BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
My opponent is a Christian proselytizer.

I will pick out your lies first before anything else, so every one can see they will vote for a liar. "as an adult you serve both money and God, making many logical fallacies in the above statement."- This is a lie, I said you can not serve both money and God. Not both. Only one. Either God. Or money. Every one who does not serve God serves money. And people who do not serve monet serve God. I f you have two bosses you will be more loyal to one. "Whatever happens was planned long ago. Everyone knows what people are like. No one can argue with God, who is stronger than anyone. The more you say, the more useless it is. What good does it do?" Ecclesisstes7:10-11 Who are you to critisize? You know no reasoning to this universe, so why critisize? Because through science if you find the structure of the universe, that would be God. Give me one thing which does not have structure? If I take structure away from anything it would not exist. So take a structure away from the universe, it also would not exist. The benifiets of being like Jesus Christ are: You will never be down or unhappy, because what made you unhappy was because of stress and work, money and friends. You will always be happy In the presents of God. You will never curse (swear also) and laugh at people in need. You will never run from any problem. You will never die. You will only life. You will become more intelligent and knowledgeable. You will be more heathly you will laugh more and make others laugh more and live long. You will become more wealthy, because you see physical things as unworthly and you will give money to the poor and God will see this, making you wealthy so you have more money to give. The more you give God will give you even more in what you gave away. These things are all Good and God is Good and perfect. I promise you that. To my dying day. See you around. My friend.
ron paul is a serious candidate with a serious chance

There is one serious issue regarding the campaign of Ron Paul. His issues on several stances are, to say the very least, questionable. Dr. Paul claims to value property rights and would work against legislation affecting America's industry an labour. It is Dr. Paul's seemingly blatant disregard for circumstantial factors that worries voters, not some poorly conceived internet conspiracy or the pandering of the media to "corporate interests" Consider this worst-case scenario- A man facing starvation consigns to work for an industrial firm, the terms of this contract require him to work 12 hours a day locked into a hellish plant with no health-safety regulations, no security, no benefits, etc. The truly disturbing part of Dr. Paul's plan is that man will be forced to take this job. There exists no way of protecting his personal right (which Dr. Paul claims to hold sacrosanct) to earn a steady, safe income. Faced with only one alternative: starvation, we will be confined to such a future of sequentially hellish occupations. It was always my belief that this savagery was overcome by our government, and a mandate of the people long ago. Are we to forget all of those victories for working and middle classes as we enter into a period of private tyranny?
ron paul is a serious candidate with a serious chance

For starters- Godwin's Law, the most important rule of having a grown-up conversation is to not compare everything you disagree with to Hitler. That puerile reference to Upton Sinclair notwithstanding, your moot point argument is statistically wrong. While there is a significant trend towards the services sector, there is still a substantial part of America that still works in an industrial setting. A more substantial part, I may add, than has ever voted for Ron Paul. To a significant portion of America, my point is not moot at all, but a stark and disturbing possible future. In addition, your argument is self-defeating. You agree that they were mistreated, and that they would gain strength. Dr. Paul seems quite determined to stifle those rights. You advocate nothing less than repealing or ignoring over half a century of labour laws just so we can "go through the same experience." The workers of the United States achieved said rights largely because there was a government for the people to appeal to. Under Dr. Paul's plan, such a repolarization of our industries will lead to another twenty plus years of oppression and fruitless negotiation. The only difference at this time is that the government will be rendered helpless and immobile; beholden to such businesses and unable to pass any legislation because it existed before and was then struck down. What Dr. Paul fails to grasp is that workers and owners are fundamentally different. Owners can fire and intimidate workers, and it doesn't work both ways. Dr. Paul's strategy of putting them on a par is effectively supporting the rule of owners over workers. Dr. Paul would not simply let "society take its course" as you say, but with the endorsement of state power there would be the concentration of resources on the side of the owners, thus extending that which Dr. Paul fails to see would occur.
ron paul is a serious candidate with a serious chance

I disagree. This "hellish nightmare" you describe is simply a bad dream you are having after reading too much Upton Sinclair. The entire scenario is a moot point as the American economy is now moving away from factory labour and into the service sector. Ron Paul simply wants the government to step back and let society take its course. Americans feared that farmers who moved to the city to work in factories when they first arose during the industrial revolution would be abused an mistreated all day. These workers were abused and indeed mistreated, but eventually gained strength and established such things as a minimum wage. The factory workers who now go to work at Walmart will go through the same experience. Ron Paul does not seek to regulate employment, he would in fact do the opposite. Dr. Paul believes in the freedom of Americans to choose their employment. What you are describing is synonymous with Hitler, and WWII production of weapons by the jews.
Personal Searches in School

