And since it's a discussion forum I thought taking contrarian position was fine.
I stand corrected that religion is a special topic on HN as nearly everywhere else that can be freely promoted and praised but any critique is in bad taste.
I realize that when it's a topic you have strong pre-existing feelings and opinions about, the tendency to rush into the forum and vent them is very strong. It's not just you—we all have it. In order for HN to be the kind of forum we all want—something with the potential to remain interesting over time—we all need to find other ways to process those reactions in ourselves. Then the forum can be free for new exchanges, not just ranty repetition.
One thing to watch out for is whether you're responding to something specific and interesting in the article, or whether you're just taking its appearance as an opportunity to post generically what you think or feel about a large adjacent thing. As I've tried to explain many times here (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...), discussion tends to get much less interesting—and also angrier—as it gets more generic, especially on divisive topics.
But if you don't find that curious, but instead a generic incitement to religious flamewar it's fine by me.
I wonder if you also flagged the post itself, because for me it's a clearly a generic incitement to religious flamewar, because it postulates and praises influences of religion (and even a very specific one), which many people might find morally offensive.