Creation’s Contest with Evolution

Creation’s Contest with Evolution

It began in Dayton, Tennessee-1925. A high school teacher by the name

of John Scopes was charged with teaching evolution, which was illegal at the

time in Tennessee. The court found Scopes guilty, and he was fined one

hundred dollars. However, the Scopes trial immediately sparked one of the

largest controversies in today's public school systems: should creationism

still be taught in public schools? In the trial, Clarence Darrow argued that

teaching creationism in public schools defies the separation of church and

state (which is pulled from the first amendment). Darrow moved on to say

that evolution does not disobey the first amendment. The trial denied all

public schools the right to teach creationism-a belief that humans were

created by a higher being-although evolution may be taught. However,

Darrow's claim is being challenged. Many believe evolution disobeys the

first amendment. Others believe that excluding creationism in classrooms

shows an unfair bias and, therefore, gives the allusion that the evolutionary

theory is a fact. This, once again, disobeys the first amendment (according

to Darrow). If the only theory of origination taught in schools is evolution

an unfair bias and anti-God philosophy is instilled in the students. For

these reasons, both evolution and creation should be taught in public

schools.

Prior to the year 1925, all public schools in the United States taught

creationism (Evolution Conspiracy). This widely accepted notion of God

creating man was challenged by a British naturalist by the name of Charles

Darwin in 1859 with the publication of On the Origin of Species by Natural

Selection. In the book, Darwin proposes that, ...

... middle of paper ...

...s say is legitimate. That kind of censorship and

unprecedented bias has the potential to force students to believe in

evolution for the sheer reason that they are not exposed to the opposing

view. This in itself directly conflicts with Clarence Darrows' argument. If

creationism disagrees with the first amendment, as Darrow explained, then it

would only make sense that humanism disagrees with the first amendment as

well. It is unfair for the students not to learn both theories of origin so

Darrows' argument is proven illegitimate. The only fair way to teach the

theory of origin is to explain both. Doing this will not instill Christian

beliefs in the students, but rather keep the students' minds open to both

sides of the two contradicting theories. As a result, students can come to

their own conclusion and that is the true definition of science.