You seem to have completely ignored, or simply skimmed over the beginning portion of this post where I make it absolutely clear that I don’t believe we have anything useful to learn from Freud. I’ll quote it at length for you:
“I do not find psychological explanations for religious belief to be helpful or useful when what we’re interested in are questions about the truth or falsity of religious claims. Further, I do not think we have much, if anything, of value to learn from Freud on the matter. It’s puzzling then to find skeptics and atheists invoking Freudian ideas about the source of religious belief meanwhile relegating him to the realm of pseudoscience in other matters.”
This displays one of two things: poor reading comprehension, or willful dishonesty on your part. Neither of which paint you in a positive light.
Until you start your approach of engagement completely over, there’s no reason for anyone to bother responding to anything else you have to say.