Are religions creative forces that alter the societies in which they exist?

The alternate hypothesis would be that religions are non-creative, and any shared traits between a particular religion and the society it in habits are a result of either parallel independent evolution or from the society altering the religion. The poll also allows for the possibility that religions may be creative forces capable of altering socities under exceptional circumstances, but not general circumstances.

and that expressions do not fundamentally alter the state of the expressor. I was wondering if anyone held that belief.

People have always and will always think (hopefully, anyway). Thinking brings new ideas. New ideas always have an altering effect on the society in which they are thought. Therefore, societies have always and will always be altered.

Unless you believe that human beings are capable of perfect stagnation and a complete cessation of creative thought or force and absolute perfect congruency in belief, action, and vision.

Which I think is a pretty silly belief.

Not enough data to answer your question, and not enough options in the poll, I think.

And I am definitely Atheist, but there is no doubt that Religion has a beneficial effect on certain populations, in certain conditions ...

In ancient times, say during the Sumerian era; The city-state was the primary political organization, based primarily on tribe and clan associations ...

If a large army approached a region and threatened a specific city, they would be exposed to invasion and possible annihilation ... To reduce that danger, they could strike agreements with other city-states/tribes-clans, and form mutual defense pacts, but personal and tribal animosities might forestall any such cooperation .... and often did ...

If, instead, separate tribes possessed a similar set of religious customs and beliefs, and shared a theological worldview; such a shared experience can override petty personal disagreements that could otherwise stifle a general consensus between tribes and clans ...

In short: Religion can help organize disparate societies into larger defense forces that can better survive attacks by conquering armies or other such threats ....

in any positive way, rather, they tend to curtail freedom for many, enliven the upper classes, and foster division.

People who were reared in monotheistic societies (such as myself) seem to use black/white, good/evil, and other dualities, more than people who were not reared in monotheistic societies. This is just my armchair uneducated sociological observation.

Very often they represent a strong force for maintaining the status quo. Sometimes they're not though, and probably more frequently than under exceptional circumstances.

Egypt under Islam is a different society than it was under the Pharoahs

Rome under the Roman gods and Rome under Christianity

Russia under its pagan gods and Russia under Eastern Orthodoxy

Japan under Shinto and Japan with an overlay of Buddhism

Spain under Islamic rule and Spain under Catholic rule

A society that gives up Religion A for Religion B will change not only its rituals, holidays, philosophy of life, and standards of behavior, pretty big items in themselves. It will also change its literature, music, art, maybe food, parts of its language, and types of education.

Christian missionaries have done an amazing job in many parts of the world with screwing up the cultures that were already there.