It's not that they're uniquely evil, rather that they don't have the moral authority to lecture.
Is there somewhere they are saying the name is morally wrong?
Literally that wording? No.
But that's the same as a politician doing favors for their biggest donor and then pretending there's no pay to play here since you didn't literally see him taking piles of banknotes in a smoke filled back room. Come on.
> they made a commercial decision
Yes but why? Because according to them it promotes objectionable items/behavior - that's a moral decision, it is also a commercial one but based on a moral judgment.
A commercial decision is not a class on its own. It is taken based on some factors. What were the factors here if not that Apple finds the name/icon morally questionable?