Wednesday, November 13, 2013

Act 3 Inherit Discussion

We are going to have a silent discussion today.  Please follow directions.  For the first half of class, we will be discussing Act 3 in itself, then we will transfer to real world questions.
Focus the first part on the text only.  Respond to my question, then ask a question when you are done.  You must respond to one another and continue to ask questions as you move through.  I want analysis, depth of thought and constant reference to the text.  

Why did the jury find Cates guilty even after there was so much support for Drummond at the end of the trial?  Why did Cates "win"according to Drummond?

131 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The jury found Cates guilty because of the new evidence brought to them from Rachel. After going to Cates class and taking the book on evolution, Rachel read this book and gave it over to the jury stating it was Cates. Because of this new evidence against Cates, the jury had enough reason to convict Cates of the crime.
    Drummond felt as though Cates won because the trial not only changed the townspeople's opinion on evolution but also changed their view about changed.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The jury still found Cates guilty because their was evidence that what he was teaching in his classroom was clearly against the law.
    Drummond told Cates he won because he changed the towns peoples veiws on evolution and made them more open to change

    ReplyDelete
  5. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I know that this is kind of an old question but I'm still wondering what gives you the courage to go a different way from the crowd? If you know that you are going to be alone what makes you stand up?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Everyone has beliefs, the willingness to stand alone for that belief, I think, shows how much that person really believes in their belief(s). The song "Cassie" by Flyleaf is about a girl who believed in God and her life was threatened if she did. And she stood up for her belief in God and died because of it. I don't actually know if that is based off of a true story but the point of it still remains.

      Delete
    2. I think that what drives courage within yourself, is the ideas that you feel need to be heard. I do feel like courage depends on how deep you feel towards your own beliefs. In my opinion, if your beliefs don't mean that much to you, then you may not have the courage to stand out and share what is most important to you. And if you can share your own personal beliefs whether or not they are different, you have the integrity within yourself to share whats most important to you.

      Delete
  7. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  8. What does Drummond's story about "Golden Dancer" illuminate?

    ReplyDelete
  9. I think Cates lost because of the judge. The judge was always giving Brady, (the prosecution), the upper hand. He never overruled any of his objections, and he always overruled Drummond's. He allowed the Bible to be used as a reference, but never Darwinism. He didn't let Drummond use his witnesses, but he let Brady use all of his. So the jury only had Drummond's testimony, and nothing else. As for Cates, Drummond knew the second that Brady sounded weak over the radio, that millions of people were listening to, he had won in the long run.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The judge technically didn't dicide if Cates was guilty or not. He only decided what his punishment would be and I think he let him off easy because he didn't give him jail time.

      Delete
  10. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I think the reason that the jury found cates guilty was because he technically did break a law. People were clearly swaying towards cates but they still found him guilty. I think the reason cates won according to Drummond was because cates had stood up for what he believes in. Like Drummond said on page 123 " you don't suppose this kind of thing is ever finished, do you? Tomorrow it will be something else- and another fella will have to stand up. And you've helped give him the guts to do it!" I think that this Is a lot of why he was fighting for. To give others the right to think and stand up for themselves. I do wonder why the judge had let cates off so easy? Throughout the book the judge and shown what said he leaned towards so I wonder why he would let Bert off with only a $100 fine.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think the judge felt sympathy for Cates. I think they were all just too mentally exhausted to take more

      Delete
    2. Daisy to answer your question on why the judge let Cates off so easily, you have to remember that $100 dollars was a lot more money back then than it is today. I mean he offered jail or a fine of $100 dollars, but in addition he lost his job and was basically blackballed in this town. So really the judge didn't let him off a easy as you think.

      Delete
    3. Daisy, it never said what religion if any the judge was and I also think the judge think that the judge knew no matter what happened in the court room, Cates would win in many people's minds. Also $100 was a lot of money back then so that could also be why the fine was lower than normal.

      Delete
    4. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    5. Daisy, to answer your question, on page 110 the mayor says to the judge, "Newspapers all over are raising such a hullaballoo. After all, November, ain't too far off, and it doon't do any of us any good to have any of the voters gettin' all steamed up. Wouldn't do no harm to just let things simmer down... Well, go easy, Merle." Right here, the mayor is basically saying to the judge to let Cates off easy. And on pg 115, the judge says, "the court deems it proper - (He glances at the mayor)" showing that the judge took what the mayor said and took it easy on Cates.

