I don't think you read me right. There's nothing wrong with debating the pros and cons of a language (or whatever else), but there's a difference between discussing and preaching. I'm always open to a nice chat, but I've got little patience for preachers. That's all I'm saying.
It's hard to understand your point if you change it. Of course no one likes preachers or endless discussions or anything else that's clearly bad: that doesn't have a whole lot to do with programming languages though. If that's all you're saying, it doesn't amount to much.
What you actually wrote (and what this article partially argues) is that the only thing that mattered was that it worked, which is a statement people can disagree over. Working isn't a binary switch that flips when you launch, any discussion of the value of something as complex as a piece of software has a lot of different dimensions. After all, bubble sort "works" too, but you'd be a pretty terrible computer scientist if that was as far as you investigated the issue.
Yeah, I think we actually agree. :) I have known preachers, and you're right that there is a big difference between them and engineers that just want to find the best tool for the job.
