Where the design community meets.
I won't argue that, but I also think any time religious beliefs are brought up or injected into a conversation, this is the road we end up on. I'm not saying that people should hide their religious identities, but if they really throw them out there they're going to need to be prepared to deal with all of those people who fundamentally disagree with their entire belief system. Name calling is always going to be ineffective and inappropriate, and so is applying your belief system to anyone else (and that goes for both sides).
For the record, I find this shot entirely tasteful and strongly believe it should not be removed regardless of policy. Illustration and art has been an integral part of Dribbble since the beginning. Nudity as a subject in art and illustration has been long accepted by larger global culture. Dribbble shouldn't accommodate the few who's values deem this inappropriate when as a larger society this stuff has been on our walls, in our homes, and in our institutions for thousands of years. If Dribbble is going to start making these sorts of calls to accommodate individuals with conservative values, I wouldn't find it a safe place to post my work.
I totally agree with your first paragraph. SO, look at the Dribbble comment thread, or anywhere in this DN thread, and you'll see that those that thought the shot went against Dribbble's policy stated nothing about their personal religious beliefs.
They didn't hide their religious beliefs on their Twitter, etc. (like you said you were okay with), but of course, this whole DN & Dribbble community saw that the couple of guys who reported something that actually went against Dribbble policy (as even the shot's designer admitted) were religious and therefore they had to start mocking & flaming them. I mean, DN just had a huge sensitivity test/issue with this whole Feminist T-Shirt deal, yet all the users are so blind to when they are trampling on others due to their beliefs.
If anything, blame Dribbble. Have them change their policy, or put in place some NSFW or "possibly-could-be-deemed-inappropriate" filter, whatever. But don't mock anyone who is actually supporting an established policy, then immediately fault their religion for it, and alienate a whole (98% peaceful) demographic.
As for your second paragraph... Totally cool that you personally don't find it distasteful, but implementing an optional "show NSFW" toggle or something alike allows everyone to enjoy and browse Dribbble, without being surprised with something that could conflict with their religious beliefs or censoring artwork. I understand you probably don't think it's a big deal if someone is surprised with something morally wrong to them, but they do, and alienating them personally isn't the way to solve it.
Notice I said "any time religious beliefs are brought up or injected into a conversation" -- in this instance it wasn't brought up by those who were being ridiculed. In some instances it is. I was making a broader statement about how unproductive that is instead of pointing fingers.
Regarding your suggestion, the trouble with tagging things as indecent or "NSFW" is that it is a form censorship. It tucks things that could be important outside of view from the community. And as with any form of censorship, it's incredibly dangerous, largely arbitrary, and doesn't seem to fully satisfy even those on the conservative end of the spectrum. Civil discussions and explorations regarding nudity in art and design are valuable and should be part of the community not tucked away as they would be if Ryan's shot had been filtered out. In the same way as nipples exist appropriately in the world, they exist appropriately in the greater world of illustration, and shielding a community from that reality would be an unproductive misrepresentation of our shared reality. As many people here stated, the issues with the artwork aren't with the work itself, they're with the observer. If the observer isn't comfortable the work, that isn't the artist, canvas, place, or work's responsibility. Discomfort in the observer is the responsibility of the observer, and in this instance a lot of people seem to be reacting to it and wrestling with how they are uncomfortable with sexuality and seeing women's nipples.
Instead of blaming dribbble, maybe those offended can do something about it such as build a 3rd party browser extension that hides content they're uncomfortable with instead of imposing their markedly conservative views upon the entire community. I'd warn them though that doing so would contribute to the very insular viewpoints that have been expressed today and shut them off from important people, work, and conversations all for the sake of a false sense of security against the lady nipples which again, I promise really do exist peacefully in the natural world.
It's one thing to report something is against policy, it's another to wage a campaign in the comments against it. Especially when the hypocrisy is quite deep considering how much mild nudity is allowed on Dribbble (a lot of it, examples in the comments) not to mention much less mild violence.
The guy straight up claimed that the Dribbble piece was going to negatively impact raising his child and you are taking issue with the fact that some people on the internet blame that attitude on religion?
Where the design community meets.
Designer News is a large, global community of people working or interested in design and technology.