In each instance there lurked within the litigation the proper role of God and man, of good and evil, of the First Commandment and Nietzsche. Clarence Darrow was well to the left of progressives, he was undoubtedly a socialist and likely so was John T Scopes. To observe that Darrow was brilliant in court, by the way, is not to endorse his worldview or his religiosity, or lack of it.
Leopold's crime condemned by the state, a murder, was the consequence of his rejection of God and God's law, violating the First Commandment. Worshiping Nietzsche, he despised God, discarded God but he would be God.
The Scopes trial is a fraud from beginning to end. It is revealing to compare the parallels of the Scopes trial which was a put up affair in which Scopes later privately admitted that he never actually taught evolution and the contrived causes of litigation such as the right to use birth control leading up to Roe vs. Wade. In both of these instances the left fabricated cases to adjudicate a soulless and godless world ordained by judges.
Darrow's defense of Leopold sought to erase God from the equation. There was no heinous violation of God's law requiring retribution, there were only human missteps which led to tragedy and which should be dealt with on human terms, i.e. no capital punishment. Darrow's defense in the monkey trial sought to erase God from the classroom and, like Leopold, do away with the first commandment and substitute human "science."
Atheists argue that a civil society can be had in the absence of belief in God. We as a society are now reaping the consequences of these assumptions. How is it working out?
