The SQLite maintainer was asked to implement a CoC and came up with this; what a hero. Because it's a verbatim copy of a passage from a historical text, proposals to remove the controvertial (religion-referencing) elements are being denied.
HN comments are predictably polarized.

If you're not in the mood to follow links, the first rule (of 72) highlights the theme of issue:

First of all, love the Lord God with your whole heart, your whole soul, and your whole strength.

For those not wired in, this is a clever juxtaposition to a 'movement' in the open source community which has seen social frameworks installed that in effect enable a certain subset of participants to enforce their paradoxical ethos of tolerating everyone except the outgroup.

MOST notable is Linux recent adoption, but should you believe this isolated, just look at how many mainstream projects have adopted the Contributor Covenant, which, amongst other things, seems to openly advocate for valuing 'diversity' (affirmative action) over and above archaic concepts like... meritocracy.

Still wondering why this is a big deal? These rules, once codified, are being weaponized almost immediately by the same group that championed their deployment, predominatly to cast out value-adding participants for thoughtcrimes, microtransgressions and other contemporary evil. Often, the evidence used when ousting contributors has originated completely outside of that community!

If you want to blacklist someone from a project because they were overtly and inexplicably hostile during a code review and you can point to logs indicating such, fine.
If, however, the internet detective in you unearths a peer's personal Twitter and you vehemently disagree their privately held political leanings, leading to you 'not feeling comfortable working with them anymore', you're the problem.

This virus has spread like wildfire not because CoC's are conducive to productivity (disagree only if you have data, thanks), but because the most pragmatic response a 2018 rational actor has to such 'social justice' efforts - by an extraordinarily militant vocal minority - is to sit quietly, not attract attention of the mob and thus maintain their livelyhood.

For those nodding their heads at that sentiment: can't blame your current course of action, though first they came...

Naturally, this phenomena has created an echo chamber in which the slightly unhinged activists confuse silence for assent.
A free-speech touting democracy works best when it gets to select the best from a marketplace of ideas. Deciding to discard that core enabler of the West's relative ascendency - free speech - and replace it with

for ($speech in $discourse) { 
if  $speech = !$hatespeech { return $speech }  # approved freespeech
else { $speech | out-null } # silenced hatespeech

- where $hatespeech is subjective, arbitrarily defined and insidiously expanding - means we're handicapping the evolution of civilization itself, by limiting the set of options from which we allow the populace to choose. Given nearly every enterprise is a technology enterprise nowadays, we should all be concerned about the cancer metastasizing it's way through this industry.