I don't lie.
You stated, "I'm not going to pretend that a marriage before wasn't valid or was made under some kind of coercion or something" as your reason for disagreeing with Catholic doctrine on the annulment of marriage.
That's certainly your right to do. The whole "I'm an Anglican, not an Episcopalian" thing is a bit of a charade as Rowan Williams is hardly a bastion of conservatism - and besides, until the Episcopalians make a decision about what they are going to do, they are Anglicans.
The more important issue is the light that your affiliations shed on your willingness to support a pro-abortion, pro-homosexual candidate.
That was your original post. So you did lie.
1) Clearly I don't have issues to the traditional Catholic view of marriage. And nothing you can post shows that I do.
What I said, on an Anglican thread about the reunification of the Catholic and Anglican churches, is that I don't approve of the how the RCC handles annulments/disolutions of marriages. That's a big hurdle you're trying to jump there by saying that I object to the traditional Catholic view of marriage. It's pretty much an insurmountable hurdle, not that I expect it to stop you.
2) This conversation all took place on an Anglican thread. And why don't you go on an Anglican thread and tell them that they're really all Episcopalians. That will go over big. /sarcasm
I'd be happy to direct you to one of those threads. And you couldn't be more wrong about the Anglican church, not that I see you're someone who is going to let a few little facts get in the way of your agenda.
Our Anglican church is a parish of the Diocese of the south, Catholic Church, egghead.
So you're on lie #2 in my book. And that's the last I care to derail this thread with religious lies coming from the likes of you.