As far as I can tell, I received not one answer.
And you call this a "debate"? This is no debate.
OK regarding the names of Mary is your question "What's wrong with giving names and titles to Mary". So is your complaint that "gentile Lady" is fairly tame therefore why am I complaining about the rest?
Are you suggesting that giving lofty names to Mary is a perfectly good activity that Christianity should be doing?
Can you see how "Gentle Lady" could be acceptable but "Gentile Lady" would be false?
I think that giving lofty names to Mary is fine as long as they don't trespass into paying divine honors. It seemed to me that none of those names you listed gave divine honor to Mary, so I thought they were all innocuous.
I HAD thought there was something in the actual content of the names that you thought was wrong, but now I see, or I think I do, that you think the mere giving of honorifics is bad.
And that I just don't get. Unless your side is going to leap to the unsupported conclusion that by merely tolerating honoring the Mother of the Lord the Church is turning folks away from Christ, I can't see anything intrinsically wrong with 2,000 years of devotion churning out a few titles. And I know the difference between a King and a Queen in a patriarchal worldview, so I'm not flustered by calling Mary Queen of anything. She is, after all, the mother of the King, and that often gets one the courtesy of a royal title.
So I don't see what the problem is.
It's not so much my question. You put up the list and said it was an outrage or something, but didn't say what was outrageous about it.