In order to consider the question we must first establish the definition of 'reason'. The OED defines it thus: 'think, understand, and form judgements logically'. Since books containing demonstrably false information form the foundation of the Abrahamic faiths, it is illogical to believe they are flawless. Therefore those who claim allegiance to any of these faiths are sanctioning a false philosophy - and that is just as irrational as claiming 'God knows best' when there is no evidence whatsoever for the existence of any God.
As has been said, faith is a personal choice - but if it affects others then the assertion that it is 'personal' is no longer valid. Whether the faithful realise it or not, their belief does affect others - not least their children. Added to that, the philosophy they embrace has far wider reaching implications to people in the rest of the world. Although the believer may tell himself that he rejects the negative aspects of his religion, it is an unjustifiable claim because simply by labelling himself as an adherent to one particular belief system, he is, by default, condoning the doctrine and the actions of that system.
Looking at the books, it would be far more rational to believe that the Book of Mormon takes precedence over the bible and the koran - which both contain undeniable inaccuracies - as the epitome of truth. At least there we have witnesses who lived within fairly recent history and who, when adding their names to a written testimony, swore that they had seen the mysterious plates from which the Book of Mormon is reputed to have been translated - but that testimony, is of course, unacceptable to the members of other Christian denominations, and to Jews and Muslims alike.