I think people may try to create a world without religion but, as you say, its been tried before and it wasnt any better.
The kinds of religion that practice the sorts of things you are talking about and propose that the religious laws, which properly should only apply to believers, and the secular laws, should be the same and should apply to everyone, believer and non-believer alike, are absolutely and totally bad religions. They are worldly and will always be threatened by extinction, I think properly so, but if you believe that a religion contains any sort of truth, for this life or the afterlife, you're going to want to be worried, or at least concerned, about its extinction and practice accordingly.
That doesnt mean compromising your own values but does realise that those values apply to yourself primarily and to other believers who share you creed, secondly (I will be honest, its a distant, distant second), and finally they do no apply to non-believers. If their actions are offensive to God then God will deal with them and he will not appoint anyone to do so in his stead. If they are, as is more likely, simply offensive to believers, well, and I'm totally serious about this, believers are going to have to discover a way to cope or what possible learning there could be for them in this. Seriously. Confucious said that if you met a righteous and a wicked man while out walking it was important to be aware that both had something to teach you, the former as an example of how you should wish to behave, the later as an example of how you should not wish to behave. He did not say the wicked should cease to exist and violence was the best remedy on that front.
A lot of the laws within religions which persist in causing conflict between believers and non-believers I really, really do believe are cultural as opposed to actually religious, that does not make it less of a problem or an issue but I think its an important distinction to make when you are sitting in judgement of religion per se.
Fundamentally, I think religious laws and strictures apply to believers, most of the time the believers fall far short of them, and some of the time the attempts to persecute others who are falling short in some way is a total and utter deflection from their own conduct. This in itself is reason enough to believe there should be a hard and fast and permanent separation between religion and state and that the law has not a religious basis and applies to all religious and non-religious equally, so if you are committing violence against a person you will be prosecuted for breaking the law, your motivation doesnt matter.
As a believer I think this is important, if people conform to a rule simply because it is "the law of the land", they have not demonstrated faith of any sort. They have simply kept mans laws to avoid the negative consequences. However, if they have kept mans laws, then have chosen also, as a matter of private conscience, to keep God's laws, without broadcasting to anyone that is what they are doing, and succeeded, then they are exceptional as opposed to merely good. That should be the goal of believers, for themselves, and by example, other believers and possibly eventually non-believers but instituting their own rules of conduct as "the law of the land", its then impossible to tell imposter from believer.