That should tell you everything you need to know about their position.

To quote St. Paul:

One Lord, one faith, One Baptism. - Eph 4:5

Pretty simple.  I have never entered more than a few words before a Feeneyite (or antiBODers, or "true Catholic as they view themselves) calls me a heretic, damned to hell, and so on.  One would think that with Saints and scholars and Magisterium that leaves room for unsettled questions, we would all agree that this particular question should prove common ground for agreeing that we are lacking a legitimate pope; but instead it serves further division.  I don't and won't debate BOD, it is settled for me, and am tired of recycling the same arguments that seldom convince either party.  But the stance of every Feeneyite I have ever been engaged by has always been offensive to charity and to the spiritual work of instructing the ignorant (as they see others).  

This is the usual slur against "Feeneyites" (i.e. Catholics who believe the Church's dogmatic definitions).  Feeneyites do not hold that BoD is heretical, neither did Father Feeney himself.  He clearly characterized his rejection of BoD as an opinion.

Either you were talking to "Dimondites" (not "Feeneyites"), or else you went on and in your purported defense of "BoD" ended up claiming that infidels and heretics could be saved.  You'll note that those are two different things.  We have a number of dogmatic Church definitions which clearly and unequivocally teach that heretics and infidels cannot be saved.  Many in pretending to defend "BoD" end up verbatim rejecting those dogmas or else applying a Modernist "hermeneutic" to them and refusing to accept them according to the meaning with which they were originally defined.  In their defense of BoD, they actually do slide into heresies, Pelagianism and the denial of Trent's dogmatic teaching that the Sacraments are necessary for salvation.  St. Pius X's Holy Office answered that Catholics must unequivocally and umanbiguously state that infidels are damned, not that "well, somehow if they do [this or that] they can be saved."

I've told people repeatedly that if they want to believed in BoD as St. Thomas, St. Robert Bellarmine, and St. Alphonsus defined it, as pertaining only to those who have the bare minimums required for CATHOLIC faith (belief in the Holy Trinity and Incarnation) [St. Robert limited it strictly to Catechumens since they belonged in a sense already to the VISIBLE Church.], then more power to you.  Carry on.  But try to tell me that "Hindus in Tibet" can be saved, and yeah I'll call that out as heresy every single time.

Nor would a "Feeneyite" say that you're "damned to hell" even if you believe in one of these objectively heretical interpretations of BoD, due to the fact that on account of the confusion of the times, the spread of this error, many are confused on this subject (even Archbishop Lefebvre).  That's a decidedly and uniquely "Dimondite" thing to say.  I've actually called them out for being schismatic due to that attitude.

Xaiver, to this day, after having been repeatedly corrected on the matter, continues to throw the slur of "Dimondite" out there against Feeneyites whenever he gets angry.

Yes, every opponent to BOD that engaged me in person and online did take the Dimond route, and yes, they always berated the aberration of BOD that you outlined very well.  I have no opposition to what you wrote, and is exactly where I am coming from.  Thank you for your thoughtful reply

This is the usual slur against "Feeneyites" (i.e. Catholics who believe the Church's dogmatic definitions).  Feeneyites do not hold that BoD is heretical, neither did Father Feeney himself.  He clearly characterized his rejection of BoD as an opinion.

Either you were talking to "Dimondites" (not "Feeneyites"), or else you went on and in your purported defense of "BoD" ended up claiming that infidels and heretics could be saved.  You'll note that those are two different things.  We have a number of dogmatic Church definitions which clearly and unequivocally teach that heretics and infidels cannot be saved.  Many in pretending to defend "BoD" end up verbatim rejecting those dogmas or else applying a Modernist "hermeneutic" to them and refusing to accept them according to the meaning with which they were originally defined.  In their defense of BoD, they actually do slide into heresies, Pelagianism and the denial of Trent's dogmatic teaching that the Sacraments are necessary for salvation.  St. Pius X's Holy Office answered that Catholics must unequivocally and umanbiguously state that infidels are damned, not that "well, somehow if they do [this or that] they can be saved."

I've told people repeatedly that if they want to believed in BoD as St. Thomas, St. Robert Bellarmine, and St. Alphonsus defined it, as pertaining only to those who have the bare minimums required for CATHOLIC faith (belief in the Holy Trinity and Incarnation) [St. Robert limited it strictly to Catechumens since they belonged in a sense already to the VISIBLE Church.], then more power to you.  Carry on.  But try to tell me that "Hindus in Tibet" can be saved, and yeah I'll call that out as heresy every single time.

Nor would a "Feeneyite" say that you're "damned to hell" even if you believe in one of these objectively heretical interpretations of BoD, due to the fact that on account of the confusion of the times, the spread of this error, many are confused on this subject (even Archbishop Lefebvre).  That's a decidedly and uniquely "Dimondite" thing to say.  I've actually called them out for being schismatic due to that attitude.

Xaiver, to this day, after having been repeatedly corrected on the matter, continues to throw the slur of "Dimondite" out there against Feeneyites whenever he gets angry.

I swear I could imagine them calling St. Alphonsus a heretic if he were alive today and not a saint.