Yes Lambear, you are right, absolutely right. The problem with this story is that it could only really work for someone who at some level thinks that racism is worse than murder, and as you so succinctly say - making it funny doens't make it right.
OK, I shall try to respond in a way that nobody could mistake for confrontational.
I believe this statement makes an invalid assumption. It assumes that a god "smiting" is, in fact, identical to a person committing murder. That would be true if starting from the assumption that gods are merely people, but that is also a (clearly, to my mind) wrong starting point. Even then, the story does not require racism to be
worse than smiting, merely just as bad.
Now, given that the story is postulating a (fantasy) universe in which a pantheon of reprehensible gods exists, and that this pantheon can elect to elevate certain (presumably recently deceased) humans to join their ranks, the concept of divine retribution being
normal is inherent in that scenario. The question of whether it is appropriate, (which has not actually been considered, merely assumed false) depends on the omniscience and wisdom of the gods in question. If the gods are wise, they will smite wisely and justly. If they are not, their smiting is liable to be arbitrary and not beneficial.
The issue that concerns, indeed depresses, Trixie at the beginning is her residual human frailty and doubt in her wisdom and righteousness. As such she is (arguably quite correctly) reluctant about her role as a goddess. The story's resolution sees her abandon that self-doubt in favour of what the ancient Greeks called "Apatheos" - the property of gods that made them uncaring about the conseuqences of their actions.
So maybe I was wrong before to say this story didn't have a deep, meaningful message. It has the message "choose your gods carefully, because humans don't make good ones". And I think it works both as humour and as bearer of that message even (especially?) if you
don't think racism is worse than murder.