The Scopes trial
The 1920's proved to be great and sorrowful times for millions of people. These people had many great ideas which would improve mankind and still some others had ideas which were based upon ignorance and illogical morals. Some people were reluctant to accept the new age, as they did not want to except theories of evolution, progression, or bettering oneself. Even though they favored industrialization they fretted leaving the old ways behind. The South was particularly unwilling to accept the fact that the world was changing and that they had to accept new morals including Charles Darwin's theories of evolution. The South even showed their reluctance to change by passing the Butler act which prohibited the teaching of evolution. Due to the nature this law, John Scopes, a teacher was put on trial teaching evolution to broaden the views of his students.
John Scopes was the fifth child born to Thomas Scopes and Mary Alva Brown on August 3, 1900 in Paducah, Kentucky.
Johns father was a supporter of labor unions, and worked as a mechanic. Thomas believed in being well rounded and taught his sons a variety of subjects at home, Freya Hanson noted in her book The Scopes Monkey Trial that " My father had read to me from Charles Darwin's Origin of Species Descent of Man" (38), which was Darwin's theories on evolution. Scopes moved around frequently as a child and when he graduated high school
in Salem, Illinois William Jennings Bryan spoke at his graduation. Ironically, Bryan would soon be his prosecutor in the Scopes Trial. Scopes went to college and took a wide variety of classes.
Mecys 2
Hanson noted in his book that " Unfortunately the combination of classes did not allow him to graduate, so he was forced to...
Seriously Flawed
Your argument although well meaning is a bit biased in its presentation. In its entirety you do not present evidence that supports your thesis which is convoluted at that. Please restate a thesis. Also, use cites. This is not a proper essay, This is an opinion paper disguised as a research paper. This is the worse example of PseudoJournalism I've ever seen. The reason I chose to throughly flame this essay was not to tear the writer down just illuminate unnoticed detrimental motivations which obviously underly this paper.
2 out of 2 people found this comment useful.