It's not a generic tangent - it's a direct reference to Pascal's wager [1]. Unfortunately the parent doesn't make their argument any more generic that Pascal's wager itself.
Ah I see. But then you should have said "Sounds just like Pascal's Wager". That's a great point and not generic at all.
The trouble with what you did post is that it landed with readers as generic religious flamewar whether you meant it that way or not. I realize it's not always possible to predict how things will land, but the burden is on the commenter to disambiguate intent. Here are some previous explanations on this theme if interested:
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_wager