There is no point in discussing them because we cannot directly affect them.

There absolutely is a point in discussing things you can't affect. Also, you can affect their power over your ability to reason if you are emotionally aware enough.

That is not an important question. Again, emotions are automatic responses.

It is. If part of the topic of this conversation is people that think with their emotions, it would tell you that emotions are absolutely related to this conversation. You brought those groups up as examples yourself.

The only route through which we can affect emotional response is philosophy.

Not true. You can learn to control your emotions to some extent without changing philosophy. Also, your philosophy is usually based on your emotions. Not the other way around. The belief that murder is bad comes from emotion. There is no argument to be made that a human life has value. We all agree its bad anyway though, because death causes negative emotions.

A philosophy that an individual's personal beliefs are of greater importance than objective reality exacerbates the issues you discuss

No one believes their personal beliefs to be more important than objective reality. They believe their personal beliefs are objective reality. They do this because of their emotions. That's why its important to discuss them.

You are knowingly choosing a dead-end road

It is a destination, not a dead end. The destination being the obvious conclusion that you have no reason to distrust all religious people.

I have nothing of value to add to your decision to follow that path, and I do not choose to walk it with you.

You had nothing of value to add to begin with. You literally just dislike religion for no reason.