I look at it a little differently. I have, on one or two occasions, made statements about anti-Mormon posts that can only be described as bigotry; this is not a defense of Mormon beliefs, it is a condemnation of bigotry. I view it as no different from condemning anti-Semitism.
As a general rule I almost never see any of the active Catholic apologists jumping onto the LDS threads to challenge their beliefs,
I'm going to say this as diplomatically as I know how and that is to say that I am unaware of any Mormon apologists on FR who possess the intellectual faculties to engage in meaningful debate (that IS NOT to say that there aren't any intellectual Mormons on FR, but they seem to avoid the Mormon theological debates). The Mormons on the theological debates seem incapable of doing much more than copying and pasting essays from official LDS sources, I don't think they even understand them, they only know where to find them. So, I basically consider the LDS threads a waste of time.
I actually at one time tried to have a weekly posting of a sermon by Charles Spurgeon, but I gave up on the idea after one of your Catholic compadres (I think you can figure out which one it is) made it clear that he considered Spurgeon to be an Anti-Catholic bigot and made it clear that he was going to come on and piss on every Spurgeon thread I posted.
I think that it is generally a bad idea to label historical figures based on modern standards. If Spurgeon was alive and giving the same sermons today, then I would say he was an anti-Catholic bigot, but the sermons of a 19th century Catholic priest would probably be just as bigoted toward Protestants. By today's standards Abraham Lincoln would probably come across as a racist, but by mid-19th century standards he was the furthest thing from a racist. Nevertheless, I have seen where modern anti-Catholics quote Spurgeon's anti-Catholic statements and that is bigotry.
I don’t really care what others think.
I like the Catholic Church and Orthodox Churches. I like their unity of effort, clear chain of authority, division of the world into parishes, and their insistence on their historic lineage back to Christ. I don’t like their Mariology or their opulence.
I like the Presbyterian (&Reformation) Church. I like its intellectual approach to scripture and, if truth be known, the bulk of any writing on theological issues is by reformed scholars. I like its appreciation of ancient forms and its insistence on Reforming rather than replacing the historic Christian position. I also like that it insists on its historic lineage. I don’t like their stuffiness and their antinomian tendencies.
I like free evangelical churches, Calvary Chapel (and earlier Methodism) being part of that group, for their insistence on spiritual, rather than human, lineage. It makes them search the scriptures; and generation to generation exhibit a willingness to adapt to what they learn of bible truth. I don’t like their divisions and divisiveness, their competitiveness & even hatred toward one another, their inability to trust one another and work together.
I don’t think there are other churches than these that are part of historic Christianity. There is no restorationistic church that I accept, because I don’t believe the Church could fail, so that it would have to be restored.