      Delete
    6. Also $100 was a lot back then and i do feel bad for the way it turned out for Cates. He got punished for trying to stand up for what he believed in.

      Delete
  12. The jury still found Cates guilty because the town has a strong belief of religion that a man who believes in Darwinism is never going to be right in their eyes. I mean these are people who cheer for the death of this man on page 65 and 66. Drummond however said he won because Cates was able to take this to a bigger court without the biased opinion on the jury, he was able to make this problem known in the world, page 116.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The jury not only found him guilty because of the towns strong beliefs but also that he really did break a law. Even if the jury wasn't so biased they would have found him guilty because it was a law.

      Delete
  13. Cates was found guilty because he broke a law. There was strong evidence that he did, and many of the witness' testimonies proved that Cates did believe in Evolution and was willing to teach it. Although in that small Tennessee courtroom Cates lost, he won nation wide. Drummond explained that Cates was one of the few people at the time, and the time to come, to rise and speak what he thought. That's all Drummond wanted to do, defend Cates' right to think, especially in a country where in it's constitution states it has Free Speech.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I completely agree with you, however. Do you think that's ALL Drummond wanted to do? Don't you think that Drummond also wanted the prestige?

      Delete
  14. I think that the Jury found Cates guilty of breaking the law. A law was in place saying that no one shall teach a creation theory besides divine creation and Cates quite simple did just that. That is not to say the the law shouldn't have been there in the first place. That could have been a reason the the punishment was not severe.

    Who is more powerful in the text; Brady or the public? How does the public's opinion affect how all politicians?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's really provoked thought David, but the public seemed to have way more power than Brady in the end. It was very interesting to see Brady going from 100% in control to 100% not in control.

      Delete
    2. Do you feel for Brady at the end of this play?

      Delete
    3. Why do you think that happened?

      Delete
    4. Well, I mean he really lead his way into losing all his power, by going against what he had preached about forever.

      Delete
    5. Who is more powerful in the text; Brady or the public? How does the public's opinion affect how all politicians?

      Its dynamic. In the beginning Brady was. He completely moved the public. The entire town was underneath a spell. They all looked up to him and agreed with him "If it's good enough for Brady it's good enough for me!" Later, the public was in control. The views of many of the towns people were changed and Brady had lost control of them.

      Delete
    6. Though what caused Brady to lose control of the public?

      Delete
  15. The jury found Cates still guilty because even though Drummond was speaking his heart out and replying to everything correctly, the jury was still on their own religion that God is real and God is everything. He was also convicted for going against most of the town by teaching evolution and going against the Tennessee law. Drummond said Cates 'won' though because even though he lost the trial he won in the long run. Cates lost the trial but the point he brought up is still being talked about today as it also says in the book a summer not to long ago which also supports me that this is being talked about long after the trial. Cates won in the aspect of the long run and giving people the ability to stand up and talk about his topic with more help.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well that's true, but Cates did break the law. He did admit to it. Do you think if there was shaky evidence saying that Cated did teach evolution the would have ruled differently?

      Delete
    2. Karl, do you think that Drummond might have fought against the trial just for the fight?

      Delete
    3. I completely agree with this because I too mentioned a lot of the same points.

      Delete
  16. At the beginning of the story, Lawrence and Lee write, "It might have been yesterday. It could be tomorrow." How, today, are we still fighting the ideals of belief especially when there are so many controversial topics? How is this story and its values applicable today? Why does the play still resonate after all these years?

    ReplyDelete
  17. The jury found Cates guilty even though Drummond had so much support for his case because, Cates did break a law. The law states that you cannot teach evolution. He taught evolution to his class. The law in my opinion shouldn't exists, and other people started to realize that too. Sadly though, the law is in place and he broke it. So, the jury found him guilty of breaking the law. Drummond said to Cates that he won in the long run, because Cates showed that people should stand up for what they believe in. He also helped show the people of Hillsboro that evolution isn't all that bad, and that people should have the right to think what they want to think. One question that I had throughout the entire story was why were the townspeople so fickle? At the beginning of Act 2 the townspeople were all for Brady. Then as Drummond started to unhinge Brady the townspeople quickly turned from Brady to Drummond. They always supported the person that looked like they were winning, and if the tables turned they'd leave the person in a second and support the other side. Another thing I was wondering what you thought of the ending. Drummond putting both the Bible and Darwin's Origin of Species together in his briefcase. What do you think the authors were trying to symbolize?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think the townspeople started to realize that Cates brought up a issue that needed to be brought up instead of just saying oh it's a law and leave it at that. I also think that the people turned against Brady because they started to realize how Brady was keeping them from other things besides their religion and the townspeople started to see that and that Drummond was bashing on Brady and that Brady said nothing but things in the bible even when the words were turned a little to make him sound better. I also think that the authors were trying to symbolize that the bible will always be there along with Darwinism and that they will never be diminished.

