Well, in my church we regularly say after the elevation , whether approriate to the moment or not: Christ has died; Christ has risen; Christ will come again. The purpose of the corpus on the cross is to remind us of the humanity of Christ, that he suffered as a man. Crucifixes were made popular by St. Francis, a very spiritual saint who even Protestants respect for his evangelical character. They may be offended by the baroque style, which emphasizes the torture of the cross, although, paradoxically, they found Mel Gilbson's very baroque movie quite congenial. At bottom, the crucifix is only an artform.
You wrote:
"I am earnestly waiting for a Roman Catholic to correct the poster who sarcastically referred to " that resurrection thing". Perhaps it could be you."
Why would a Catholic need to correct the poster who wrote that? Was it not a perfectly logical rejoinder? Yes, actually it was. The fact that it was sarcastic is unimportant since he was merely showing that the Protestant poster was sarcastic. After all, Christ said "body" and "blood". He didn't say "bread" and "wine" after they became His body and blood. So who was really be sarcastic here?
We don't deny the Resurrection, but you demand we apologize for sarcastically drawing someone's attention to it. You have a Protestant who denied a Christ founded sacrament, a miracle, a great gift where the Savior gives us His flesh and blood under the appearance of bread and wine and you're whining about what a Catholic said even though it in no way denied the Resurrection?
Protestants deny the Eucharist for the same reason they don't like the crucifix: they struggle with the Incarnation. Deep down many Protestants are little better than Docetians.