Shrugs, I'm not a member of that church. I didn't mean it was about me in particular.
It just struck me as kind of missing what they say they are about. And I agree the article, in a sort of vaccuum as it were, is kind of working over hard to be provocative. (Their choice of images is a little funny maybe, too.)
Just... "trolling" isn't a word I use about daily life very much. I thought it was a word about internet culture, with a sort of connotation of 'nothing really matters anyway since we're just on the internet - but btw, I think you have no point except to bother someone.' But if the question is what is the church or the issue at all, then you haven't said much to argue they don't, or can't, possibly have a good point in there.
All too often I think, when someone doesn't like the substance of something or can't be bothered to figure out what it has to do with them, it's common these days for people to resort to saying things along the lines of oh, they're just doing it to bother someone they don't like, or just doing it out of narcissism or to get attention. It's too convenient because that can be thrown at just about anything that's released into the public somehow. But the one doesn't preclude the other. Even if it does happen to bother someone, it can still be useful or meaningful.