      Delete
  18. The jury was not the best jury ever. And I think personally they were still supporting Brady. It's not as easy to just change your beliefs like that, and the jury that was chosen was specifically chosen to be more towards Brady's side. Most of the people in the beginning believed that Brady was the amazing guy that could save them. "Mr. Brady is the champion of ordinary people, like us."I think Cates won, because he opened the door to so many other people. Now they will be able to go out themselves. What is an example of a person "opening a door" in the world of today?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with you Bianca. I think part of the reason Cates was found guilty was because the jury was made up of people from the town who all originally opposed Darwin's theory's. Cates opened the door of rebellion and standing up for what you believe in. In reality, he won. it was an unfair law and an unfair jury.

      Delete
    2. But Rachel you need to take into look at the facts. Cates Absolutely did break the law. If you were on the jury, regardless of weather you love Brady or not facts are facts.

      Delete
    3. Cates lost because he broke a law. Although it was unfair and against the United States Constitution, but the law was still there. There was strong evidence that he broke it as well. But I think he shouldn't have been charged for the crime. It is a bad law.

      Delete
  19. What did you think of Hornbeck at the end of this play? Why does Drummond get angry at his cynical and heartless comments?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I thought that Hornbeck did not look good at the end of this play. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but Brady just died and everyone else is mourning for him while Hornbeck is totally insensitive. The least he could have done was keep his mouth shut and not say anything at all. I think that Drummond got angry with him because at one point Drummond and Brady were friends, colleagues even. Drummond had respect for Brady, and so when he died he was upset. Just because Drummond burned Brady in the trial, it doens't mean that he didn't like and have respect Brady. So, when Hornbeck was saying those awful things, Drummond did what any other friend would do, he stood up for him.

      Delete
    2. Hornbeck is not a likable character at all. That does not mean he was not wise. Maybe he was just as wise as Drummond. Drummond wasn't a likable character in the beginning either, but at the end I think we all loved him. Drummond is furious at Hornbeck's attitude because he has no right to judges anyones beliefs. Even that of Brady's.

      Delete
    3. Hornbeck at the end of this play was very rude and had no sympathy for Brady. Hornbeck may not have liked Brady but that doesn't mean he had to disrespect him especially when he just passed away. Drummond was angry at Hornbeck's comments because Brady and him used to be close friends. On page 67, Brady said "We were good friends once. I was always glad of your support. What happened between us? There used to be a mutuality of understanding and admiration. Why is it my old friend, that you have moved so far away from me?'' Based off this quote I thought that Drummond may have felt guilty about drifting apart rom Brady and that is why he felt anger towards Hornbeck after Brady died.

      Delete
  20. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  21. The jury still found Cates guilty because even after all the help from Drummond, all the townspeople found him guilty and there really was no way for Drummond, Cates or the jury to chance their minds. Drummond said that they won because they helped the future Martin Luther King Jr's to have the guts to stand up for what they believe in and what they want to see happen. They won because through fighting for his beliefs, Cates brought confidence to others to do the same.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I believe that the jury found Cates guilty because the Jury was technically on his own side. HE believed in religion and was most likely against evolution so he kind of chose the side he liked better.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with this and I didn't really think of it in this way till now

      Delete
    2. I sort of feel like the Jury may have been torn by the end of this trial. I think that they almost wanted to go with Cates, because as you could see, many of the towns people began to go on Cates' side. I think that the real definite reason that the Jury went against Cates was because he did go against the Tennessee law.

      Delete
  23. The Jury found Cates guilty because there was evidence that showed that Cates broke the law on purpose. Rachel also showed evidence of Cates having the possession of the book. Even though people thought that this was a very silly law, it's still a law, and those who disobey will face consequences.
    Drummond believes that even though Cates lost the battle, he had won the war. Even if the jury stated he was guilty, Cates showed the country that he could stand for his beliefs, and that learning something new isn't a bad thing.

