Northeastern’s College Republicans and College Democrats faced off Wednesday, debating some of the most controversial issues in American politics, including abortion, gay marriage, stem cell research and the war in Iraq.

The debate, which was moderated by senior communications major Chad Cooper, drew a crowd of about 200 people, which both groups said greatly exceeded their expectations. It was held in a Shillman Hall classroom, which overflowed with students sitting on the floor, leaning against walls and perched on windowsills.

The event was divided into eight debates, each about a different subject, and each group chose one representative to participate in each debate. The debates consisted of a three-minute speech from each side, then two-minute rebuttals and one-minute closings.

The first topic discussed was justification for the war in Iraq, and was debated between Brian Caron of the College Republicans, and James Sargent, president of the College Democrats. Caron argued that based on Saddam Hussein’s human rights record, the war was justified and Iraq is now better off. Sargent argued the United States went to war for unclear reasons set by the current administration.

The debate got more heated during the next topic, gay marriage. College Democrats Secretary Sarah Jacobs argued against Michael Murphy, president of the College Republicans. Jacobs compared the laws preventing gay marriage to previous laws which prohibited interracial marriage, and argued that gay couples are being denied equal rights, including the legal rights and benefits of marriage and the right to express their love.

“Gays are not attacking marriage, they want to practice it,” Jacobs said.

Murphy, in turn, argued the institution of marriage must be protected so the definition of marriage does not expand to include polygamy or incest. He also said love is not enough of a qualification for marriage. When Jacobs asked him to explain this further, his response drew murmurs from the crowd.

“The reason men and women marry is that it’s the best possible arrangement our society has come up with for raising children,” Murphy said.

The next topic, free trade, was less emotionally charged, and was argued by Curtis Bergh and Josh Robin, vice presidents for the republicans and democrats, respectively.

Tempers flared again, however, when Murphy took on Michael Broderick on the subject of weapons proliferation, with Broderick arguing for more diplomacy with countries like Iran and North Korea, while Murphy argued the ineffectiveness of diplomatic tactics.

“You ask why Iran shouldn’t be able to have nuclear weapons. How about because they’re a terrorist state?” Murphy said in his rebuttal.

When Cooper declared a short break after this fourth debate, audience members seemed divided as to which side was winning.

“Each side’s doing a really good job,” said Laura Vulaj, a sophomore journalism major who was a member of the College Republicans last year.

Jen Mangini, a sophomore biochemistry major and friend of Vulaj, said she generally doesn’t like politics, but really enjoyed the debate. She said she came to support the republicans, and was particularly impressed by Murphy.

“He really knows his stuff,” she said.

After the break the groups launched into a debate on stem cell research. Republicans Treasurer Tina Penman took on freshman Fallon Schuler for the democrats.

Schuler, arguing in favor of stem cell research, based her argument on what she called the hypocrisy of restrictions on stem cell research, when stem cells are created and destroyed in fertility clinics every day. She also argued stem cells cannot be considered people, and called them, “Microscopic lumps of cells with less human characteristics than a dung beetle.” She also spoke about the many possibilities of alleviating human suffering through stem cell research.

Penman’s response caused some consternation.

“My opponent has talked a lot about hope, but it’s just that, hope,” Penman said. “Christopher Reeve had a lot of hope, and we all know what happened to him, unfortunately.”

The audience response to this comment on the actor who once portrayed Superman was raucous enough that Cooper had to call the crowd to order.

The next debate was Social Security reform, and was debated by Robin for the democrats and Dave Moberg for the republicans. Moberg’s arguments were peppered with one-liners, comparing the current Social Security system to Robin Hood.

“Robbing the rich to pay the poor – that’s fine for our storybooks, but let’s leave it out of our economic policy,” Moberg said.

Perhaps the most explosive issue was abortion, which was argued by College Democrats Secretary Heidi Buchanan and Jamie Waller for the republicans. Waller opened discussion bluntly.

“I stand here today in stark opposition to a woman’s right to an abortion,” Waller said. He went on to build his argument around the premise that Roe v. Wade was a flawed decision by the Supreme Court, and to give other examples of flawed decisions, such as the Dred Scott Case.

Buchanan’s argument was more personal.

“This is my body. It is not Rick Santorum’s body to legislate over, it is not George W. Bush’s body to legislate over, but mine,” Buchanan said. She went on to tell the audience that her sister had gotten an abortion after being in a physically and emotionally abusive relationship, citing her sister as an example of a woman who was unprepared to raise a child. Later, in her rebuttal, she said criminalizing abortion would be “basically screwing over women in lower-class areas who aren’t as educated.” She began to tell another personal story, but Cooper interjected and asked her to keep to information already presented.

The debate ended where it began, with the war in Iraq, only this time, the argument was not justification for the war, but what the United States’ policy should be now. This was argued by Bergh for the republicans and Mandi Boyce for the democrats. Bergh argued for a continued military presence in Iraq, while Boyce argued that the U.S. should focus on rebuilding Iraq’s infrastructure, then leave.

At the end of the last debate, Cooper moderated a discussion period, during which audience members could address questions to either group. This portion of the event provoked many outbursts of conversation from the audience, and Cooper had to bring the room to order on several occasions. In one of the most personal moments of the evening, a member of the audience asked Tina Penman, as the only female arguing with the republicans, about her own stance on abortion. Penman said she is adopted, and her biological mother was a teenager when Penman was born.

“If she had chosen abortion, I wouldn’t be here,” Penman said.

Cooper cut the discussion off at 10 p.m., after three hours of debate. Members of both groups emphasized that they were surprised and pleased by the turnout. No one seemed to be declaring a winner as the audience and even members of the two groups mingled after the event.

“Obviously we feel like we could have done better in some areas, and I’m sure the republicans feel the same way,” Robin said.

Murphy said the event’s high turnout showed that students care about the issues.

“People say Northeastern has an apathetic campus, and I think we proved them wrong tonight,” Murphy said.