Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
The relationship between religion and science
Influence of religion in science
Darwinism vs creationism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The relationship between religion and science
Influence of religion in science
Darwinism vs creationism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The relationship between religion and science
John Thomas Scopes, a teacher in Dayton Tennessee, with a hopeful mind in teaching children about Charles Darwin. Scopes was never a full time teacher, he was an occasional substitute and the high school’s football coach. In Tennessee, they have a law where it is illegal to teach children about Charles Darwin and evolution. This is called the Butler Act.
The Scopes “Monkey Trial” changed the way science and evolution are taught in America’s school systems today. The trial came about when John Scopes, an algebra and science teacher, taught evolution as a plausible theory while filling in for a biology teacher at Rhea County Central High School in Dayton, Tennessee. The action went against Tennessee’s “Butler Act,” which prohibited teachers in public schools to “teach any theory that denies the story of the Divine Creation of man as taught in the Bible, and to teach instead that man descended from a lower order of animals.” Scopes, along with others in the community, wanted to change the law so that students could be taught Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution, and the matter was taken to court. The
§§ 17:286.1-17:286.7 (West 1982), is facially invalid [p581] as violative of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. ”(Edwards v. Aguillard) The ruling helped many people by deciding several things at the same time. It helped solidify that the States cannot pass a law requiring the teaching of creationism or other religious text that the main purpose is to restrict the teachings of evolution. It also helped by using the lemon test, which wasn’t decided too long before this case, become a more accepted as a way to determine if a law was unconstitutional.
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.
Today it is “recognized as a leading work in natural philosophy and in the history of mankind” (Landry). Today it seems as if there is a price to pay when talking about this topic in public, especially in school classrooms, as many teachers and parents argue that the Bible’s literal interpretation of human development is supreme. Challenges facing the theory were found relevant in 23 states as well as seven foreign countries. In 2004 a challenge was brought up by the Kansas State Board of Education. Is evolution a matter of a theory or is it the subject of “true scientific controversy” (Tamblyn)?
If we had to have any laws against evolution the state should regulate teaching evolution because the state is able to regulate teaching evolution better in their state and would be able to understand what their state needs more. In the 1920”s in Tennessee where the Scopes Trial happened there was a new law called the Butler Act. The new Tennessee law, known as the Butler Act, stated that these idea could not be taught in public schools (1A Pg,10). Like stated before evolution was a hard subject to discuss because you never knew who be offended or who would think that you are an awful person and against their religion because you just brought up evolution in scientific terms. Teaching evolution in the 1920’s was a very rough subject to teach because if you tried to teach evolution a student may try to ask like how we got here and tried to relate it to the bible then another student may get offended because it may offend their religion or how they view evolution.
In this court case, the state of Louisiana made a law that forbade the teaching of the theory of evolution in public schools unless the school were to teach the theory of creationism as well (“Edwards”). Though the law did not require the teaching of either of the theories, it did require one of the other if schools did decide to teach it (“Edwards”). Parents, teachers, and religious leaders seeked to prevent the forcing of this law (“Edwards”). Andrew Koppelman, the author of “Phony Originalism and the Establishment Clause,” says, “States are prohibited from
Tennessee passed a fundamentalist law forbidding the teaching of anything but creationism, and the American Civil Liberties Union financed a test case to prove the unconstitutionality of the law through the famous “Monkey Trial”. The law was deemed constitutional, signifying the triumph of the religious fundamentalists over the science of the cities (Garraty
Darwin’s theory contradicted biblical theology in such a fundamental way that it was very near impossible for many people to accept; the drastic difference in the fundamental beliefs between devout Christians and accepters of Darwin’s theory made any kind of compromise between the two groups very difficult. Despite the extreme differences in fundamental beliefs between followers of Christianity and the scientific community, a few compromises have been made throughout history. The most prominent of which were equal time laws. Equal time laws call for teachers to spend, obviously enough, equal time on both evolution and biblical accounts of creation; equal time laws also typically require that teachers make both evolution and Biblical creation stories seem like they have equal evidence to back them and similar support among
Evolutionist lost short term but won long term. DeBerry says how some schools throughout the U.S. took evolution out of their textbooks. Tennessee did not even use their biology books in their schools. Schools did not start teaching evolution until decades later (4). The Butler Act was not enforced, and it was eventually repealed years later.
It may be common knowledge to know that Creationism was a principle theory in the realm of science during this time period. Creationism was taught in our schools and institutions, but during this age that mentality took a pivotal shift. Creationism, which is believe in a supernatural creator came under threat by rising, new theories. Theories such as Darwinism began there moment of birth during this time period. It would be by the writing’s of Charles Darwin that society would come to know of Darwinism.
Do you support the state of Georgia's decision to allow public high schools to offer elective courses involving the teaching of the Bible? Certain States are, also, considering the passing of a bill to allow Bible classes to be offered in public schools. Although, some feel as if church and state should remain separated, but the opposing side feel as if church and state should simply admix. I believe that Bible classes should be allowed as a part of high school curriculum.
The students should actually know the right kind of information of how the world has become to be today and how did they become the person they are now; they should be taught by the information that has valid reasoning and evidence not by make up information that is based on belief. By learning the concept of evolution I have a strong feeling that the students will use the concepts to help them solve biological problems that they might have to face in the future. For example, students who would want to protect themselves from any sort of diseases, like the hereditary diseases, the students should first have full knowledge on the evolutionary histories of the disease-causing gene. It assures me that if evolution were taken away from learning, students would not get the knowledge that they need to know on how the world were created and that it will be difficult for them to handle issues that they might face in the future, relating to life, humans, or animals. My opinion of supporting evolution will not change, and that I believe that evolution should be taught in school so that our future will be
Flash forward to the very first day of school ten years from now. As students sit anxiously in their seats in a packed auditorium, the principal presents the rules and regulations for the school year. At the end of his presentation, he hesitantly addresses the slide of religious dos and don'ts. He explains the consequences of participating in religious activity, like reading the bible or praying, and sends the students on their way. Public schools should allow students to express their religious beliefs in the classroom because it is the foundation of our country, the origin of morals, and the right of our students.
Do you know what your religious freedoms are in school, or what you can control in your learning? Well the role that religion plays in school should be minimal or none. Three reasons why religion should be kept to a minimum in U.S public schools are; the constitution, public school is public, and common sense. The first reason is the constitution. The Constitution states that religion is separated from state.