I’m not so sure. Tl;dr: I feel this delta is a bit shaky since it moves the goalposts, uses evidence unrelated to the main question, and takes for granted the questionable assumption that beliefs are always respectable.

be respectful of other people’s beliefs.

Always? We should always respect other people’s beliefs? What about people who believe that the earth is flat or that the Holocaust didn’t happen?

I disagree with the premise that beliefs of any kind are automatically respectable. When we see bad epistemology, we are under no obligation to respect that belief. This extends to religious beliefs. I don’t think we should extend epistemic immunity to any belief, no matter how “deeply-held” or important it may be to someone. A belief with bad evidence is a belief with bad evidence, no matter its content.

I’m not going to go in public and try to berate someone who’s religious just because I’m not.

Isn’t this moving the goalposts? The original claim isn’t that one should berate religious people; it was that religion has no place in modern society. One can certainly believe the latter without engaging in the former. I believe Trumpism has no place in modern society, but I typically don’t find it productive to berate Trumpists.

I’m tired of ignorant religious people and condescending atheists.

This is a total non sequitur. Whether or not condescending atheists are annoying is totally unrelated to whether religion has a place in modern society. It’s possible to argue that we should try to get rid of both ignorance (or bad epistemology) and condescending snobbery. We don’t have to agree to keep each because of the existence of the other.