I guess I don't understand your point. Nor do I understand the distinction you're trying to make between "religion" and "view".<quoted text>
Read it again please.
I said that only one view can be right. I didn't say religion.
Meaning that atheists that believe there is nothing after death could be right. Either way, there will be only one scenario that happens after we die. It doesn't matter if we, as a race, had 6 billion ideas of what will happen after death, only one will be right.
Do you understand what I meant?
You are correct for the most part. Most everyone feels that their stance is correct. There aren't many that are open in saying, oh well I might be wrong. And there is a percentage that treat religion like insurance. In other words, Well I don't believe anything happens when we die, but just in case, I'm going to go to church. I see this as wasted time. You either act on what you believe, or don't believe it. Don't be undecided.
While I agree with you that there is only one reality, and there can be only one thing that happens after we die, I disagree with the irrelevance you've placed on the beliefs that we have while alive. You make decisions based on your beliefs, or at least are affected by your beliefs (the fact that we're having this conversation is proof). Some of those decisions could affect other people's lives (e.g., who you vote for, passing a bill to establish a state religion,...etc.). It's not trivial, nor irrelevant.
And it's more than just atheism vs theism. It, to me, is the silliness of Pascal's Wager. If you agree with Pascal and hold the position that it is better to believe than not, how are you to choose the correct god (let alone religion/denomination)? There is no more evidence for any brand of faith than the other.