I read the article "Is the Open Source Software Movement a Technological Religion?," in which Gil Yehuda compares the movement to religion.
Although he has some interesting points, I think actually closed source or proprietary software advocates are the ones who seem much more to be into a religion.
Why? To put it simply:
1. Their leaders hide the truth (the code, flaws, etc.) from them and they simply accept it.
2. They attack open source based on claims that have been given to them and that in many cases are not accurate.
3. They do not have the will to investigate their products / leaders and take them as religious people take dogmas.
4. They lack the scientific need to investigate and learn. How many times they reject open source based solely on the claim that they "do not want to learn anything new"?
5. They prefer to put up with the flaws of their software because "that's how things are".
6. They are are not allowed to actually get into the depths of the software they use nor have the opportunity to change it.
7. They let a specific corporation use them to its will and they happily keep giving this company as much money it asks from them, regardless of the product they receive.
Again, closed source advocates are more a religion in my perspective. At least I have the freedom to choose and I will not go to software hell if I decide not to keep supporting a specific open source tool.