*DISCLAIMER: The views held by each debater on Debate Night, are not necessarily the views of said debaters held outside of Debate Night.
On Tuesday Apr. 12, Malden High School hosted its very first Debate Night in the Jenkins Auditorium. Students from all different history classes attended and participated in the event along with teachers, staff and family members of the participants. The event was hosted by the National History Club and the History Department. Each debate was moderated by a reporter from The Blue and Gold Newspaper, including seniors Haley Mallett, Nick Bramante, juniors Tatum Skiffington, Felicia Fallano, and Gabriella Onessimo.
Several topics were debated by groups of students of two or three people. Some discussions included college welfare, free speech safe zones, abortions, gun control, the Syrian refugee crisis and more. Each debater was given an opportunity to give an opening statement, answer questions asked by the moderators and give a closing statement at the end of the debate. Seniors Terrica Dang and Liam Elliot began the event and made clear that people should be able to get their points across without harsh criticism.
The free speech safe zone issue was debated by sophomores Waymond Szeto, Harrison Zeiberg, and freshmen Felix Li. Szeto supported the safe zones while the Zeiberg and Li were opposed. Szeto claimed, “If [someone is] talking in a reasonable manner, then [someone] should have the right to say something. However, if [someone is] being rude and swearing, why should [Americans] defend people’s right to do that? It’s not ideas that we’re trying to silence; it’s the way one person passes on these ideas to another.”
Zeiberg questioned Szeto’s claims by asking, “What good does silencing do if people are still thinking about it? You have to talk about things in order to change things. Our nation was formed on principles where [Americans] can say whatever [they] want however [they] want. Free speech safe zones go against what this nation was built on.” Li agreed with this rebuttal, adding, “These free speech zones are more general ways of attacking people. Like [Zeiberg] said, we should confront these people who are attacking and are promoting hateful ideas. How can we as Americans stand aside and watch our ideas be plucked away?”
The topic of abortion was discussed by Dang and senior Kaitlyn Gibson. Gibson, who was opposed to the legalization of abortion in the United States, stated, “Women should not be going to get abortions just because she ‘accidentally’ got pregnant. But women are not alone in being pregnant. What they do with their body now affects the human being growing inside them. People who are having sex and getting pregnant should not be able to rid themselves of a responsibility. Women who cannot afford abortions should not be getting pregnant.” Dang disagreed with Gibson’s beliefs, refuting her in stating, “The government should not intervene in what [women] should do with [their] bodies. Any woman should be able to do what she wants for her own health. Yes, having a child is a responsibility, but it is not a responsibility everyone can handle. The nation’s interest in prohibiting abortion is not strong enough to fight against women’s rights. This defies the definition of liberty, which every woman has.”
The dispute on gun control was argued by sophomores Alicia Tan and Jenny Huynh along with Elliott. Huynh began the debate by reminding the audience of the liberties within the Second Amendment, which is the right to keep and bear arms. She stated, “[She is] in opposition of the gun-free zones. It violates our second amendment as well as other parts of the Constitution. It is not protecting people; it is leaving people defenseless. America needs solutions that is going to
ensure safety not only for students but for parents and the general public.” Tan supported gun-free zones because “they are useful and they have the ability to keep people safe. It doesn’t just apply to everything, it is only in public places, especially those for children. Gun-safety zones are a type of safety net that we need to better the chances of not getting shot, hurt or harmed by others.”
Overall debate night was a success and offered students a great opportunity to be able to civilly discuss controversial topics in today’s world.
