Jacob Wu ‘27
Staff Writer and Web Editor
On November 2nd, the Benedict Fenwick Debate Society held its first debate of the year on topics concerning the 2024 presidential election, the possibility of Greek life on campus, and the nature of human morality. Hosted in Dinand Library’s Levis Browsing Room, the B.J.F. Society’s crowded debate was judged by Fr. Peter Nguyen, S.J., of the Religious Studies Department, and Professor Faisal Baluch of the Political Science Department.
The first debate was centered on the prompt “Resolved: Humans are inherently immoral,” with Peter LaBorin ‘26 and Flynn Harper ‘27 in the affirmative, contrasted with Katie Harkness ‘25 and Maggie Baughman ‘27 in the negative. The affirmative argued that humanity is based on a feeling of self-preservation that has repeatedly led to destructive choices throughout history. The negative argued instead for a collective tabula rasa (black slate) of humanity, neither inherently moral or immoral but that we are rather shaped by our environment and individual choices. At the end of the first debate, both judges decided in favor of the negative.
The second debate prompt, “Resolved: Holy Cross should permit Greek life on campus,” included the affirmative consisting of Juan Hernandez ‘27 and Flynn Harper ‘27, and the negative argued by Ella Murray ‘27 and Nora Kelly ‘27. Hernandez and Harper stressed the sense of fraternity and sorority that Greek life would provide to those who seek a community for themselves, and that the establishment of formal Greek life would be a safer alternative to partying in off-campus houses. The negative, however, argued that most of what may be offered by Greek life on campus is already available in Holy Cross’ student life, and that the popular culture of such life would pose a greater danger to students. Ultimately, the judges sided with the negative.
The third and final debate, “Resolved: Trump appeals more to the American electorate,” was the most politically relevant topic, coming just days before the presidential election. The affirmative consisted of Ian Sykes ‘28 and Flynn Harper ‘27, and the negative was led by Cecilia Massaua ‘27 and William Ulterino ‘27. Both sides found common ground in conceding the personal flaws of Donald Trump, with the affirmative arguing that Trump’s unusual charisma, economic policy, and political acumen has broadened his support among American voters as a whole. The negative instead stressed that the numerous lawsuits, accusations, and controversy surrounding former president Donald Trump has eroded his support with the American public, and that his appeal, however charismatic, is relegated to only a small portion of the population. Both judges ultimately found for the negative.
Featured image courtesy of Kate Santini ’27
Leave a Reply