Sorry, I didn't mean to soften the statement; it is a cause and effect
relationship.
> I wonder what David Barton meant with the apparent correlation between the
> US Supreme Court decision and "the gross national product."
Opps, Barton's book was at work so I couldn't check it last night for my
post. In _The Myth of Separation_, David Barton, Wall Builder Press,
P.O. Box 397, Aledo, TX 76008, Barton has several graphs: Birth Rates
for Unwed Women: 15 - 19 Yrs of Age; Violent Crime: No. of Offenses;
Sexually Transmitted Diseases - gonorrhea: Age Group 15 - 19; SAT Total
Scores 1951 - 1986; Pregnancies to Unwed Women Under 15 Yrs of Age;
Divorce Rates; National Cases of Sexually Transmitted Diseases - All
Ages; Multi-Factor Productivity: Non-Farm Business; and Multi-Factor
Productivity: Private Business (pp 209-216).
The last two graphs were what I remembered as the GNP.
> If he meant
> that the Supreme Court decision had an adverse effect on the US GNP,
> what did the US Supreme Court do in the '30's to bring on the great
> depression? If the US Supreme Court reversed its decision and
> promulgated Bible reading and prayer, would the GNP rise?
I think Barton's point was that a nation which honors God will prosper
while one which shoves Him out of sight (as we continue to do through
the court decisions of liberal judges) will suffer the consequences for
breaking spiritual laws. The Court would not promulgate Bible reading
and prayer if it reversed its decision, it would only allow Bible
reading and prayer.
Bill Payne