I think this kind of low-effort, “religion bad haha” take is not really worthy of HN.

I’d rather read a meaningful comment about the value of an institution trying to sway people’s beliefs versus a machine, just as sharp a critique even, but at least with something thoughtful to contribute.

▲

paxys 7 hours ago | parent [-]

We aren't talking about religion as a whole but specifically the catholic church. Look up their track record in the topics I just mentioned. And flippant criticism of a religious authority is perfectly acceptable here just as it would be for a private company or the government or anyone else.

	▲	ThrowawayR2 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I'm pretty sure it's not. There's over half a dozen entries in the HN guidelines that ask for thoughtful and insightful posts and not "flippant criticism": "Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes. Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. Don't be curmudgeonly. Thoughtful criticism is fine, but please don't be rigidly or generically negative. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community. Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith. Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents. Omit internet tropes. Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something. Please don't pick the most provocative thing in an article or post to complain about in the thread. Find something interesting to respond to instead."