"Monkey Trial"

Mare

New Member
Wasn't sure if this was the right place to put this thread but wanted some opinions....

1925: Tennessee bans the teaching of evolution in schools; teacher John Scopes ignores the ban and is later prosecuted in the so-called "Monkey Trial."
:confused:

Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernN'Proud
1925:Simple, really. He broke a state law. He was prosecuted for doing so. Why would that cause confusion?


Ok wrong smilie there i put........I was reading up on it when i posted it and i found it to be very interesting...especially the opening statements.....Got me to thinking what would have happened if he could have tought it!

And Now Adays how people freak out with....In God We Trust on our $$....... and prayer in schools....and ten commandments in public places.....Would people think different of him now???

"Opening statements pictured the trial as a titanic struggle between good and evil or truth and ignorance. Bryan claimed that "if evolution wins, Christianity goes." Darrow argued, "Scopes isn't on trial; civilization is on trial." The prosecution, Darrow contended, was "opening the doors for a reign of bigotry equal to anything in the Middle Ages." To the gasps of spectators, Darrow said Bryan was responsible for the "foolish, mischievous and wicked act." Darrow said that the anti-evolution law made the Bible "the yardstick to measure every man's intellect, to measure every man's intelligence, to measure every man's learning." It was classic Darrow, and the press--mostly sympathetic to the defense--loved it."

"The prosecution opened its case by asking the court to take judicial notice of the Book of Genesis, as it appears in the King James version. It did. Superintendent White led off the prosecution's list of witnesses with his testimony that John Scopes had admitted teaching about evolution from Hunter's Civic Biology. Chief Prosecutor Tom Stewart then asked seven students in Scope's class a series of questions about his teachings. They testified that Scopes told them that man and all other mammals had evolved from one-celled organism. Darrow cross-examined--gently, though with obvious sarcasm--the students, asking freshman Howard Morgan: "Well, did he tell you anything else that was wicked?" "No, not that I can remember," Howard answered. After drugstore owner Fred Robinson took the stand to testify as to Scope's statement that "any teacher in the state who was teaching Hunter's Biology was violating the law," the prosecution rested. It was a simple case."
 

chcr

Too cute for words
Re: "Monkey Trail"

Monkey trail? Would that be in Africa somewhere? :lol:

Sorry, Mare. I couldn't help myself.

If he could have taught it nothing at all would be changed, BTW.
 

Gotholic

Well-Known Member
Re: "Monkey Trail"

It is quite ironic how things turned around since 1925. Since it is now unconstitutional to teach Creation or have prayers in public schools.

It is also quite interesting to know that the phrase "seperation of Church and State" is not mentioned at all in the constitution...
 

freako104

Well-Known Member
Re: "Monkey Trail"

probably not differently but possibly he would have been more accepted. there are still a few who do not like the idea of evolution being taught(I am more for a little bit of both being taught and letting the person decide what is true)
 

chcr

Too cute for words
Re: "Monkey Trail"

Gotholic said:
It is quite ironic how things turned around since 1925. Since it is now unconstitutional to teach Creation or have prayers in public schools.
What country's constitution would that be?

Gotholic said:
It is also quite interesting to know that the phrase "seperation of Church and State" is not mentioned at all in the constitution...
No, but it is clearly implied when it is stated that, "no religious test shall ever be required, as a qualification to any office or public trust, under the United States." Further, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." It's sad how many people there are that are ready to play semantic games with freedom, isn't it?

BTW, are you in any way aware of who actually won the Scopes trial?

BTW, are you in any way aware of the definition of irony.
 

freako104

Well-Known Member
Re: "Monkey Trail"

If a movie I watched called Inherit the Wind is accurate was it Scopes who won? I was never told whether or not he won the trial
 

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
Re: "Monkey Trail"

chcr said:
What country's constitution would that be?


