He's providing colorful detail, a small part of a larger story, and offering a bit of emotional support for the earlier commenter's attitude. (He's not proselytizing, or inviting anti-/pro-religion as a main topic, though there's always a risk someone else will take it that way.)
I would suggest that in such a thread, there should be more space for heartfelt honesty, rather than self-censorship-for-the-sake-of-decorum-and-equanimity. There's a time and place for all styles and topics of communication... and it can shift in just a single screen or replying under a different parent comment.
I don't hate Christians, and - being from the "Bible Belt" - many of my family and friends are Christians. But I still consider it (and most - if not all - other religions) to be a scourge on society.
Hate doesn't enter into it, unless you take a pretty damn expansive view of what "hate" means. I think Christianity is damaging to society, but I don't hate anybody.
that lead to emotional responses instead of intellectual discussions.
So? Not every discussion is some deep intellectual debate which needs to be held to rigorous academic standards. Sometimes people are just talking and sharing observations.
But statements like yours are equivalent to Christians walking around claiming that all gays are evil and will burn in hell.
Not really.
Those kinds of comments belong on /r/athiesm not here.
It's one thing to disagree with the choice of the person, the teachings of a particular branch, or even the idea of a God.
But statements like yours are equivalent to Christians walking around claiming that all gays are evil and will burn in hell.
They are stereotypical hate statements that lead to emotional responses instead of intellectual discussions.