Last week the ÂÜÀòÉç Honors Program, in collaboration with the Department of Philosophy, hosted a thought-provoking Braver Angels debate, a program dedicated to fostering civil discourse across political differences. The event featured both Molloy and Richmond Hill High School students arguing the topic “Should the United States be tougher on immigration?”
Organized with the College Debates and Discourse Alliance (CD&D), a nonpartisan program made up of Braver Angels, ACTA, and BridgeUSA, this event created a safe space for students to argue the immigration process in the United States and whether it should be simpler or more complicated to pursue citizenship. The College of Arts and Sciences hosts these grassroots debates once per semester, 8 to date, with past topics ranging from the impact of artificial intelligence on humanity to the limits of free speech and media censorship.
These on campus debates usually focus on divisive topics, and while debates can be contentious, these discussions are structured in a way that allows students to argue alternate sides without interruption. It’s a great opportunity for students to practice deep listening and a modified form of parliamentary procedure, participating in an efficient, fair and orderly discussion. Mae Rum, Program Coordinator for Braver Angels, served as the Chair and instructed students to direct their questions to her and avoid using the word “you.” For example, if somebody has a question, rather than asking “Why do you believe that apples are better than oranges?”, students were encouraged to say, “Madam Chair, I’m curious why the speaker believes that apples are better than oranges.”
Framing questions this way lowers the emotional intensity of an already sensitive topic, making them feel less accusatory. It also guides students to be more thoughtful in the way they phrase their questions, producing clearer and substantive exchanges rather than rhetorical jabs. Each question provoked thoughtful dialogue on the topic, and even though some students disagreed with one another, they were able to talk it out without any disrespect.
“The elements of indirect questioning and an unbiased mediator ensure valuable and constructive conversation. Instead of bickering, personal attacks, or unnecessary elevation, listening is made mandatory,” said Valeria DeCastro, a debate participant and honors visual arts education student at Molloy. “After my second time being an opening speaker at a Braver Angels Collegiate Debate, I have truly come to appreciate its parliamentary structure. These events are as relevant as ever, as they encourage rising generations to engage in meaningful dialogue.”
There are no winners or losers in these debates, either. The point isn’t to out-argue a fellow student, score a ‘gotcha’ moment, or resolve everything before the clock runs out.
“We are not going to solve this issue today,” said Rum. “Civil discourse can be exciting, and we are here to discuss this together and be curious without rank or hierarchy.”
Dr. Howard Ponzer, ÂÜÀòÉç and Chair of the Philosophy Program at Molloy, highlighted how these events empower students to speak up and communicate effectively without fear of judgement in today’s world.
“The Braver Angels debate format helps students find and use their own voice, because it is not win or lose, but rather a space in which the goal is to listen to and learn from one another,” said Ponzer. “The purpose of the debate is to hear the other’s point of view, despite our differences, not to prove the other wrong. Once they see that the debate is about listening and learning, and not about judgment, they willingly open up and discuss even difficult topics with confidence and empowerment. This is a rare occurrence and opportunity in our hyper-critical social media era.”
One participant echoed Dr. Ponzer’s sentiment. “With this unique style of debate, its nice to know that you won’t be attacked because of the point you’re arguing,” said Joe Stallone, an honors accounting student at Molloy. “The structure of the conversation allows all participants to understand each other’s arguments and fosters an environment where everyone feels like they can argue their own beliefs without being judged.”
To kick off the debate, four students alternated in presenting their opening arguments; two argued for the US to be tougher on immigration, and two argued against it. This structure made it possible for students in the audience to hold space for both sides while listening and forming their own opinions, considering elements of each argument.
“This past session on immigration was particularly impactful for my students,” said Jennifer Meighan, Social Studies Peer Collaborative Teacher at Richmond Hill High School. “Many of them are first-generation immigrants themselves or come from families directly navigating the immigration process. Their lived experiences added depth and authenticity to the discussion, while the format allowed them to take a step back and analyze the issue from multiple perspectives.”
In a time when many conversations become polarized quickly, especially those that are political in nature, spaces like these play a major role in teaching students how to disagree in a thoughtful way, while still listening and learning from each other. “This is the main purpose of the Braver Angels debates,” said Ponzer. “To give students the opportunity to practice the art of civil discourse in a way that bridges the partisan divide that for too long has threatened our democratic traditions and society.”
As these conversations continue to happen on campus, the impact extends far beyond one single debate. In learning how to listen, question, and engage thoughtfully with opposing viewpoints, students develop skills that will influence not only their academic experiences, but also how they navigate an increasingly complex world.
