Certainly he does. Read the thread you're referencing (in opposition to the rules of FR which says not to carry one argument over to another thread.)
Rome is not "silent" on infant salvation. Rome screams evil by its concocted fabrication of "limbo" being the eternal destiny of babies who are not baptized.
A satanic, completely unScriptural doctrine developed to frighten the masses into entering a church led by "another Christ."
That is not Christianity. That is coercion by evil.
That would be because salvation is through faith in Christ, not of works. Baptism has been elevated to a work in many churches, not just the Catholic one.
It does not detract from the necessity of baptism if you believe that baptism is necessary for salvation and that one is not held accountable is one has not sinned. Some churches maintain that baptism is necessary for salvation AFTER the person has made their own profession of faith. That inflicting baptism on someone cannot save them.
RNMomof7 is right. It is a kind of election, only by the parents and the church, not by God.
Perhaps the western Church doesn't, but I have never heard the Eastern Church speculate that chilidren who die in infancy are in hell. As far as the East is concerned, the Augustinian notion of the ancestral sin is an innovation unknown to the Church, and Calvinism is a distortion of orthodox Christianity to the point of nonrecognition.
The Church is quiet because we do not know
Sure we do. Christ says "Let the children alone, and do not hinder them from coming to Me; for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these." [Mat 19:14] he obviously found no fault in them that would hinder them from inheriting the kingdom of heaven.
What he night have meant by the "kingdom of heaven" is an other issue.