The searches that I am talking about are NOT random. One other point that I would like to state is that, lockers are the school's property: so therefore, the contents inside of the locker are subject to periodic administrative searches, and districts reserve the right to search lockers without the consent of the student if necessary. Since I see you have not completely grasped the concept of the T.L.O case, the T.L.O case made it legal for school officials to search students belongings. Schools can use metal detectors for weapons, but that will not stop drugs and substances from entering school grounds.
Personal Searches in School

I see what you are saying, but by violating the 4th amendment in schools, you are just making it OK to violate all amendments, all basic rights. Sometimes, schools do these searches at random, taking a student's things to rummage through them, and some schools do pat downs after RANDOM SEARCHES. Some schools even make students pay $5 to get their stuff back. And if you are going to do it based on rumors, you need to get some evidence based off of that.
Personal Searches in School

My opponent has stated that Personal Searches in school is violating the 4th amendment. But is this statement accurate? I have found evidence that under "reasonable suspicion" it is legal for school officials to search students personal belongings. http://www.infoplease.com... I would feel awfully unsafe if I heard a rumor going on that someone had a weapon in school. Sure...it's just a rumor, but what if it is true? Violating other amendments would have direct punishments, but under "reasonable suspicion" searches are not violating the 4th amendment.
CAMHS (Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services) Needs major reform

Sorry "Have I stumped you?" is just my default sentence for when someone doesn't reply. I too sincerely apologize, as I know realize that you are right. I misunderstood the first part of the message and thought you meant EVERY mental health clinic in the UK, but yes, you are right. Growing up with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, Selective Sound Sensitivity (Misophonia) and General Anxiety, I see where you are coming from. My doctor did refer me to that counselor, and I ended up cancelling it because they tried to get a Social Worker instead of someone to deal with sound problems for my Misophonia. The one thing that REALLY needs fixed are schools. My Misophonia teared my studies apart, and me being the academic student I was, seeing my scores drop made me really upset. And what did the school say? "Just don't concentrate on the noise and it will go away". Schools also need to actually KNOW all of the disorders, sure they could treat Diabetes, but someone comes in with a mental problem? Oh, there's nothing I can do. I'm just going to make you sit in class with a girl who breathes through her mouth all day while you sit there and have a panic attack. So yes, I'm sorry for taking up this debate even though I agreed with you, but this should be known by everyone by now. Something needs to be done soon.
CAMHS (Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services) Needs major reform

You have not stumped me and I sincerely apologise for not posting on the last round. My argument, much like yours, comes from personal experience. Since the age of 11 I have been working with camhs off and on and still to this day, 6 years later, it has gotten me nowhere. I have been diagnosed with a whole host of problems from depression, seasonal affective disorder, general anxiety disorder, social anxiety disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder. I have been given just about every type of medication and therapy they have to offer, yet each diagnosis and each new treatment all seem like an excuse because they refuse to admit that they actually have no idea what my problem is. Sometimes it can take up to 2 months for my next appointment to come through, and even then it might only be a checkup and nothing productive happens. The only time they actually work hard is if I have to go to the curt (camhs urgent response team) at the hospital because I've gone and done something stupid. When I tell them my problems such as a history of abuse or my brother's death they always brush it off and tell me my real problem is something else entirely. They're completely shambolic.
CAMHS (Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services) Needs major reform

While you are right in a way, I believe that the UK mental health services are not as bad as you make them out to be. When I was in secondary school, I had an awful case of Misophonia/4S (Selective Sound Sensitivity Syndrome), and I definitely received the treatment I needed. I went to the doctor, and he referred me to a counsellor within a month. There are many cheap services as well, such as Childline: a phone service for depressed/abused children, many free counselling services out there, and if you still can't get treatment, a doctor can usually refer you to a counsellor.
Foreign (European) cars are better than American cars.

you just said that european cars were best.Check out the volkswagen polo which has less power compared to other cars.American car industry came down in the past time when it made cars which did not satisfy the needs of customers.But now it is the 'golden age' of american car industry.The efficiency of american cars can be felt by viewing the american president's limo built by general motors.Dodge dart,ford fusion,tesla model si,which got the 2013 trend award lift the pride of american cars.i just reffered the wikipedia.
Foreign (European) cars are better than American cars.