    Why did Rachel showed evidence against Cates? In the beginning of the book, she is so defensive for Cates, not wanting to get him in trouble.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well Rachel is this very shy timid girl who is absolutely scared of her father and what he will do if she turns against him, page 54 and 55 plus at this time she didn't agree with what Cates did, she didn't really agree in the end she still believes in god but at the end she accepts that there are other ways.

      Delete
    2. I think Rachel went up as a witness because she wanted to protect her family's name kinda of in the town. Considering her dad is the reverend so she wanted to make sure people in the town still were o.k. with her family and especially her dad.

      Delete
    3. Noah did you think about how when Reverend Brown was talking about how Cates is a devil and what not and Rachael completely disagreed about that. After that Brown said banish you also that's when Rachael in my opinion switched to her fathers side and said a few wrong things in court but felt back and went to Cates side again.

      Delete
  24. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Even though Drummond had a more favorable argument, he was still found guilty because the jury received evidence incriminating Cates. Rachel tells him that she assisted the jury by supplying the evidence.
    Cates "won" according to Drummond because it is only the jury who believed that Cates truly committed a crime. The common people are still in favor of Cates, and this trial made a mockery of that law. Eliminating that law made the community more open to change with them knowing it is possible.

    Brady's victory was described as bitter. Why wouldn't he be joyful about winning this difficult case?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think the reason Brady's victory was described as bitter is because although he won the case, the people of Hillsboro seemed to not be as interested in him or love him as much anymore after Drummond asked him all those question on the stand.

      Delete
    2. It wasn't even a victory. Cates was found guilty but Brady lost that case and he knew it. People's minds were opened. They were given a whole new outlook on things. Brady was made a fool of. Drummond proved all Cates did was wonder. All he did was think.

      Delete
    3. I think that Brady was bitter about this "victory" because in the process Drummond made Brady look like a fool. Also, most of Brady's loyal supporters were no longer loyal or supportive of Brady. Not to mention that it was obvious to most people that Brady did not win this case. On paper it would seem that way, but in the opinions of people which truly matter to Brady, he lost. I also think that this "loss" was one too many. Being "almost-president three times" as Drmmond said probably pushed Brady off the edge to go insane. I think that once his outer shell started to crumble all that was left inside was a sad man that wasn't as strong as he appeared.

      Delete

  26. I think the jury found cates guilty because the town is already set in its ways about evolution and they won't change easily. So therefore the court/jury cant find him innocent because then there would be a huge uprising in the town and they can't have that. If the court found him innocent then people wont agree because they already have there own opinions on evolution so therefore even though the court had a ton of evidence proving him innocent.

    Cates won according to Drummond because Drummond new that cates was actually innocent and Drummond brought enough evidence to the court to prove Cates innocence. So in the end Drummond new that he did his job correctly and well enough to prove Cates innocent.

    ReplyDelete
  27. The jury found Cates guilty still for one big reason, He WAS 100% guilty. The trial was weather he taught or didn't teach evolution in one of his classes. Which he absolutely 100% did, so technically he lost his case. However, Drummond thought he won because he was not only 100% guilty but 100% right with his opinion of every man has the right to think. Also Cates gave every other person who is or will go through this to stand up.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That is very true! in my mind I didn't think about that but that is right. He was 100% guilty for teaching evolution....

      But was he wrong?

      would you have done the same?

      Delete
    2. What would you stand firm for? In the face of opposition, what would you hold steadfast to?

      Delete
    3. I believe Cates by no degree was wrong. I would have most certainly done the same in any position.

      Delete
    4. I agree. But I am also with Connor on this. That doesn't make him wrong necessarily.

      Delete
  28. The jury found Cates guilty because I think they pretty much went into the trial with a decision in their mind and were not going to change their mind. I think the jury had to at least have a little but of a mind and not be closed off to every thing that Drummond had to said.
    What I think is that Drummond told Cates he won because he did not win the trial but he won something bigger. He gave what I think is hope to the other atheists. It is like "he did not win the battle but he won the war".

    Is there a good reason for the radio man for being from Chicago, is it because of Drummond?
    Do we follow people or pay more attention to things more closely because they are from where we live?

    Should Drummond have given Cates any hope?
    Are Some things we tell people sometimes best if we just tell the cold hard truth?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Noah, what does the hoopla show about the weight of this trial on America itself? This was the first trial where it was publicized across the nation through radio.

