“Ok, then. Define the ‘underlying problem’ as clearly and specifically as possible.”
I'll try. But work with me. I'd rather have a dialogue on this than a long and boring monologue. I'd rather that you try to make an effort to understand what I'm trying to say, even if I don't say it that well, rather than for you to try to pick it apart. REAL dialogue isn't waiting for one's interlocutor to stop talking so one can say your piece, especially to refute the other.
I think that at the core, the problem is one of iconoclasm.
That, I think, probably oversimplifies it, but I don't think by much.
Catholicism (and Orthodoxy, as well), are not iconoclastic.
Christian groups generally other than Catholics and Orthodox are inherently, and deeply iconoclastic.
And the rules of the forum significantly favor iconoclasm.
sitetest
That is the "anti" position in the religious debate town square. If you are suggesting that no Freeper be allowed to destroy the beliefs of another then you are indeed arguing for an "ecumenic" style of discussion.
Hogwash.