Kim, I was just composing a post thanking you for your earlier post. So glad and relieved to hear you are not leaving the forum!! (phew)
I for one was grateful (as evidently others were) that you addressed (1) the implications of posting about a faith healing in the Treatment section of this forum; and (2) a discomfort with moderators rather strongly expressing their personal religious views at the same time "moderating" conflicting views on an inherently charged topic like faith healing (e.g. in the thread containing the original faith healing story, a moderator implicitly tried to dissuade a member from expressing his skepticism about faith healing from commenting further on the thread, though it didn't work).
I'm sure I underestimate how hard and time consuming it must be to moderate. As others in this thread have already expressed more succinctly, however, a problem arises when a moderator expresses a position on an issue as an individual, but then reappears in the same discussion as a moderator and "moderates" implicitly or explicitly, against conflicting points of view. It's a conflict of interest. I think moderators should be given as much leeway as possible given how tricky some issues are to navigate and that the line between expressing strongly held personal beliefs and moderation may be a fine one at times, but most can see a conflict of interest when one exists, and that is the key concern. I hope this concern can be considered as constructively and objectively as possible.
And to Cort, Jody and other members of the forum team: for the record, Kim's post did nothing to undermine my respect for each of you and appreciation for your hard work running this forum, as volunteers and despite suffering from this disease yourselves, and I doubt it did for others - especially since on a topic like this, no one person's views is likely to exactly match another's.