Should my irreligion remain an internal practice

I've thought long and hard about this. Especially since I took home Richard Dawkin's The God Delusion. I don't know whether it's okay for me to read other people's thoughts on Religion. I am very interested in their viewpoints, yet at the same time, I like that I've evolved my irreligion by my own thought. It came out of my personal reverence for the mind. And I am wondering if reading others' ideas--especially those of the persuasive kind--would taint my own beliefs.

I didn't finish reading The God Delusion. I would say I read about 20 pages of it? It was very interesting the points he makes. I just don't like the fact that it seemed like he was pushing his audience to believe whatever he believed. I just didn't like how he was trying to persuade his audience. That one article in Wired, about New Atheism got to me. The idea of atheist zealots? That is so... Religious! I honor agnosticism/atheism as an inner enlightenment, a realization that existentialists come to, after thinking about Reality and Life. And when I debate with my religious friends on the topic, my goal is to push them to see Reality. It's not that I'm throwing insults at them and proclaiming, "Son, there is no God." I really truly madly deeply cherish secularism as a wonderful product that follows an extensive thought process. That is why I kind of got a bit irked at Richard Dawkins. However, I still admire this man. Just watch him on The O'Reilly Factor. Smashed Bill O'Reilly up to pieces. And like all others of O'Reilly's liberal guests, made the host himself look like an ignorant, brainwashed fool!

So to read or not to read? I like to learn facts that corroborate my agnosticism. But I really don't like to read about stories of why somebody turned on Religion. I like the fact that they did spurn the Institution, but I don't like hearing it, for I fear it would contaminate my own thought process. What killed me was when I was talking to my friend. I gave him some examples from Dawkin's book, just to see what his God-fearing mind had to say about it. And he insulted me. He said, so that's where you get your ideas. Oh no way, hon'! You did not just say that! My beliefs come from my own head. I don't need anyone to tell me what happened, as Religion does! That totally sparked a fire in me. And put me in this unfortunate dichotomy. Yay, another point of internal contention. I think that sometimes I am cruel to myself in that I do not allow myself to do certain things. Like reading Dawkins for fear that his ideas might become mine. I don't want to adopt any silly Institution's ideas. I like that mine are mine own. I'm just talking existential ideas. I guess. Because I believe in Science. Because it's backed by Real Stuff. Not generations of manipulation and oral traditions. If you know what I mean?