Hahah, better not. Religions, while in a sense perfectly fine with me as far as personal freedom of speech and personal religion goes, should perhaps not be accepted for a mere 'just because'-kind of reasoning.

In my opinion theists need something better to justify their worldview. Don't get me wrong, I've got no problems when people believe in something entirely different than me, but I do think one shouldn't be able to call it truth or make (ridiculous) supernatural claims when it's not based on (significant and/or relevant) evidence in such a sense that you can actually speak of truth (however relativistic that really is, even in science).

To be honest I think from a rational point of view a lot can actually be said for just banning world religion as a whole. The only problem is that it would have zero practical benefits doing so (at this point in time), being as popular as it is it would simply disappear underground. Not to mention the fact that it would violate the freedom of speech/opinion kind of stuff I think is even more important than explaining why I think organized religion should disappear.

Then again, do members of organized religions ever truly think for themselves? It's one thing to agree, a whole another to follow in blind unconditional faith. Especially when knowing that most people have their own 'personal version' of their beliefs anyway.