Scopes Monkey Trail Research Paper

741 Words3 Pages

When I first read about the Scopes Monkey Trail I wasn’t sure what side I wanted to choose. While both sides made great points I agree more with the school teacher John Scopes and his attorney Clarence Darrow. If I was a juror I would not vote to convict John Scopes. Often Christian parents try to shield their children from anything they feel is unchristian like. These children aren’t going to live in Dayton, Tennessee their whole lives, when they go off to college or move away from home there are going to be people whether it’s a professor, spouse, coworker or friend that will teach them about evolution and other subjects the parents my feel are unchristian like so why not prepare them for their future and teach them these things now? In the trail there were several arguments …show more content…

What Darrow meant in his statement is using the Bible as an argument of why evolution shouldn’t be thought to the children in Tennessee schools doesn’t make sense because the Bible is about religion not science. The next argument Darrow makes is the law does not specify what can be taught but the law does say that you cannot teach anything that conflicts with the Bible. Darrow argues that not everyone who reads the Bible is going to have the same concept of the Bible. Everybody has their own understanding of the Bible and its meaning. Therefore people will have a different view of what teachings conflicts with the Bible. The last argument that made me not want to vote to convict John Scopes is the argument he made that religion has caused people to have different opinions. But some things should be between an individual , his maker or his God. Darrow says that the constitutional convention should leave the questions of religion between man and what he worships. Questions of religion shouldn’t be brought into the classrooms of

Show More

More about Scopes Monkey Trail Research Paper

Open Document