Nope because this is all in the frame of procedit not the Greek term. A lot of the time this is a misunderstanding. You guys in your theology with relation to the Greek term are correct. Latin theology in relation to procedit is correct to. You theology does not deny the sons divinity.
You keep bouncing around the issue without actually taking a stand.
You say that Orthodox theology, related as it is to the Greek term, is correct, and that Latin theology, related as it is to the Latin term, is also correct.
But you also assert that the Greek term is interested in origins, while the Latin term is interested in motion.
But when asked how the Latins were able to (mis)translate the Greek term so that it no longer means what the Greek means because it is no longer talking about the same concept, you want to say that the Latin term indicates both origin and motion.
But when asked how that doesn't make the Son an "origin" of the Spirit, you say it doesn't--that it means origin when it refers to the Father and motion when it refers to the Son, even if that's not at all the plain sense of the Latin.
The common thread in all of this is "The Pope is never wrong".