[kirse]

Please don't take HN threads into generic religious arguments. They lead to religious flamewars

Or they don't, as demonstrated by the results of this thread. Further, where was your commentary on this large thread then? Is there some sort of distinction between "spiritual" and "religious" that HN commenters are not aware of?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29700445

Your selective enforcement of a non-existent rule in the guidelines regarding religious discussions makes me question if you just don't personally like the content above. Of course any conversation about "righteousness" will likely delve straight into morality, philosophy, religion, etc.

Maybe you ought to take the HN guidelines into account and "Assume good faith" on behalf of the parent commenter who was contributing directly in line with the topic of the posted article

>> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.

[dang]

> Or they don't, as demonstrated by the results of this thread

In the general case, they certainly do, and we have to moderate for the general case.