No, but it is clearly implied when it is stated that, "no religious test shall ever be required, as a qualification to any office or public trust, under the United States." Further, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." It's sad how many people there are that are ready to play semantic games with freedom, isn't it?

BTW, are you in any way aware of who actually won the Scopes trial?

BTW, are you in any way aware of the definition of irony.

Are you aware of the very first official act of Congress, after the Constitution went into effect, was to create a national day of prayer.
 

Winky

Well-Known Member
Re: "Monkey Trail"

Are you aware that all religion is a throwback to a more primitive time?
 

chcr

Too cute for words
Re: "Monkey Trail"

Gonz said:
Are you aware of the very first official act of Congress, after the Constitution went into effect, was to create a national day of prayer.

Sure Gonz, you should know that by now. :shrug: Perfectly all right too, as long as no one is "required" to pray.
 

chcr

Too cute for words
Re: "Monkey Trail"

freako104 said:
If a movie I watched called Inherit the Wind is accurate was it Scopes who won? I was never told whether or not he won the trial

He was convicted of breaking a law that he did, in fact, break. As I understand trial law, that'd be considered losing. :shrug: Of course, it did help to put evolution in a public forum...
 

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
Re: "Monkey Trail"

A Nat'l Day of Prayer is ok but teaching aboutcreationism, alongside evolution, is overstepping boundries. "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".
 

freako104

Well-Known Member
Re: "Monkey Trail"

chcr said:
He was convicted of breaking a law that he did, in fact, break. As I understand trial law, that'd be considered losing. :shrug: Of course, it did help to put evolution in a public forum...


makes sense now. thank you for that.
 

chcr

Too cute for words
Re: "Monkey Trail"

Gonz said:
A Nat'l Day of Prayer is ok but teaching aboutcreationism, alongside evolution, is overstepping boundries. "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".

Wrong. Teaching biblical creation as part of a science curriculum in a government subsidized school is wrong. Teach about it all you want ("christian religion on the other hand. puts forth this explanation"), but it is simply not a scientific theory. Until you can find a clear fossil record or DNA evidence or some such to support that the world was created by god on the order of 10,000 years ago, I don't think you can teach it as a valid scientific theory.

I don't understand why so many people (on both sides of the issue) have such a hard time understanding the distinction.
 

freako104

Well-Known Member
would you oppose it as being taught as a theory in a biology class? I am sure you mentioned you wouldnt mind it being taught in religion before
 

chcr

Too cute for words
freako104 said:
would you oppose it as being taught as a theory in a biology class? I am sure you mentioned you wouldnt mind it being taught in religion before

Yes freak, I would oppose it. There is no biological evidence to support it. Despite what some people "believe" about science, testable, verifiable evidence is required to be a valid theory. Other suchevidence may disprove a theory, that's what science is, in part. Putting forth an explanation without verifiable evidence is philosophy, although people refer to such as theory all the time. String "theory" for instance. The math is pretty, but it's not a scientific theory until you can produce verfiable evidence. You can pass a law to make teachers teach that pi is equal to three, this does not make it so.
 

Thulsa Doom

New Member
Have scientists ever taken over sunday school boards to push through legislation requiring stickers to be placed on bibles that say "We dont know for sure!"? Just curious.
 

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
Seen the new rules at the Lutheren Churches over the last decade or so?
 

freako104

Well-Known Member
Thulsa Doom said:
Have scientists ever taken over sunday school boards to push through legislation requiring stickers to be placed on bibles that say "We dont know for sure!"? Just curious.


an excellent point
 

chcr

Too cute for words
Thulsa Doom said:
Have scientists ever taken over sunday school boards to push through legislation requiring stickers to be placed on bibles that say "We dont know for sure!"? Just curious.
Honestly, Thulsa, I think that most scientists would find that a complete waste of time. They don't care what other people believe, that's the purview of religion. I argue the point all the time, but frankly don't care whether anyone else accepts it or not. I just enjoy the argument (well, up to the name calling point anyway).
 
Top