quote: We could also count the removal of prayer from the schools
Why? What makes that a sin? Its not even as if the prayers are guaranteed to be Faith-approved "Christian" prayers. You can bet that there would be a lot of Mormon prayers in Utah schools, Catholic prayers in other places, maybe even Muslim prayers.
quote: Righto, another "progressive" move on the part of the powers that be, who of course think all religions are the same, and misread the First Amendment to treat school religious exercises as violating the separation of church and state.
No, just the obvious fact that State-sponsored prayers are an establishment of religion and therefore contrary to the First Amenment as intended by James Madison and Thomas Jefferson. (Oh, and do you have any objection to Judaism ? The lead plaintiff in Engel v Vitale was a Jew and Jewish organisations supported him)
I think that you will find that Simon Greenleaf made some errors in his legal thinking. For instance, is it enough that a document be purported to be written by an eyewitness for it to have significant weight in court ? Or are there further conditions to be met ?
quote: And there are those who also wrongly believe the evidence led them ot the Old Earth and Evolution. So what?
The evidence supports both those things and you know it.
quote: My point is only that I make use of evidence and don't think it's possible to believe anything without evidence.
As you have just reminded us you frequently make excuses to deny the evidence. You frequently believe things on - at best - very weak evidence, and in ignorance of evidence that is quite easily found.
quote: And no, the nature of the conclusions to be drawn from the kind of evidence available means there can be no other conclusions drawn.
That would be pretty amazing if it were true. But it isn’t. In the “Tension of Faith” thread you were promoting the Gospel of John as good evidence, despite the fact that it is clearly not - and it is certainly not evidence from which “no other conclusions can be drawn”. You were even reduced to pulling in the false dogma of Biblical inerrancy in an attempt to support its value as evidence (and there is another belief you cling to despite clear and strong evidence to the contrary).
That makes it very clear that you don’t have evidence which matches the description I quoted above. You don’t even have good evidence.