Bill+Week+Six+Assignment

 John Scopes once said, “If a state is allowed to dictate that a teacher must teach a subject in accordance with the beliefs of one particular religion, then the state can also force schools to teach the beliefs of the person in power, which can lead to suppression of all personal and religious liberties.” In Scopes’ biology class he did not follow the rules set by the state which forbids the teaching of evolution in school. He did not break the law because he wanted some sort of recognition or fifteen minutes of fame, he taught evolution because he believed it was an important and factual part of science. In fact, he did not try to hide the subject of his teachings; he was the one who pulled the book he was using in class from a drugstore shelf after being asked if he agreed that biology could not be taught without evolution.

In 1925, when “The Monkey Trial” was taking place, //this// science could be defined as one with a very small gab between science and religion. During the trial, the only kind of evidence presented by the prosecutors was religion based. Most of the questions asked were related to the bible, and whether the correct interpretation should be literal of figurative. Darrow, the defense attorney, took the most punishment during the trial. He was the only one to speak; Scopes did not say a word until the trial was over. Also William Jennings Bryan and Darrow battled over questions about the bible and science.  At the end of the eight day case, it was obvious that there was nothing Darrow could have said or done to grant Scopes innocence. After 11,520 minutes of trial the jury only needed nine minutes to deliberate. This equates to 0.078% of the total time of trial. Scopes and Darrow knew that they were not given a chance to win, but Bryan’s death six days after the trial could be considered a victory to Darrow. In the end, the only was the trial affected Scopes was by making him $100 poorer. After eight days of listening to what Darrow had to say, Scopes decided to speak up. “ Your honor, I feel that I have been convicted of violating an unjust statute. I will continue in the future, as I have in the past, to oppose this law in any way I can. Any other action would be in violation of my ideal of academic freedom — that is, to teach the truth as guaranteed in our constitution, of personal and religious freedom. I think the fine is unjust.” (//World's Most Famous Court Trial// 313)