In an effort to get students talking and thinking about important issues, the Undergraduate Student Government hosted a Crossfire Campus Debate in the Union Ballroom last night.

“This event stemmed off of a concern I had last summer,” said USG President Johnnie Lewis. “[Our generation is] not connecting to our current society.”

The debate was designed to be audience-centered for that reason, Lewis said. By increasing audience participation, more students would be able to let their views be heard.

Topics that were discussed included the U.S. military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, the War in Iraq, abortion and capital punishment.

After stating that the views offered tonight were not necessarily the views of USG, Lewis started the debate with a discussion on “don’t ask, don’t tell.”

“I think it’s a very ineffective policy,” said junior Chris Kundmueller. “You’re getting rid of very useful people to the military.”

Kundmueller also said the reason he has heard that the policy exists is it reduces morale to have homosexuals serving openly in the military. But Kundmueller said having such a policy reduces camaraderie.

Soldiers are afraid of being labeled as gay, he said, and that infringes on the friendship and camaraderie between the men fighting.

“It’s a question of how close people are allowed to get,” Lewis said.

Mark Ingles, president of the College Democrats, said he thought the system should also be repealed.

“We are in a war right now, and you need every person you can possibly get,” Ingles said.

The discussion moved to the Iraq War, and whether America should stay or get out.

One of the main issues was whether the U.S. can tell other countries how to run their government when our own system is not perfect, either.

“To what extent do we police other countries?” Lewis said.

With a short online video, the discussion then went to abortion.

“[It’s to] kind of get you thinking, kind of get you talking,” Lewis said.

One of the points brought up was whether abortion should be acceptable in the case of rape.

“Most pro-lifers I know say in the case of rape, then it’s all right,” said senior Joe DiNardi. “But what child deserves to die because of the sins of the father?”

Whether a child will be born into poverty was another point addressed.

“What does our system do for uncared children?” Lewis said. “Do we have enough things in place to give children a good life?”

DiNardi said it seems like people are saying that since it’s such a hard world anyway, parents might as well just save the child the trouble of living in it.

“If abortion was illegal, abortions would still take place,” DiNardi said. “Murder is illegal, murder still takes place. Should we just say, ‘OK, let’s make it legal?'”

The final discussion was about capital punishment.

One of the main aspects talked about was rehabilitation versus punishment.

“What do we use our prisons for?” Lewis said. “Is it for rehabilitation? Is it for punishment?”

Kundmueller thought rehabilitation was something so subjective that people have to take it on a case-by-case basis.

Ingles agreed.

“True remorse is very subjective,” he said. “I don’t know how you can judge that.”

At the end of the event, Lewis thanked everyone for coming.

“These are things we as individuals need to take our own personal stance on,” Lewis said. “We as a generation need to start speaking up.”

Students who attended the event thought the concept was a good idea.

“My big thing is it’s all about education and getting all sides of an argument,” said sophomore Sundeep Mutgi. “Regardless of whether or not you disagree, it’s important to see where other people are coming from.”