Do you feel the need to eradicate religion? If so , why?
Forcing anything is the wrong way to go. As someone else said, religion (or many of them) will very likely die its own death in time.
Are religious people profitable to society or not?
Not any more or less than non-religious people. Except perhaps those employed by religious institutions which don't pay taxes. There's possibly a bit of a loss that is had there to society as a whole - I'm thinking of things like school or police funding dollars. Though if there were no churches, money wouldn't be going to them anyway. People would likely just be buying more things - though that also leads to tax income. Hard to weigh that against the good done by church outreach programs however...
How are religious people to be judged?
Judged for what? Anything and everything? Then I'd say like anyone else. Or did you mean specifically for the beliefs/opinions they hold? If the latter, I would say that in places that judgment must remain secular, they be judged using the secular ideals upheld in those arenas. On a person-to-person basis, I suppose judgment can be whatever one is willing to try and support. Isn't that the way things go now anyway? Aren't religious people often very judgmental themselves? Sorry... not really sure where this question was going.
Is it necessary in todays society to reject religious people?
Reject them? Not at all. Question (or even challenge) them? Why not?
We seem to be living in an unique time in history where religious people are constantly under fire moreso then at any time in previous history.
Contemporary access to information and differing views/opinions does seem to be quickly eroding religion's hold. Can anyone make the judgment call that this is inherently a "bad" thing?
Is it right to force people to change their religious beliefs and convictions?
As stated before, forcing anything is the absolute wrong way to go. However, how "wrong" is it to try to get someone to finally think over something they have heretofore simply accepted on the word of others and preached mostly because they were being obstinate? How many things can we point to that would have been stifled if the proponents of those things simply "gave up" in the face of complaints and opposition of religious parties who were most outspoken against them? For example, we'd still be teaching that the Earth is flat. We'd still be teaching that the Earth was the center of the universe. Slavery might still be a supported activity.
Point being... if someone is being dumb and trying to get the world to remain adherent to completely out-dated, contemporarily immoral, or simply outlandish/implausible ideas... then yes, there
WILL be push back. That some of those people feel that such is a personal attack is not truly a "real" problem.