USC Democrats, Republicans clash at Student Debate
Participants congregated to debate topics such as abortion and foreign policy.
By SASHA RYU
The Trojan Democrats and the USC College Republicans went head-to-head Wednesday night at the first student debate of the semester. Sophia Perez, executive director of the Political Student Assembly and a senior majoring in political science, moderated the event alongside Eli Scott — president of the USC Political Union and a senior majoring in philosophy, politics and economics. Dozens of students gathered in Tommy’s Place to watch the seven debaters speak.
The first topic was abortion. Rebecca Carlson, the vice president of Trojans for Life and a doctoral candidate studying philosophy, provided a conservative perspective on the issue. Sara Stienecker, president of the Trojan Democrats and a junior majoring in political science, argued from the progressive side.
Daily headlines, sent straight to your inbox.
Subscribe to our newsletter to keep up with the latest at and around USC.
The debaters each had three minutes for opening statements, one minute for rebuttal, four minutes for cross-debate and four minutes for moderated questioning.
Carlson opened the debate by sharing that she believes abortion is immoral and “the fetus has to be protected from violence.”
“I think bodily autonomy is an incredibly important right … but I also can’t see a consistent way to say that one person’s right to bodily autonomy outweighs another person’s rights to be protected from violence, the right not to be killed,” Carlson said.
Carlson went on to clarify that, although she’s pro-life, she believes people who have received abortions should still be met with compassion.
“I know statistically there are people in this room who have had an experience with an abortion, so I also want to speak to that really quickly,” Carlson said. “I think regardless of what your views on the ethics or legality of abortion are, we should all be able to agree that that’s very often a really traumatic situation and a really traumatic experience. And I’m sorry that you have been through that.”
Stienecker responded by challenging Carlson’s assertions that fetuses meet the five conditions of personhood. Stienecker continued her argument by pointing out that restrictions on abortion disproportionately harm lower-class Americans.
“My ability to make decisions on my own body shouldn’t vary from state to state, and moreover, that disproportionately affects a lot of people who are unable to travel,” Stienecker said. “Forcing lower income Americans to go through this experience when wealthy Americans are able to just cross state lines is a disservice to them.”
Nicolas Gomez and Duncan Law participated in the second round of the debate with a discussion on foreign policy.
Law, a senior majoring in public policy and political science, represented the Trojan Democrats for this round. After the event, he said he was happy with how the debates unfolded.
“I was surprised by just how much difference there was on some of the topics. I expected there to be a little more common ground,” Law said. “But I think it was really great to see people come together and discuss these really contentious topics.”
Duncan Law, a senior majoring in public policy and political science, represented the Trojan Democrats during the section on foreign policy. (Sasha Ryu / Daily Trojan)
In the third round of the debate, Daniel Parker, a senior majoring in international relations and the global economy, and Elizabeth Farrington, the director of external affairs for the Trojan Democrats and a junior majoring in political science, debated education rights.
Parker opened the debate with his arguments against teaching students about racism and sexuality at public schools.
“The only values that should be done in the classroom are hard work, teamwork, good manners, a love for learning, and definitely not critical race theory, a blatantly false and select view of our history, or LGBTQ propaganda,” Parker said.
Later in the debate, Parker continued by condemning the idea of incorporating “racial politics” into a school’s curriculum.
“I think when you’re going to tell a little white girl in third grade that she’s a bad person because she’s white, or you’re going to tell a little brown boy in second grade that he has privileges because he’s Black, that’s wrong,” Parker said.
Farrington responded by arguing that “students are growing up in a diverse country which should be reflected in their education.”
“My grandmother attended segregated school in rural North Carolina. There she read a book called ‘The Story of Little Black Sambo,’ … and she wondered if there would be any other depictions of Black Americans in her education,” Farrington said. “I think about her story when I think about this topic.”
Parker and Calvin Ryan, a senior majoring in economics, ended the debate with a discussion on cash bail.
After the debate, Ryan said he was happy that the debate provided an opportunity for him to have a productive discussion with someone on the other side of the aisle.
“We actually had came to a few agreements that I thought were very important,” Ryan said.
Madelyn Sequeira, the president of Trojans for Life and a junior majoring in international relations, said that she enjoyed attending the event and listening to the debaters have open discussions on contentious issues. As a conservative, she said she also enjoys talking with people on campus who have opposing political views.
“[Being conservative at USC], you have to be able to engage with a lot of people who disagree with you, and that’s not a bad thing,” Sequeira said. “Honestly, I love it. I love to be able to talk to people and hear their perspective, because I think at the end of the day, we do share a lot of common ground.”
