Q.E.D.? I disagree...

This is an interesting argument, but I have some counter points:

Laziness is deemed a virtue of a programmer, but not necessarily a Perl Monk. It's possible that a Perl Monk/programmer could be lazy in their role as a programmer, while being active in their role as a Perl Monk. As an analogy, a person may be an aggressive driver (hello, road rage!) while being polite in face-to-face interaction.

There is more than one kind of laziness. An appropriate kind of laziness for a programmer is to save effort through good design. A bad kind of laziness is skipping the design phase, making more work later. While 'laziness' as a virtue of a programmer refers to a good kind of laziness, 'lazy' as used on the Saints in our Book page may refer to a bad kind of laziness. So, a Perl Monk/programmer should be lazy in a good way, but not in a bad way.

I conclude, happily, that one may be both a virtuous programmer and a worthy monk.