Allow us to pick one from the list at creation/builder time or type in our own diety name (if we worked out another with the DM) or Better yet just don't display the Divine contact at all 

Instead, it shows up in the Character sheet as this ugly crazy long blurb

====================

Yeah because it is RP flavour and nothing more. You would choose or roll this yourself and make reference in your character's backstory and/or notes - which you do have boxes for on your sheet.

None the less character creations instruction should be in the build UI not in the character sheet, it junks it up with extra cruft

That's personal preference (and not one I share) not a bug. 

If you were to manually type up your character sheet old-school I doubt you'd type up this instruction text, that seems like a good heuristic....

==================

Roll on the Divine Contact table to determine which deity you encountered, or work with your DM to identify a more suitable choice.

No, but this is a false equivalency. The point of the online character sheet is to provide full reference to everything instantly from the sheet - something the paper character sheet is not intended for - same reason people don't write the full spell details on their sheet either - just the name and maybe the book/page number it's from. As a tool designed for full and instant referencing to the entire text whenever wanted - I appreciate it in the online sheet. So let's keep this purely to the online tool, eh? No point discussing apples when the topic is oranges.

This is the Bugs forum. What you have expressed is a personal preference for a design choice, not a bug. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

The point of a character sheet whether Paper or Online is to provide an efficient, concise, useful view that does NOT include unneeded content

While this is not a software/code bug,  it is a bug in that it creates an inconsistent user experience, it is a content bug  in the underlying data / config

Plenty of other backgrounds have similar character creation items in the 5e Book but are treated differently by DnD Beyonds Online Character Tool

I would hope that DnD Beyond has a goal to treat similar items in the same way, to be consistent, and predictable, Astral Drifter obviously violates that approach 

For proof, I submit these images 

You do know, you aren't going to change my mind on this right? You're presenting, again, your personal opinion. I don't agree to that opinion. 

This isn't a "content bug", it is a deliberate design choice by the site creators because they, too, don't agree with you. 

This forum is for actual site bugs. If you want to provide your personal feedback, use the feedback forum?

Personally I really don't have a strong opinion on this either way - but I do agree that a bit of consistency (one way or the other) in how backgrounds are handled would be nice. The inconsistency that Wayne_B has pointed out is just one of many examples of backgrounds with similar or identical elements have those elements handled differently by the site. One other example I can think of off the top of my head is that several different backgrounds give "a writing kit (small pouch with a quill, ink, folded parchment, and a small penknife)." That bit I just quoted is from Cloistered Scholar - which has been on the site for years and is fully functional. Compare how the same item appears in the much-newer Lyceum Scholar background: "a writing kit (small pouch with a quill, ink, folded parchment, and a penknife)." The difference is not merely cosmetic; when used in the Character Builder, Lyceum Scholar adds "a penknife" to the character's "Other Possessions" tab, whereas Cloistered Scholar adds a small knife to the character's main inventory. Likewise, for backgrounds that include "a pouch containing x gp," some add both the gold and a pouch to the character's inventory, and some add only the gold. (And at least once I found one that added only the pouch but not the gold, though I think this has been fixed since.)

Like I said, I really don't care which way the site designers decide to handle each of these cases. It's not a big deal to me either way.  But in my opinion it ought to at least be handled the same way consistently - especially since not handling it the same way consistently really makes it tough for anyone to claim it to be "a deliberate design choice by the site creators."