The, Anti Evolution And The State Of Arkansas

The two-hour special documentary, Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial, features the Kitzmiller v. Dover School District case in 2004. It captures the turmoil that tore apart the community of Dover, Pennsylvania in one of the latest battles over teaching evolution in public schools. Some members of the community believed that not only Darwinism, but also a so called theory, Intelligent Design, should be taught in their public high school. It was a battle between the two theories. It forced neighbor against neighbor and friend against friend. The community itself was broken half and half on the controversial issue.

I believe that the state should not tell people what to believe. Everyone has their own mind and they have the right to believe what they want to believe. I see nothing wrong with teachers teaching about Darwinism or Creationism. I think that everyone should be educated on both matters. There is nothing wrong with knowing information about both subjects, and believing or not believing in them. It is the job of teachers to educate the students on people’s ideas and findings from their research. Once a teacher is telling students what they should or shouldn't do then it is a problem. In the movie, Inherit the Wind, there are many instances where I believe that Bert Cates should not have been found guilty for educating his students on the

The Tinker v. Des Moines case had lots of impacts; including the Tinker family’s lives over the years. Mary Beth continued in activist movements such as peace, anti-war, and civil rights efforts. John Tinker continued his anti-war movements in college. He even ended up majoring in protest. In addition, only 2 years after the ruling, leading attorney for the Tinkers, Dan Johnston, was invited to Roosevelt High School to be their commencement speaker (Anker). Secondly, to mark the 50th anniversary of the case, On December 15, 2015, Mary Beth and John Tinker visited Roosevelt High School and discussed students’ rights. Besides the effects of the people involved in the case, many subsequent cases have also been affected from the Tinker v. Des Moines case. For example, a subsequent case similar to the Tinker case would be Epperson v. Arkansas. In this case, a teacher, in a public school, sued the school for prohibiting her from teaching human evolution. The Supreme Court, with Justice Abe Fortas writing the opinion, concluded that "The State's undoubted right to prescribe the curriculum for its public schools does not carry with it the right to prohibit, on pain of criminal penalty, the teaching of a scientific theory or doctrine where that prohibition is based upon reasons that violate the First Amendment” (qtd. in “Epperson v.

The 1920’s was a time of prosperity and change in the United States, but with change comes disagreements. One of the largest debates during this time period, and still today, was the debate between science and religion. Many people were Christians in America during this time and they believed that the story of how God created the Earth should be taught in public schools. These people were called “fundamentalists.” They believed nothing could compare to or be as powerful as God’s word. The other side to this debate were the Modernists, or the ones who believed in science rather than religion. Modernists wanted to teach the theory of evolution in public schools instead of the Creation story the Fundamentalists believed in (“United States in History”). All of these different opinions led to one of the most famous trials known as the Scopes v. State of Tennessee trial. John Scopes was a substitute teacher in Tennessee who decided to teach the theory of evolution to a science class. Scopes was accused of violating the Butler Act, which states that teaching anything that

In the “Monkey Trial” William Jennings Bryan spoke as the leader of the Christian fundamentalist, what him and his followers wanted to do was for the people and court to find out how unfair it was for something that they perceived as “materialistic and anti-religious be taught in the very same classrooms from which all religious instruction had been banned” (Thomas, 2009 p. 25). This situation created a lot of debates among the people. Many things changed in the American public schools that arise because of the evolution theory and religion.

The Court is now confronted with the responsibility of determining if Dover?s proposition, and the implications of its implementation are constitutional, or whether they would violate fundamental personal freedoms. In order to make its decision, the court must contemplate many facets of the issue, including: if the religious origins of intelligent design permeate the theory too strongly, if teaching I.D. in schools would violate statutes regarding state funding for public schools, and even if the theory provides sufficient factual scientific evidence to be taught as a scientific theory in a school?s biology curriculum.

In 1925, the Butler Act was passed, which prohibited the teaching of evolution in public schools. The teaching of evolution was seen as a destructive force that would destroy civilization, and a threat to the word of God (Document 3a). An American teacher, John Scopes, was sent to trial for teaching evolution in his biology class. During the trial, Dudley Field Malone, an attorney at the time, argued that the courts were not debating whether Scopes taught a couple of pages of evolution to his class. Rather, they were debating whether or not society should be based on religion or science (Document 4). This produced a shift from ancient beliefs to modern ideas because the popular trial was able to finally bring science to life in

Starting with the Scopes Trial, many more cases have occurred concerning the teaching of evolution. “By 1928 every southern state except Virginia had debated or was considering legislation banning the teaching of evolution in the

“In 1925, Tennessee outlawed teaching the theory of human evolution in public schools.” This ban of evolution was taken to court and was named the Scopes Monkey Trial, since the Tennessee teacher John Scopes was the defendant in the case. However, as Ronald Numbers states in his book, Galileo Goes to Jail: and other myths about science and religion, this was a response “to the invitation of the American Civil Liberties Union, which opposed the statute on free-speech grounds, [so] town leaders in Dayton, Tennessee, decided to test the new statute in court by arranging a friendly indictment of a local science teacher named John Scopes.” In this trial many celebrities in politics and law presided over this trial, in the end it was more of a publicity stunt than anything else. Yet for many years, this trial was believed to be entirely about how the very Christian based community of Tennessee didn’t agree with the teachings of evolution. This event was misconstrued so much that it was even printed in school books that give examples of Sciences fight against the tyranny of Christianity. Newspapers printed headlines about this trial for years to come and it lead the public to believe that this was not just about publicity but about the actual fight of science vs