      Delete
  29. The jury found Cates guilty because he did violate a state law. Although there was a lot of support for Drummond at the end, the people of Hillsboro were very religious and narrow minded people. Then again, Drummond opened up the minds of the towns people. That is why Drummond believes they won the case. They spread knowledge and changed some opinions. They created a way to have different outlook on curiosity and the right to think. The monkey trail completely changed how people all over will think. "Tomorrow it'll be something else - and another fella will have to stand up. And you've helped give him the guts to do it!"

    How did Brown affect the town of Hillsboro?
    How do the views of our community and leaders affect our own views?

    Why was this "crime" committed in Hillsboro? Why was it such a big deal in this town?
    How would the world be different if everyone only believed in creationism or if everyone only believed in evolution?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Gentri, I think that people's views change when they are talking to a "higher class" citizen compared to a lower. I think that we as people today, act fake around people we want to impress. This way, our views change. These views sway to theirs which is a fault that everyone struggles with today.

      Delete
    2. I think the crime being committed in Hillsboro was because that is where Cates was. Now the reason this is such a big deal in the town is because this town seems to live and breath the christian religion and won't except anything else. I think it our world would not be as diverse if we all believed in one thing.

      Delete
  30. After Drummond speech that turned the audience to support Cates, Cates was still found guilty. Even Though the jury supported Cates, he still committed a crime. According to Drummond on page 122, “What jury? Twelve men? Millions of people will say you won. They’ll read in their papers tonight that you smashed bad law. You made it a joke!” Cates may have been found guilty, but he changed the citizens of Hillsboro’s perception. He gave them the opportunity to think and chose what they believe in! My question is, what rights do we take advantage are today? How?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The case defiantly had to have made people more open minded to change. This will cause people to begin to challenge ideas and make a difference.

      Delete
  31. I'm not sure why Cates was found guilty, I think it might be because one jury member can change the whole case. For example if everyone on a jury finds someone guilty but one doesn't then the person is found innocent.

    Cates won according to Drummond because he said the bible and The origin of species were about the same size and he also made so many people think about things they never would have.

    1. Why would some of the people in the trial not have an open mind.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Some people would not have an open mind because they stick true to their beliefs. The strongly agree with what the currently know and nothing is going to change that. For example Reverend Brown on pg 66 said “ Lord we call down the same curse, on those who ask grace for this sinner- though they be blood of my blood and flesh of my flesh”. The reverend Brown is true to his belief about the bible being the truth.

      Delete
    2. I agree with you Jeremy. The townspeople were so set in their mind that they didn't want change. I also think that some of the people may have been afraid of what others thought of them if they went against the town and Brady.

      Delete
  32. The jury found Cates guilty because what he did was illegal and the towns people saw it as a big crime, even though Drummond did really well supporting him the jury still found him guilty. According to Drummond, Cates won because more and more people will hear about this trial and in their opinion they will think that Cates won. A question I had was at the end when Drummond was balancing out the two books then put them in his suitcase, what was the symbolism behind his gesture?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lauren, I believe that the symbolism was that the two group should be able to come together as one and understand that its just what they believe in. I think this also because he kind of smashed them together to put in his briefcase symbolizing that the groups should come together as on.

      Delete
    2. I disagree with you they didn't just find him guilty because what he did was illegal. They found him guilty because even if they believed he did something wrong they didn't want to be looked at and made outcasts.

      Delete
    3. I agree with Bergen's comment. I think that Drummond was trying to symbolize that just because people believe two different theories, it doesn't mean they have to be separated. Drummond was trying to get the two sides of the town to come together.

      Delete
  33. As the play comes to a close, we get some powerful stage directions with Drummond at the center of it all; what did you think about the VERY end?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think that it was showing Drummonds view on religion but also how he wanted to open his mind. I think that's why it was such a big deal that he took both the bible and Darwins book. It shows that he is open to both sides.

      Delete
    2. I feel like the last paragraph in the book was extremely important to the final opinions that you may gain on Drummond. On page 129, the final stage directions end as, "Then Drummond slaps the two books together and jams them in his brief case, side by side." To me this sums up everything that Drummond consisted of throughout the story, we just didn't realize it until the end. I feel like he has always been this sort of way. He never really showed us that he felt towards one side or the other. And to me, this shows how Drummond felt throughout this entire case. I feel like her believed that there shouldn't be any controversy between the Bible and Darwin. He, by this action, seemed like he was showing how the two were equal and continue to remain equal and completely up to opinion.

