Inquisitive minds can disagree on the particulars of its qualitative and quantitative badness.
To the OP – even the most liberal sort of evolutionary creationist would still be able to affirm 1-4, though likely utilizing definitions too broad for YECs to countenance. I’d agree they are essential (or nearly so) for a robust theology, though again perhaps more broadly than YECs expect.
As for 5-7…the historicity of Adam and Eve and the fall feature very prominently in the soteriology and even eschatology of historic evangelical protestantism, but that is primarily a consequence of how those theologies evolved since the reformation. The history of the church includes many different views on original sin, atonement, imputation, and a host of other concepts. One of my first steps toward a healthier view of theology was realizing that modern evangelicalism very possibly could have misstepped in diverging from a lot of the older traditions. It’s a scary thought, because evangelical theology (particularly in its reformed version) presents a very tightly-held, interlinked set of doctrines, and you feel like questioning anything is going to upset the whole apple-cart. But it’s a worthy exercise.