What was Clarence Darrow’s position during the Scopes Trial?

History

2 answers:

liraira [26]3 years ago

6 0

Answer:

In 1925, Darrow defended John Thomas Scopes in the still famous Monkey Trial. Teacher Scopes was judged for teaching the theory of species evolution at a state school in Tennessee. The charge was "to teach a theory that denies the history of the Divine Creation of man as set forth in the Bible, and instead teaches that man descends from a low order of animals."

The accuser and principal witness was the fundamentalist William Jennings Bryan. When Darrow interrogated him, Bryan had to accept that the biblical account of creation could not be interpreted in six days as if it were 24-hour days but as six indeterminate periods of time. Darrow demonstrated to public opinion the raving of a literal interpretation of the Bible and the need to teach scientific theories in schools. Although the judge sentenced Scopes to pay a fine of $ 100, the trial immensely discredited Bryan and fundamentalism and it was a triumph for Scopes as a teacher, because what he taught a few students could teach him to the whole country and the world. Bryan died shortly after.

coldgirl [10]3 years ago

4 0

In 1925 Clarence Darrow defended John Scopes who was charged with teaching his students about evolution which broke Tennessee law.

You might be interested in

How did the Dorian invasion help spread the Greek culture

lesya692 [45]

Answer:

It is believed that an enemy, Eurystheus of Mycenae, is the leader who invaded The Dorians. ... The origin of the Dorians is not completely certain, though the general belief is that they are from Epirus or Macedonia. According to the ancient Greeks, it is possible there could have been such an invasion.

Explanation:

4 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

West germanys acceptance of a market economy led to..

garri49 [273]

D. Successful growth would be the correct option!

3 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Which of the following was not a result of the Cuban Missile Crisis?

Pie

The correct answer is a large increase in the number of refugees from Cuba to the United States.

The Cuban Missile Crisis was a conflict between the United States and Soviet Union that involved Cuba. At this time, Cuba was an ally of the Soviet Union. This alliance allowed for the Soviet Union to place missiles in Cuba, just 90 miles from US territory. This conflict was solved peacefully after 13 days of discussion between the US federal government and the Soviet Union.

With this information in mind, it is clear to see that Cuban refugees did not increase. This reason this cannot be true is that during this time, the US and Cuba were enemies. Many Cubans disliked America because of the Bay of Pigs invasion that happened a year prior.

5 0

3 years ago

2.A government is laissez-faire when it A.fairly regulates workers. B.fairly regulates businesses. C.does not interfere with bus

Alchen [17]

A government is laissez-faire when it does not interfere with business affairs and does not regulate its actions

Further Explanation

Laissez-faire is an economic theory that resists any form of government interference in business affairs. It uses the principle that the less involvement of the government in the economy the more successful it can become, leading to the success of society as a whole. Free market capitalism is based on this Laissez-faire philosophy.

The following are the common types of legislation Laissez-faire economists oppose:

• minimum wages

• duties

• trade restrictions

• corporate taxes

Effects of Laissez-faire in the society

While Laissez-faire was implemented in the late 18th and early 19th century it was also noticed that it resulted in large gaps between the wealthy and the poor, unsafe working conditions for the workers and starvation.

Government Intervention

In the beginning of the 20th century significant government controls and regulations were implemented with the goal of protecting workers from unsafe working conditions and to protect consumers from unfair trading practices.

Criticism of Laissez-Faire

Critics of Laissez-faire targeted the moral ambiguities that is attached to capitalism as a system, to which, it does not inherently protect the lowest in the society. As an argument, advocates believe that when individuals pursue their interest first, the benefits will follow. However, for the detractors, Laissez-fair only leads to economic imbalances and poverty.

Learn more