Would no religion really benefit anyone?

Sure there are religious wackos, terrorists, god driven mass murderers, and delusional religious freaks.  I'm not talking about those.  I'm talking about the everyday citizen of any given country who happens to believe in their god.  They have some faith, some hope that believing in this god will benefit them later, regardless of whether or not this is a valid belief.  Like believing that "if you're good this year, Santa will bring you more presents" or "if you tip the waitress you'll have good karma brought to you" or "if you work really hard for the company, you'll have an excellent retirement package  and won't get laid off."  In other words, hope is the driving factor behind many of our actions.  To eliminate religion would eliminate people's day to day hope. 

Even if their beleifs are "scienticifally incorrect," think of all the people in the US that cling to God to get through their own lives.  Look at black churches that have joyous singing and dancing.  The Bible typically refers to its followers as sheep, and that's what they are.  But isn't it better than being convinced that there is no god?  To actually KNOW or have it forced upon them that no god can possibly exist?  You'd have people with no hope, purpose, or reason to differentiate right from wrong.  Sure, some people can act morally on their own, but others can't.  They need a reason to not steal or kill or cheat on their wives, and with no moral or spiritual "penalty," what do people have to lose?  Do you really want a completely atheist society?  Religion makes an excellent behavior control system, just like government laws, accepted behaviors, popular beliefs and opinions, TV advertisements, and political statements from our current political leader.  The validity of these systems may be wrong in some instances, but at least they offer some kind of order.   

This is a step-by-step deconstruction of the first two posts' arguments.

Even if their beleifs are "scienticifally incorrect," think of all the people in the US that cling to God to get through their own lives.
>>Is false hope a good reason to live? Sounds like 'ignorance is bliss' to me. When you use religion as a reason for anything, whether it be being a good person or simply living, you are corrupting the motivation behind your actions. After all, the 9/11 terrorists didn’t see themselves as evil in the eyes of their religion; but, if they had used rational and ethical thought, thousands would not have died. From a relative moral point, they were good people; however, anyone with the least sense of ethics can condemn their actions.<< 
Look at black churches that have joyous singing and dancing.  The Bible typically refers to its followers as sheep, and that's what they are.  But isn't it better than being convinced that there is no god?
>>Depends. Would you like to live with your parents for your entire life? Maybe. But most wouldn't. Having a god is like having a parent you can listen to only when you WANT to. Realizing there is no god is a very liberating force; just like a man out of college, you find a world that is, as moot says of 4chan, of your own making. You suffer the consequences of your failures, but can fully celebrate your successes without attributing them to an extraplanar being.<<
To actually KNOW or have it forced upon them that no god can possibly exist?  You'd have people with no hope, purpose, or reason to differentiate right from wrong.  Sure, some people can act morally on their own, but others can't.  They need a reason to not steal or kill or cheat on their wives, and with no moral or spiritual "penalty," what do people have to lose?
>>Well, this is the same thing from before. Do people really need to be tricked into obeying ethics? No. Absolutely not. Just because God doesn’t say “Don’t run red lights,” would you do it? Religion can and has been in the past replaced with a sense of ethics and societal trust.<<
“Do you really want a completely atheist society?  Religion makes an excellent behavior control system, just like government laws, accepted behaviors, popular beliefs and opinions, TV advertisements, and political statements from our current political leader.  The validity of these systems may be wrong in some instances, but at least they offer some kind of order.”
>>This is a particularly amusing angle from, I can only assume, a theist. The idea that religion is useful as a controlling force has existed since Roman times, and we all know how successful Rome’s civil rights record was. When religion is used to control the people, it removes their humanity and reduces them to essentially slaves. And, if you suppose ignorance is a decent tradeoff for stability, let me recommend a book to you: 1984 by George Orwell.
As far as completely atheistic societies go, there haven’t been many. People have a hard time leaving religion behind voluntarily, and state-enforced atheism is impotent. Although many associate authoritarian communism with state atheism, the connection is insoluble. Marx saw religion as the support of the aristocracy/bourgeoisie, and that its removal would be one of the major forces of liberation. It never fails to amaze me, though, how often people will gladly wear the yoke and pull for the priest, content in the labor of Sisyphus.<<

“Also, religion can add emotional and psychological support to those having a hard time in life.  Without that, some may be able to find a sense of hope on their own.”
>>I’m going to assume you meant ‘without that, some may not be able’, because that’s more germane to your argument. While it is true that religion may help people recover from things such as drug abuse, alcoholism, family problems, etc., there are plenty of alternative, secular solutions to such problems. Why have a priest vaguely familiar with you and your problem giving you advice, as opposed to a psychiatrist or a counselor trained and experienced with people? Besides, religion can often do more harm than good to its partakers (Waco, TX, the numerous ‘faith healing’ attempts no one hears about because they failed), as well as have no effect at all (i.e. the baptist church-going gang members at my school)<<

“Religion is also used in taking up people's free time.  People need to dedicate themselves to something, whether its sports or school or a career or sitting and watching TV for the rest of their lives.  With no religion, you've just given millions of people the opportunity to find something else to do, no matter how pointless.”
>>This is really amusing to read; it’s not really a valid point, and seems to hurt your argument. So… wait, spending your time in useless prayer is somehow better than enjoying the company of family and friends, working at a job, helping others, making something of your life? That makes a lot of sense.<<

“Someone once said that humans are infinitely bored.  Yet some people have nothing better to do than dedicate themselves to religion.  Once they have nothing to do, with no hope of an afterlife to cling to, what then?  Would they just sit and rot with no purpose?”
>>Some indeed may; that ideology is called nihilism. But others, such as existentialists, see the one life they have as valuable, and strive to enjoy it to the fullest extent possible. Besides, if you have an infinite, perfect afterlife to anticipate, what’s the purpose of staying on Earth? You should just bite the bullet now. Btw, the idea of suicide as a sin appears nowhere in the Bible; it comes from St. Augustine’s City of God.<<