      Delete
  34. Did Brady die because of the stress or because he was just so flustered by "losing" and not being listened to? How do you think he died?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Daisy, Probably both because he was so freaked out by the situation he might have had a heart attack.

      Delete
    2. I think he died because of the flush of emotion. He may have died from a heart attack. Brady is used to have everything go his way and have everyone drool over him. When the trial started to change and the audience was leaning towards Cates, he started to get overwhelmed. He died because of his public image was disappearing,.

      Delete
    3. I believe that Brady died from many reasons. One being he wasn't the healthiest person who lived, he was constantly eating, page 23, I think that the stress of "winning" the case but finding out that this was going to become a problem of the world was just to much to handle for him.

      Delete
  35. I feel like they found him guilty because there was too much pressure among other people. I feel they didn't want to be made outcasts. I say this because the town of Hillsboro is a very religious town and they already made Cates an outcast. Every body was also very split on the task at hand because on page 113 there is a mixed reaction to the ruling.
    Cates won according to Drummond because with his case he set down an outline for others if they are caught in this same situation. It also shows that there is a possibility to win you have to start strong and end strong. There is also something that shows that no matter the odds and if everything you had to use is irrelevant that you always have a chance to use what others have to your advantage.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I completely agree, if one person in Hillsboro were to go for evolution, they would become outcasts. Though what caused that kind of mentality? One person? Brady?

      Delete
    2. I think what caused that mentality is being scared of change and that something might go wrong if they opposed it. I think it was more than one person but Brady really put the bad thoughts into peoples minds.

      Delete
  36. I think that the Jury found Cates guilty due to the obvious fact that he DID break the law of Tennessee. Even though Drummond did have extremely strong evidence throughout the case, the Jury can't ignore the fact that Cates broke the law. On page 115, the judge exclaims "Bertram Cates, this court has found you guilty of violating Public Act Volume 37, Statute Number 31428, as charged." I feel like this in itself shows how the Jury could have possibly been torn because of Drummond's arguments. However, in some way, like Drummond says, I feel that Cates won the trial due to what he gained and how his community reacted.

    When Brady was trying to make his speech, I was wondering, should Brady still be so eager for the attention of those around him? Did this theoretically hurt him more than it helped him?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think that Brady NEEDS the attention, but he is also a very close minded person who doesn't want change and he is this leader to people who don't want to move on either, so when the people were leaving he was scared the an idea of moving on is okay and he was afraid of being left alone. I don't think that this hurt him or really killed him because the people didn't really pay attention to him.

      Delete
  37. The reason why the jury found Cates guilty was because even though Drummond made a great case about why the bible can be wrong but he never explained why Cates should not be guilty. Cates still broke the law but he did help the people of Hillsboro to understand that evolution is not a bad thing to be taught. Cates “won” according to Drummond because he changed the world and how they see the Bible and evolution. He changed what may happen to the next person that has the same problem as Cates.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Cooper was right Cates 100% guilty of teaching evolution..

    but was he wrong?
    Would you have done the same thing?
    Do you think Cates thought about the consequences?
    Do you think that Cates thought that teaching evolution was so bad?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Connor, I almost feel like there is no right or wrong way to answer your question. As many think Cates did wrong, there are also those that think that what he did was good. I honestly believe that your opinion on his actions is all up to interpretation. It all depends on who you are and your own beliefs. I think this is a great question but unfortunately can never be answered.

      Delete
    2. I don't believe that Cates thought teaching evolution was so bad or else why would he have done it and gone through the whole process of a trial instead of admitting guilt?

      Delete
  39. Why did Brady act the way he did in the beginning of the story? He wanted the attention and support of the town and got in in the beginning, but why? Was it because of his 3 failed presidential election failures?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think Brady was somewhat of a "drama queen" because he always needed the attention and thats why he acted this way in the beginning of the story.
      Everyone who is in power and popular want attention from everyone around them so therefore he tried to get thee support from the townspeople.

      Delete
  40. The Jury found Cates guilty because it is still a biased state, and Drummond new that he put up a fight that could not be won, he just wanted a challenge.
    Cates won because he fought an unfair trial and it was broadcasted to one million people in the public. Do you think that Brady's overreactions during the trial had to do something to do with Brady's death?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I did not think about if the jury could possibly be biased, but that could be a major cause of his defeat.