In one corner we had William Jennings Bryan who was an unsuccessful presidential candidate and seasoned leader of the Democratic Party. Although Bryan was a conservative Christian he was also a complex man. The fundamentalist man was far from a legal or political dummy; he'd previously served as secretary of state and he was an exceptional public speaker. Bryan was also a strong, verbal critic of the teaching of evolution in the United States. With experience and his legal and political expertise aiding his legal preparation Bryan attempted to make his personal beliefs, objectives, and motives a supplementary aspect in favor of creating a more nuanced basis for his argument. As Bryan focused on subtly weaving in his core Christian, fundamentalist beliefs into his argument he put himself in a position that allowed him to center his argument against teaching evolution in public schools at the taxpayer's expense. Bryan and many of his followers thought it was unfair that the Bible and Christianity could not be taught in public schools along with evolution. Many felt that taxpayers were paying for the instruction that they believed was undermining children's faith in their parents' religion. Bryan was also against teaching evolution as fact instead of just theory. As a result, Larson forces us to see a picture of conflict between the democracy, represented by Bryan, and individual rights, represented by Clarence Darrow and the

In the wake of the Scopes trial in Tennessee, the State of Arkansas passed an “anti-evolution” statute in 1928, that made it illegal "to teach the theory or doctrine that mankind ascended or descended from a lower order of animals," or "to adopt or use in any such institution a textbook that teaches the doctrine or theory that mankind ascended or descended from a lower order of animal.” Forty years later, the case of Epperson v. Arkansas (1968) was argued before the Supreme Court. The case originated in 1965, when Susan Epperson was hired to teach 10th grade biology at Little Rock Central High School. The local school board had recently adopted, as a part of an approved curriculum, a new biology textbook that included a section on evolution. Immediately, Epperson recognised her dilemma; that to teach the required curriculum would put her at risk for dismissal under the “anti-evolution” statute. A suit was filed to challenge the constitutionality of the statute, and the State Chancery Court of Pulaski County ruled that the statute was unconstitutional. This ruling was overturned by the Arkansas Supreme Court in 1967. Upon appeal, the U.S. Supreme Court held that:

In the late nineteen-eighties, Edwards v. Aguillard argued that a Louisiana law was against the First Amendment of the Constitution. This law prohibited public schools from teaching about evolution and the evolutionary processes unless the topic was taught alongside religious based creation theories. More specifically, this law imposed on public schools was argued to have broken the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. This clause simply says that absolutely no law can establish or support a religion (“Establishment Clause”, 2011). Many people challenged the state’s law including local parents and teachers as well as men and women with religious affiliations. Ultimately, the Supreme Court found that the state’s act was unlawful according to the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment due to the fact that there was no non-religious basis to the act. The creation theories are entirely based around the idea that an all-powerful god created the human race. Therefore the state is promoting this religious teaching. Although it was argued that the act was to give students more opportunities to learn, the point was made that the teachers lost the power to make decisions in his or her own classroom. Furthermore, the law inhibits the learning of children by banning the teaching of evolution unless creation is also taught in the classroom. The law

The Scopes trial, writes Edward Larson, to most Americans embodies “the timeless debate over science and religion.” (265) Written by historians, judges, and playwrights, the history of the Scopes trial has caused Americans to perceive “the relationship between science and religion in . . . simple terms: either Darwin or the Bible was true.” (265) The road to the trial began when Tennessee passed the Butler Act in 1925 banning the teaching of evolution in secondary schools. It was only a matter of time before a young biology teacher, John T. Scopes, prompted by the ACLU tested the law. Spectators and newspapermen came from allover to witness

The ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) gave an ad in the paper saying that it would financially help defend anyone who would teach evolution in a public school thus breaking the law. And George Rappleyea an oposser of the butler act went to see the town's school board's head school concerning this matter and they decided not only would this help the small town of Dayton but also will either

Public schools are a place to learn proven facts and some very well—known and accepted theories. These schools have been led this way for a long time and show no signs of changing. Many states around the country have rejected the teaching of creationism in public schools, since the subject is so controversial among teachers and parents. In Ohio, a bill to develop new science content standards was not successfully passed. Many creationists were upset when they discovered that the first drafts of the standards were filled with evolutionary content, without any allowance for alternative explanations of life’s origins. In the uproar, the state board held a special meeting to investigate the process that the writing team and advisory committee used to draft the science standards (Matthews, Answering Genesis). This is why learning the facts about evolution should be taught at school. By doing this, there would be much less confrontation between teachers, students, and parents. If one has the desire to learn about creationism or any other beliefs of how the world came to be, one should learn it at a place outside of school, such as church or at home.