The GP wasn't saying anything about racial slurs or straw man arguments and "Don't attack the messenger if you cannot refute the message" isn't straw man -- it's ad hominem.
In most religions the religion itself defines what behavior is allowed if you're an actual adherent and not just paying lip service to it and so it would very much so be important to many debates even without being the topic of the discussion.
Just look at any american discussion of homosexual relationships. You have religion, which is a choice, (or at least religion influenced values) affecting the opinions of people with regards to sexual orientation which is probably not a choice.
Though honestly I'm not sure religion is a choice given that there is some research that says that the religion condition is partially tied to genetics.
More on topic: This article seems a bit facile to me (maybe pointless would be a better word.)
It might as well say "the way to stop wars would be for everyone to be nice to each other."
People shit talk and harass each other constantly -- online and off. Sometimes in jest, sometimes in anger, sometimes in affection.
Shaming people who do any of that to females should also need to shame anyone who does that to anyone and I just don't see that happening.
In my opinion the line between offensive harassment and normal behavior is too blurry for it to happen. And I'm not sure if 'shame' is really a healthy tactic culturally.
The best we can do is to try to be the best people we can be and try to influence our kids to not be dicks and hope they become better people than we are.