      Delete
    2. Danny, I do believe his overreactions had to do with his death. As I said to Daisy earlier, he most likely suffered a heart attack.

      The one thing I wondered is why Hornbeck doesn't feel sorry for Brady. I mean he did die! Why do you guys think this is?

      Delete
    3. I honestly do think that Brady overreacted about the trial and I think it could do a little with his heart attack because he was stressed out, but the way he ate could have affected it a little.

      Delete
  41. The jury still found Cates guilty because he did break the law. So therefor he is going to be guilty. How did he break the law? He wasn't suppose to teach evolution and he did just that. The whole town was against that and so he was guilty.

    Cates won to Drummond, I think because he changed people's opinions on evolution and that they found out that breast was exactly against it.

    Was the death of Mr. Brady a greater impact on the town of his old friend Drummomd? Well Rachel and Cates new life reflect any part of the trial?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think that Rachel and Bert will runaway and be happy for ever. And they will teach evolution together.

      Delete
    2. The death of Brady had a greater impact of drummond. Towards the end of the story, Drummond defended Brady against Hornbeck. Brady and Drummond used to be friends and I think that Drummond was stunned that he passed. Drummond will miss Brady because he actually had a personal connection to Brady while the townspeople did not.

      Delete
  42. In the end of the story, it feels like Drummond himself learned a lesson from the trial.
    Has there been an event that changed the way you thought about something?
    Even down to food or music?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes. I think that everyone has a hard time sometime in their life. Personally I have a hard time trusting others. That was in response to one event over many years. A singe moment can affect someone for the rest of their life.

      Delete
  43. The jury found Cates guilty even after all the supportive evidence for Cates. The jury found Cates guilty because no matter what Drummond would say to the jury, the jury knows that Cates had broken a law that the state had put into action. Also that the fact that Cates told the jury that he knew that the law was in action. Drummond says that Cates had “won” because with this huge trial that was going on it. This trial let all of the townspeople know that evolution is out there and there is a lot of support to uphold the fact of evolution. Also it showed that there is a lot of conflict between these two topics.

    If the jury didn't find Cates guilty what would happen to the townspeople?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If Cates wasn't found guilty then there would have been a large amount of change going on in Hillsboro and the men of the jury would be criticized by many.

      Delete
  44. The jury found Cates guilty even after there was so much support for Drummond at the end of the trial because at the end of the day Cates did break a law. It was set in stone that teaching evolution in a public school was illegally and Cates did teach evolution so he did go against the law. When Cates asked on pg. 122 “ I’m not sure. Did I win or did I lose?” and Drummond replied “You won.”, Drummond was so fast to react in this positive way because in his opinion he did win. They did win because there consequence was very little compared to what it could be. It was only a $100 dollar it could have been a long jail sentence.

    Why do you think the townspeople opinion towards the trial changes so dramatically? Could this stand for something “larger”?

    ReplyDelete
  45. I believe that Cates "won" in Drummond's eyes, because he was able to change the unchangeable. No one in the town of Hillsboro thought that by the end of the case, they would be on Drummond's side. However, many found themselves there with a different opinion. On page 123 Drummond states, "Tomorrow it'll be something else-and another fella will have to stand up. And you've helped give him the guts to do it!" I believe that this quote really stands true in the play and everyday life. There is a first for everything and even though Cates didn't win in the eyes of the world, he won something else in the process.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I completely agree. The people now know it is possible the make a difference in society.

      Delete
    2. I love the last sentence in your response! It's really moving and it made me think about what Cates really took away from this case.

      Delete
  46. Cates was convicted of the crime because the town is biased towards religion and similar to the book, "To Kill a Mockingbird", the men of the jury would be criticized by the community if they didn't find this, obviously innocent, man guilty.

    On pg.122 Drummond stated that even though 12 men had found him guilty, millions of people would read about it and say that it was a joke and realize that he had smashed a bad law.

    Should Brady have been less concerned with the crowd's loss of focus on him? Do we as humans ever worry about something so much that it is more detrimental to us to worry than it is for us to just forget about what it is that is worrying us?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think Brady couldn't help but be concerned about the loss of focus because if you are talking to a crowd and they lose focus you failed at your job of teaching or entertaining the group.

