I'm a noobie here as well, so the best I can figure is that some people here have figured out the dual nature of flagging other's content.
First, I remember reading somewhere that a downvote (flagging) has just as much potential for a payout as upvoting does. If that is true it leaves on the table the potential for persons or groups of persons (or even bots and a network of bots) to build a network based on nothing but mutual flagging for payout & profit.
Second, as you have already hinted to in a comment, if it goes against someone's personal beliefs or practices of Z (no matter if your content is true and can help others interested in the Y personal belief/practice we may be producing an article on, it may be an indirect threat to their personal belief/practice of Z), the only means to censor us in favor of their own beliefs/practices being seen is to flag it.
Sad that people can not just express their own thoughts, beliefs, and opinions in a comment. A big draw for me to stay here was the statement that steemit is 'decentralized and can not be censored'... yet that is proving not to be the case. Allowing others the freedom to flag without justification, thus hiding content, is the basic building blocks for censorship with no other purpose than to hide content based on OPINIONS.
I agree, the system needs changing. I believe an opinion should not be justification to hide and bury posts simply because a few got a little butthurtz and launch a flagging campaign against another user.