National Archives and Records Administration. National Archives and Records Administration, n.d. Web. 04 Feb. 2014. http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html. "The Constitution of the United States: Amendments 11-27."
Available at: http://www.history.com/topics/federalist-papers. [Accessed March 24, 2014] Kurland, Philip B. & Lerner, Ralph. 2000. The Founders’ Constitution.
Web. 06 May 2014. "Obscenity." LII / Legal Information Institute. Cornell University Law School, n.d.
Even though the rural fundamentalist majority legally banned teaching evolution in 1925, the rise of modernism, started long before the trial, raised a critical question for rural Americans: should they publicly impose their religious beliefs upon individuals who believed more and more in science. Larson divides his account into three sections: before, during, and after. The first section carefully exposes the political struggle over individual rights hidden in the debate between science and religion. What emerge are the political views of the two opposing parties: William Jennings Bryan and the ACLU. William Jennings Bryan’s adherence to fundamental Christianity and creationism was only one part of his politics.
Encyclopedia Britannica Online. Encyclopedia Britannica Inc., 2014. Web. 04 Feb. 2014 http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/268448/Thomas-Hobbes. "Leviathan."
From his theories that he claimed were developed during his voyage, Darwin eventually wrote his Origin of Species and Descent of Man, which exploded into the world market over twenty years after his return home. Wallace, King and Sanders wrote in Biosphere, The Realm of Life: "In 1859, Charles Darwin published a theory of evolution that implied that humans evolved from apes. . .The Darwinian revolution was the greatest paradigm shift in the history of biology, and it greatly changed the way that ordinary men and women viewed their own place in the world." (1) World Book tells us: (2)".
The American science writer Michael Brant Shermer once delivered a sublime thought in one of his works: “Science and spirituality are complementary, not conflicting; additive, not detractive. Anything that generates a sense of awe may be a source of spirituality” [Michael Shermer, Why Darwin Matters: The Case Against Intelligent Design (New York: Times Books, 2006)]. This thought sounds like a plausible and coherent answer to the highly controversial point of the relationship between spiritual standards and science. Life, however, would be tedious without varying viewpoints on essential vital matters. Hence, contemplating the mind of a passionate creationist defending an uncompromising claim instead of conforming to both sides is spellbinding.