If theists understood "evidence"

[Ravenshire]

Of course it is - but poor evidence. On it's own it rarely is enough to be used alone in criminal court to convict. Sadly, unless of course your skin is dark. Then it seems to be more weighty.

Well then, if the best you have is poor evidence, then set the Pudding man free!


Also, I have posted before, but you can easily google, and find many lawyers who will disagree with you.  If you only have a single witness, it may be a little dicey, but even then it can still convict, and is still given as evidence.  I only see this claim from atheists... I wonder why that is?

You're either forgetting or straight up lying about this as I have given you evidence that even judges are coming to question the validity of testimony as evidence except when it's corroborating physical evidence