Does this person mean "organized religion" and not "religion"?

Yes, I think so. Moreover, he/she is probably conflating all organized religions with the more virulent brands of so-called Christianity.

All too often the anti-theists on this site confuse all religions with intolerant ones, not realizing that believing in God isn't even a requirement for all religions. That coming together for shared fellowship, community, ties to traditions, the comfort and pagentry of rituals can all have value quite aside from any spiritual paths individual members of religions are pursuing.

The religion I was raised in taught me that its scriptures were for formulating and asking questions about the universe and our spirits (not ghosts, not souls, but the animating force within us) and not for finding pat answers. It taught that asking the questions can be scary, but needed to be done, even when the answers weren't immediately apparent.

Having nothing to go on but your statements, I think the person who wrote this is an atheist who has no regard for people who do believe or for the possible benefits of belief. Personally I don't find this kind of intolerance any better than dogmatic religious intolerance. I find it to be just as sanctimonious and equally debatable.

The person in question appears to be a one-note fundamentalist of atheism. Sadly, every group has at least a few.

I doubt they make the distinction between organized religion and other forms of spirituality, nor do they care that there actually is one. Best to ignore them and move on. :-)

Religion is defined as a systematic set of beliefs, usually in at least one deity.

Relationship or not, christianity is a religion.

Bongernet's drag-n-drops are as fatuous and boring as those perpetrated by CJ/Chris/David.

I don't think they know the difference

In fact, I'm not sure I know the difference.

Sounds like both to me, personally.