Better Students Ask More Questions.
Explain how Bertram Cates technically "won" the case despite the fact that he was found...
2 Answers | add yours
A good question. Cates was found guilty of teaching evolution. If you judge the case based on the simple verdict of guilt or innocence, he lost. However, if you look at the issue in a larger context, he won. A huge amount of public attention was put on this matter. Henry Drummond defends the case as an issue of free thought, and the media makes fun of the fundamentalist position. The result is that science wins and a certain kind of religious position loses, and so Cates won.
Posted by gbeatty on April 18, 2007 at 8:53 AM (Answer #1)
Bert Cates won because his lawyer showed all the holes in the Creationist theory. He was found guilty of teaching evolution, but that was not the point.
Posted by cheesepie14 on April 11, 2009 at 3:50 AM (Answer #2)
Related QuestionsSee all »
Join to answer this question
Join a community of thousands of dedicated teachers and students.