I'd like to say that I'm that objective, but I'm really not
. I'm just human, and sometimes it's hard to not slip the irony a bit.
Without extending this judgement to the entire holy priest community, I've had my share of crap from various ones over the time. For me, priests seemed to divide in 3 large groups: diehard holy, diehard disc and those that played both without much of a fuss, even if they bent towards one or the other more or less.
The diehard discs usually pissed me off with constant whining that "disc is the absorb healer, we need more shields". I deeply dislike that approach and I've been told that I'm obviously more fit to be holy because of this. For me, all healers are..healers. We heal, aka make green numbers and each of us has a special flavour - that should not be the vast majority of our output, because its inevitable to cause unbalance. Recently, there's a new branch forming - the diehard atonement ones. For them, casting anything outside atonement spells is a waste of time. They claim they are doing triage because atonement is smart, and there is no other way they could help the raid better. I dont disagree atonement is as smart as an automatic spell can be, but it's not really triage from my pov.
The diehard holy usually hate disc, with a passion. They usually play happily other healers as alts, but they hate disc. They tend to prefer raidhealing and despise anything outside producing pure numbers. They call themselves "pure output healers". Back in the good old times of ICC, I got recruited by this good guild as a disc priest. They did have another priest, but he wouldn't touch disc with a 10 feet pole, calling it brainless and retarded. Could have also had something to do that he was proudly wielding a legendary mace. When cata got close, knowing the numbers of disc on the beta, I announced I will most likely be switching to holy (I had played disc for half of wrath, and holy for the other plus tbc). I instantly got called a fotm reroller that jumps ship whenever my specc isn't retarded OP, also told that blizzard doesn't release broken healers so I'm just ranting for nothing. So I stayed disc. It was painful, but I guess it created a special relation of "for better and for worse for me". It's also prolly why I'm prone to defending it. Yes, it is OP atm, and ppl seem to think its always been like this. Not many of those saying it though really played it for 3-4 years continuously. Disc is prolly the specc that went through the most drastic changes: from the pure tank healer in the start in wrath, to the shield spamming in icc, to the more balanced approach in cata, turning now towards a hybrid dmg/healer thing. Sometimes for me it feels like I haven't been playing the same class all this time.
And then there's those that play either specc, and are just priests. Not disc, not holy, just priests. I have one of these in my guild now, hes a great guy. I've always known him as holy, but in my guild he played disc, and he's great at it. He's happy to be a good healer, and he doesnt care in which specc.
I really dislike extremes. I admit I'll play disc if given the choice, but I never hated holy. For me, they are just different. But most ppl usually label it as braindead, or at best "easier". The reason why I prefer disc is the flexibility (for me the whole chakra separation is artificial) and the dps part (though I'm not an atonement only fan).
As for the holy words I never said they are never used, just barely used. My view might also be skewed by the fact I'm playing 25 mans. Me being disc means that if there is any tank healing to be done, I'll do it, not the holy priest, so she doesn't really use serenity.