      Delete
    2. Cameron Brady loves to have attention on him all the time and when he had lost all the focus on him he felt left out and in the open. Sometimes people worry so much that they get scared of that thing that is making them worry them out. Sometimes people get worried so much that people forget where they are at.

      Delete
  47. Drummnd's speech was very inspiring and powerful but people were still going to stick to their fundamentalist beliefs and that is why Cates didn't win. People didn't want to change their beliefs but the speech did open up their minds. The jury was chosen with questions about their faith and if they were fundamentalist, God-fearing people. That kind of fixed the election and made the jury more on the side of Christianity which ensured that he would be guilty. The Reason why Drummond said that Cates "won" was because he knew that this case was basically done from the start and that he was able to change people's thoughts and beliefs. The verdict of the trial was one of the best outcomes that could have happened.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Through experience and change, are we always personally changing? Will our views ever be consistent?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think we will ever have consistent views. Media and other people in general are always changing the way we look at things.

      Delete
    2. Throughout time your views will change. I also think that your views will also change because as you get older you will experience more thing s in life and it will change your views

      Delete
    3. I think that as people we change our opinions more than we change our personalities. i think this is because we see things and we might say that we like one thing one day and hate it the next, this relates to attitude as well.

      Delete
  49. I think that there wasn't a good reason that the jury found Cates guilty. I couldn't really understand that in the end Drummond really nailed Brady down and got him to a point that he had nothing to justify his side. I think that there was still that thing in the back of their minds saying that he did brake the law and he was going against the towns ways and fundamentalism. I definitely think that Cates still won because he was changing the views of the towns minds and was helping move progress along.

    ReplyDelete
  50. When Drummond at the end shows his own views does that make people think different about him? Did Hornbeck end up telling the story of Drummond and how he was a person who believed in religion not just being an agnostic?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think that if anyone ever found out that you weren't who many believed you to be then, yes, you would definitely be viewed differently.

      Delete
    2. Because all the townspeople noticed that Drummond was not all about evolutionist but he also had some religion in him. Hornbeck might have told the story about how Drummond had been referring to the bible and not all about all how humans evolved.

      Delete
  51. What do you think the town will look like 15 years from now?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What I think the town will look like in 15 years is there will be half and half. There will be those people who stick with the same old same old and then there will be people who branch out and try something new.

      Delete
  52. I think the jury found Cates guilty because I mean he did break the law. I mean ya he got lucky with the consequences but he still broke the law and needed to pay the price. He may have been teaching evolution on accident or on purpose but either way he broke the law. They found him guilty because there was evidence that he was teaching evolution so there really was nothing to go to court over but I bet Bert was glad he did go. I think he was glad because the fines really weren’t that bad for the whole big deal this trial was. I think Drummond is right. I do think Cates won. Drummond says he won on page 123 and it states “You don’t suppose this thing is ever finished, do you? Tomorrow it’ll be something else--and another fella will have to stand up. And you’ve helped give him the guts to do it!” This really saying that you helped someone in the long run to have the courage to stand up for his beliefs. In my opinion this law is so stupid because it eliminates the peoples right to think what they want to think. I think that since this is a small country that they are a little more strict but should still believe what they want.
    Is being a part of a small town like changing your beliefs? If so why? If not why?

    ReplyDelete
  53. The jury found Cates guilty because he broke the law which could not be overlooked. Also because the town was so biased towards supporting God and the Bible that they didn’t want to be looked down on like Cates was for believing in Darwin’s evolution. Since so many people in Hillsboro were against evolution and supported Brady, they did not want to let Cates be found innocent. Cates “won” according to Drummond because on page 123 he says “You don’t suppose this kind of thing is ever finished, do you? Tomorrow it’ll be something else- and another fella will have to stand up. And you've helped give him the guts to do it!” I think Cates won according to Drummond because Cates could have been in a worse situation than he was. Cates could have been locked in jail for the rest of his life or had an even worse punishment but instead he got to leave with Rachel and didn’t even have to pay the five hundred dollar fine. Another reason is because he proved to other people who will be on trial during their lifetime that it is possible to stand up for what you believe in.


    In the future, will this town still be divided? Will half the town still be sided with Brady and the other side with Drummond?

    ReplyDelete
  54. Did Brady die because of a heart attack and his unhealthy lifestyle or because he was in shock from of the result from the trial?

    What does the future hold Cates and Rachel? Where will they go if this trial was announced publically through the radio?

    ReplyDelete