It's fine if people desire to maintain belief so that they can "feel cared for." I don't agree that it's a "need", since there is ample evidence that human beings can live quite successful, happy, and fulfilled lives without supernatural beliefs. To directly answer the question posed in the headline, the clear answer is "No." No one "needs" a church. They may desire one, or feel better in a church community. My point is that non-belief doesn't mean giving up love, support, care, community, etc. But if people wish to continue believing, fine.(The same expectations apply, however, that people shouldn't use their supernatural beliefs as basis for public policy.)<quoted text>
As a fellow atheist, I agree with you in part. But the reason non-fundamentalist religions continue is that some people cannot live an existential life. They need to believe that someone out there cares for them. If we atheists want to religion to wither away as Marx and Engels thought nation states should wither away, we would need to make sure that people do feel cared for.
And it certainly doesn't mean, as an earlier poster claimed, that believers will be necessarily "preached at by the members of the GLBTQ community who have come to the conclusion that religion and/or spirituality must be discarded if one is to be accepted in the GLBTQ culture." Lots of GLBTQ people are strong believers, and I'm not aware of the move to force them to discard belief in order to be accepted in the "culture", whatever the hell that is.
Although the numbers of non-believers are growing, we are in a clear minority. We don't get to dictate the eligibility rules for the "GLBTQ culture."