses, and maintain their position as 'the few' opposed to 'the many' by whatever means available (notice I didn't say 'necessary'). The problem is that people have been so conditioned, so dumbed down that they follow like lemmings over a cliff. This is not the time for the non-religious (I mean atheists for the most part) to revel in themselves, as they are manipulated into just as much ignorance as the lemmings are.
4. In regards to religion (and yes even atheism is a belief system like any other religion) and security, I find three general categories of a person's security. Bear in mind this is a gross generalization for the sake of brevity. The first category of security is mass mentality. Pretty easy to see how many theists and athiests alike fall under this category. Apathy(and all the way down to hatred) which generally I find many atheists and agnostics fall under. And ignorance, which theists, atheists and agnostics could potentially all fall under. This is not to say that everyone is ignorant or apathetic etc, but is meant to illustrate the futility of saying "I'm right, you are wrong", and to illustrate some ways that beliefs are used as a protection of ones boundaries, fears and likewise.
(once again that was not meant to label anyone, or to be infallible or to even say I'm right)
5. I generally find that atheists are much less open to metaphysical (meta-scientific) concepts as a whole, and do not limit their apathy/hatred/disbelief to strictly religious concepts. ( I am speaking of things like PK, energy work, the observer, quantum mechanics etc)
6. My most emphatic belief is that we are the creators of our reality. Period. Fairy tales or literal circumstance alike. (I don't mean we created the universe or anything.... Or did we?...) Religion is what we make of it, reality is what we make of it, society is what we make of it. And we are failing, epically.
7. My most apparent observation is that most people lean far to one side or far to another, not many people are indeed as open as they claim. To me, this is one of our largest failures as a species.
I know all that was rather off the original topic, but seemed to fit in to where the topic ended up