Rebuttal: You said that European cars are too expensive. This is just simply not true. The Dacia, for example is one of the cheapest cars available,*costing only $9,800.** Volkswagen, for example, is not expensive at all.Argument: European cars are not only better quality, and better looking than American cars, they even get more miles per gallon.*** European cars have better performance. (AKA handling, top speed, and braking.) Speed: This is a no-brainier. And everyone knows this, I don't even need to prove this. Braking: The European car will stop half a mile before the American one does. Handling: Have the cars dive around in a circle. See which one is better. (Hint: It's the European one.)European cars also look much better, I don't even need a source for this one, just look on Google images.And Americans cannot make cool cars, according to the Rolls-Royce director. :)*****http://qz.com... **http://www.dacia.co.uk... ***http://jalopnik.com... ****http://www.forbes.com...
Foreign (European) cars are better than American cars.

Rebuttal: “The Indian president uses a Mercedes S600. Did the Indians react? ” Of course they did not! The Indians do not make any good luxury cars. Would it not be a shame for the President to drive a $2,500 Tato Nano? * “The American car ford fusion can defeat Camry and Honda civic”. No it cannot! The Japanese are way up on the SUVs of the world, mass production at its finest. The only part that the Americans have a handle in is pickups. ** as you can also see by the list on the link, Toyota Camry is top selling non-pickup in the world, followed by the Accord. Ford Fusion does not even make the list. “And Prius still leads as a fuel efficient car. ” EXACTLY! The Prius is a JAPENESE CAR, NOT American. This argument makes no sense. “By general motors American cars give 230 miles per gallon” Such horrible grammar. And where the &%#@ did you here that from? “Corvette ZRI gives 620 horsepower for about $100,000 which is one-third of Lamborghini's and Ferraris. ” Ah, but the Lambos and other European cars offer so much more quality and likeliness and everything else, it’s worth it. *** “The money is less because the money is made in dollars and European cars in euro and there is no doubt American cars are best. ” What. Was. That. Sense no all at. “I referred www. quchronicle. com/2010/02/America” Using the same source, it says “Over the course of 2009, the American automotive industry faced what was quite possibly its worst year since the creation of Ford. By the summer of this past year, Chrysler and General Motors, better known for Dodge, Jeep, Chevrolet and Cadillac vehicles, collectively filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Throughout the rest of the year, Pontiac and Saturn would be no more, and both Saab and Hummer would be sold to other foreign companies. ” This shows just how unreliable the American car companies are. They could “crash” at any moment. "I used. .. globustv. net/english/page/advantage. ." WHAT THE FREAK! THAT IS A REAL ESTATE COMPANY IN FRANCE! What does real estate have to do with this? . http://www.carwale.com... . http://blogs.cars.com... . http://www.lamborghini.com... Argument: The European cars definently have a much better handle on the car manufacturing than the Americans. For all of the reasons that I have stated above; handling, braking, style ect. All of these reasons are my reasons, AND the reasons are why I should win this debate. Also add to the fact that my opponent does not provide reliable evidence (more like weird evidence) and has horrible spelling, (there IS spellchecker on this thing) are the reasons I should win.
Foreign (European) cars are better than American cars.

When i said about American presidents limo i tried to prove the efficiency of american cars not whether he use a american car.The indian president uses a mercdes S600.Did the indians react? The demand for american cars are increasing day by day.The american car ford fusion can defeat Camry and honda civic.and prius still leads as a fuel efficient car.by general motors american cars give 230 miles per gallon.america makes a number of efficient hybrid cars.for eg.chevy volt which runs on electricity and gasoline.cadillac escalade hybrid is another example.american car gives more power for least money .corvetteZRI gives 620 horsepower for about $100,000 which is one-third of lambhorghinis and ferrariis.the money is less because the money is made in dollars and european cars in euro and there is no doubt american cars are best. i reffered www.quchronicle.com/2010/02/america and globustv.net/english/page/advantage..
Foreign (European) cars are better than American cars.

