Creation’s Contest with Evolution

1993 Words8 Pages
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.

    More about Creation’s Contest with Evolution

      Open Document