The examiner always checks your ability to reason in a coherent and consolidative fashion while applying analytical and empirical evidence. As per this statement, your acceptance or rejction of the chosen statemet's stance should be given less importance. Contrary, the quality of your arguments, evidence, facts, figures, objective analysis and mode of discourse is more crucial.

However, things are not always that simple. The first thing you should keep in your mind is that 'I have no idea who is going to check the paper'. If you refuse the above mentioned topic, you will have sufficient evidence to back your stance. You can argue by stating that religions, in their inherent nature and teachings, are always good and they preach peace and brotherhood. And a lot of other arguments etc. However, if you accept the above mentioned topic, you will also have to take into consideration the teachings of Islam as well. How will you then justify your stance? Will you mention that Islam is similar to other religions. Amid the weak arguments, the examiner may also judge your ability to defend your own religion. In this situation, the possibility of getting good marks is jeopardized.

Hence, I think that the opoosition or acceptance of the statement should always be done after throughly analyzing data/information at hand.

In response to the original question: Yes You can oppose any topic unless you possess the relevant inforamtion and analytical technique. However, it is not suitable to oppose the statment when the inforamtion at hand requires your subjective analysis.

__________________
The one who is most deserving of thanks and praise from people is Allah