We assess the evidence from a different philosophical basis, they say. We have a right to disagree. Perhaps. But they have no right to teach a wildly distorted view of the evidence, ignoring all the detail (which accumulates at an increasing rate) refuting them, considering only disputes and uncertainties. Possibly The Truth may be found; certainly it may be approximated; they run from it, and do all they can to obscure it.
Truth is my friend, and lies will destroy me. What matters most to me is the truth about myself, whether I am in any sense female, who I am, how I really respond when my responses are not suppressed. And why. So I blogged on homosexuality because of lies about human worth and human drives which forced round pegs into square holes, just as I had been forced. The basic lie is that (some or all) humans are dangerous and must be controlled.
I find truth in my religion, but my religion is practice, attitude, relationship, not belief. (Not even that one- sometimes it’s “way of being, not dogma”.) Understandings, moral or practical, are contingent and relative, for the moment, ready to be amended or dropped as necessary.
Truth is whatever I imagine it to be.