Rebuttal: "Check out the Volkswagen polo which has less power compared to other cars." Maybe the Polo does, but so many, many, many other cars have SO much more power than American cars, it is definently hard to point out one of a million and say that all of them have less power. Therefore, European cars are definitely more powerful than American cars, with a few minor exceptions. "But now it is the 'golden age' of American car industry" No it has not. Maybe in America, but you wonder why? Because it is made in America, easy to get, plenty of them all around. "The efficiency of American cars can be felt by viewing the American president's limo built by general motors." Are you seriously serious? The President drives an American car. No way. How do you think people would react if he didn't drive American? He really has no choice. "Dodge dart, ford fusion, Tesla model si,which got the 2013 trend award lift the pride of American cars." All of these cars are beat out by the European cars. Dodge Dart I can say nothing about, just average, no comment. Ford Fusion. Ba, BMW was always the top. Tesla Model. Nice car, however the Prius is better. (This is non-American, therefore I will use it.) "I just referred the wikipedia." Wow, nice, reliable sources. Argument: European cars are better than American cars all around. I kind of already told this to you. And it's true. Points: I would like to point out that my opponent has not made am actual argument, just tried to prove my arguments wrong.
Abortion

Day 21:The heart begins to beat,7 unsurely at first, gaining strength day by day. The heart beats 70 times per minute at first, reaching a maximum of 170-190 at seven weeks, and slowing a bit to 160-180 at 9 weeks.8 A day later the eyes begin to develop. The earliest stages of the ears are now present.9 Thank you for informing me about this, this is where I personally feel its wrong to kill a human, because this is when I feel like it becomes a person. But, also, you have yet to take in the consideration about the mother situation. "1% of all abortions occur because of rape or incest; 6% of abortions occur because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child." Yes, it is a very small number, but I feel like it okay with those situations. source: http://www.abortionno.org...
Abortion

P1: I understand that a fetus is a human. P2: But a fetus isn't a fetus until 8 weeks into the pregnancy. C: Yes, it is wrong to kill maybe after the 8th week. P1: Yes, it may contain those following this but so does a bacterial cell. But do we care for them? C: If it is a fetus, yes it might be wrong to kill, but before then, I feel like it is okay.
Abortion

First I will present my case. P1: A fetus is a human P2: It is morally wrong to kill a human C: Abortion is wrong P1: A zygote, made at the moment of conception, already has the same attributes needed to be alive. It has metabolism, growth, reacts to stimulants, and reproduction cells. It has human DNA. A fetus is a homosapien, therefore they are a human. P2: This ones kind of obvious, I hope you agree. Conclusion: Abortion is killing a human, therefore it is wrong. Sources F. Beck, D. B. Moffat, and D. P. Davies, Human Embryology, Second edition . http://abortionfacts.com... THE THREE QUESTIONS I await your response.
Abortion

I am arguing as for abortion. The reason being is that it is the choice of the woman; and if the man is there, him also; to keep to zygote or not. If they don't then let it be. Another reason is that there might be underlying issues with why the woman wants an abortion; like say if she got raped, or incest. That's why I feel like some one should have the choice to choose if they want to carry the child for nine months, or have the choice to abort it with in the first trimester.
Abortion

"Thank you for informing me about this, this is where I personally feel its wrong to kill a human, because this is when I feel like it becomes a person. " And this is when most abortions occur, it is before 8 months. Concession. Vote Con. "1% of all abortions occur because of rape or incest; 6% of abortions occur because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child. " Yes, I feel it is okay in those situations. I agree.
Time is just an illusion/made up force that helps us understand our place in the Universe

I am happy to accept the Con side of this debate. I assume the first round is just for acceptance, so, I will accept. I will post definitions, since the Instigator has not done so, however, I will not define "Time," since that is what this debate is about: From the Oxford online dictionary at oxforddictionaries.com: Illusion - 1. a thing that is or is likely to be wrongly perceived or interpreted by the senses: the illusion makes parallel lines seem to diverge by placing them on a zigzag-striped background 2. a deceptive appearance or impression: the illusion of family togetherness the tension between illusion and reality 3. a false idea or belief: he had no illusions about the trouble she was in Universe - 1. all existing matter and space considered as a whole; the cosmos. The universe is believed to be at least 10 billion light years in diameter and contains a vast number of galaxies; it has been expanding since its creation in the Big Bang about 13 billion years ago. (the second definition of "Universe" is irrelevant to this debate). Finally, I should like to note that this is my first debate on Debate.org, so, although I shall endeavor to keep to the to formats of other debates, if I do make any mistakes, I apologize in advance. -A.W.