Pope Leo XIV’s accession could mean a new opportunity to reform the Catholic Church by allowing women as ordained deacons. Those advocating for this change argue that allowing women would represent a return to early Church tradition and showcase an evolving Church ready for modernity. Those against this argue that it would blur theological lines and that women already play substantial leadership roles within the Church. Now we debate: Is It Time for the Catholic Church to Ordain Women as Deacons? 

Arguing Yes: Casey Stanton, Co-director of Discerning Deacons 

Arguing No: Pia de Solenni, Theologian; Former Chancellor of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Orange in California 

Nayeema Raza, Journalist and Host of "Smart Girl Dumb Questions", is the guest moderator. 

Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates.  

Take our podcast listener survey here: https://bit.ly/opentodebatesurvey 

Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. 

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The shocking 2022 murder of four University of Idaho students have resulted in a life sentence for the killer and still-unanswered questions — about new genealogy tech, media exposure, lessons for law enforcement —worth Thinking Twice about. John Donvan sits down with journalist Vicky Ward, who co-authored with James Patterson “The Idaho Four: An American Tragedy,” and discuss what drew her to the case, how collaborating with Patterson changed her process, and reconsidering elements of the criminal justice system. 

Our Guest: Vicky Ward, Co-Author of "The Idaho Four: An American Tragedy" 

Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates 

Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates.  

Take our podcast listener survey here: https://bit.ly/opentodebatesurvey 

Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. 

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Love in the time of AI? Some people seeking romance or friendship are turning to AI chatbots to fulfill those desires, but could they surpass traditional human relationships? Those who say they can argue that AI can offer empathy and safety, and it’s a solution for those left out of traditional dating. Those saying they can’t argue that intimacy is complicated and cannot be replicated in code. Now we debate: Could Dating an AI Be Better Than Dating a Human? 

Arguing Yes: Thao Ha, Associate Professor of Psychology at Arizona State University   

Arguing No: Justin Garcia, Executive Director & Senior Scientist at the Kinsey Institute; Chief Scientific Advisor to Match.com  

Nayeema Raza, Journalist and Host of "Smart Girl Dumb Questions", is the guest moderator. 

Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates.  

Take our podcast listener survey here: https://bit.ly/opentodebatesurvey 

Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. 

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

President Trump has officially signed the One Big, Beautiful Bill Act into law. There is debate among conservatives about whether it will end up driving economic growth or increasing our debt. One side argues that ordinary Americans will pay the price and the long-term fiscal outcome is terrible. Another side argues these policies will encourage investment, growth, and job creation. Now, two conservatives debate: Is the Big, Beautiful Bill a Disaster? 

Arguing Yes: Jessica Riedl, Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute 

Arguing No: Diana Furchtgott-Roth, Director of the Center for Energy, Climate, and Environment and the Herbert and Joyce Morgan Fellow in Energy and Environmental Policy at The Heritage Foundation 

Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates 

Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates.  

Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. 

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The Trump administration enacted severe actions against Harvard University that threaten its endowment, funding, and ability to enroll international students, based on accusations of antisemitism. Do these actions go too far? Prominent voices long affiliated with Harvard – former university president Larry Summers and law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz — engage in a nuanced debate and provocative discussion: Did Harvard Have It Coming? 

Arguing Yes: Alan Dershowitz, Emeritus Professor of Law at Harvard Law School  

Arguing No: Lawrence Summers, President Emeritus of Harvard; Former Secretary of the Treasury  

Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates 

Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates.  

Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. 

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

As an Associate Justice on the Supreme Court for almost three decades, Stephen Breyer was no stranger to hearing arguments for different sides in major cases. In this episode, our moderator-in-chief, John Donvan, and Chief Content Officer, Lia Matthow, interview Justice Breyer and discuss his book “Reading the Constitution: Why I Chose Pragmatism, not Textualism.” He discusses how he used this philosophy to guide his decisions and why he thinks jurists should choose this approach. 

Our Guest: Stephen Breyer, Former United States Supreme Court Justice 

Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan and Lia Matthow, Chief Content Officer of Open to Debate, moderates 

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Open to Debate, in partnership with the Human Rights Foundation and the Oslo Freedom Forum, is examining a strategy employed by many countries to respond to aggressive or authoritarian regimes. In recent years, these have been levied against countries such as Russia, Venezuela, and Iran, which have ranged from freezing assets and trade bans to travel restrictions and full embargoes. But do sanctions work in deterring repression? Those arguing that they’re effective claim that they’re a nonviolent way to force change and serve as a deterrent for other countries. Those who are skeptical about the efficacy of sanctions say they are leaky, don’t lead to regime change, and can harm civilians and exacerbate humanitarian crises. 

Now with this background, we debate the question: Are Sanctions an Effective Policy Tool? 

This debate was produced in partnership with the Human Rights Foundation and was recorded at the Oslo Freedom Forum in Oslo, Norway, on May 26, 2025. 

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Under President Trump, America’s role on the global stage is being redefined — but can other countries trust its allyship under his leadership? Critics argue his transactional approach and threats to abandon allies undermine trust and force nations to reconsider their security. Supporters counter that demanding more from partners is “tough love” that will lead to stronger, more balanced alliances. Now we debate: Is Trump’s America a Reliable Ally? 

Arguing Yes:  

Joshua Shifrinson, Associate Professor at University of Maryland's School of Public Policy; Nonresident Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute  

Kelly Grieco, Senior Fellow with the Reimagining US Grand Strategy Program at the Stimson Center 

Arguing No:  

Liana Fix, Fellow for Europe at the Council on Foreign Relations 

Charles Kupchan, Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and Professor of International Affairs at Georgetown University 

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The new Trump presidency has led to pressure on the First Amendment, and the lines between free expression and political enforcement are blurring. Those who say speech is now freer argue that his actions are restoring viewpoint diversity. Those who argue it’s more restricted argue it’s a crackdown on speech that doesn’t align with the administration’s views, especially in Harvard’s case. In partnership with the Cascades PBS Ideas Festival, we debate free speech’s evolution in the Trump 2.0 era.

Nadine Strossen, Senior Fellow at FIRE; Former President of the ACLU 

Brandi Kruse, Host of "unDivided with Brandi Kruse” 

Nick Gillespie, Editor-at-Large at Reason, is the guest moderator. 

Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates.  

Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. 

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In light of today's breaking news—Israel’s targeted airstrikes on Iranian nuclear and military facilities, and Iran's retaliation—we are re-releasing our episode that confronts one of the most urgent questions of our time. Originally aired in January 2025, this debate has only grown more relevant, with our two experts offering insights critical for understanding the road ahead.

Iran is getting closer to developing its first nuclear weapon. With tensions rising in the Middle East, should the U.S. and its allies take a stand? Those calling to stop Iran now argue this is a “now or never” moment for the region. Those calling for tolerance say while it’s not ideal, it is manageable, and maintaining diplomacy should be the focus. Now we debate: Can America and Its Allies Tolerate A Nuclear Iran, or Is It Time to Stop Them Now? 

Arguing STOP NOW: Behnam Ben Taleblu, Senior Fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies 

Arguing TOLERATE: Barbara Slavin, Distinguished Fellow at the Stimson Center 

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices