BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Gardasil vaccination encourages sexual promiscuity

My opponent has presented a well reasoned argument, however the definition of the item in question defeats his argument. A Vaccine, (In action form Vaccination) as defined by [1] medterms.com, is "[an] Injection of a killed microbe in order to stimulate the immune system against the microbe, thereby preventing disease." To this end, a vaccine must be proactively administered to have an effect. This prevents its use as a "Plan B," making it difficult to use as justification for sexual promiscuity. Furthermore, even without the "Plan B" argument, a vaccination must be actively sought out. This means that the vaccinated individual would be aware of its uses. In [2] GARDASIL's case, the vaccination only protects against four of the known 100 types of HPV, the virus that causes cervical cancer, meaning that it does not protect against most of the health concerns related to sex. This means people treated with it would be aware of its uses, and know to use safe sex as protection.
Gardasil vaccination encourages sexual promiscuity

Good call. The burden of proof is in the context. The vaccine targets an sti, which would otherwise be protected from by wearing condoms. Condoms are the safest form of protection (save abstinence), and administering a vaccine to protect against an sti develops a false sense of security. In short, one would ideally not contract hpv if they adhered to safe sex practices in the first place, and without the risk of hpv one would be more inclined to have sex without a condom, increasing risk to other infections and unwanted pregnancy. As well sexual knowledge varies between individuals, sexual educations differ between schools and not everyone has access to the same curriculum. These inconsistencies lead to misconceptions about disease contraction, protection and infectiousness.
The single greatest mistake a man can make in life is getting married

Relationships and marriages in America are in a disastrous state. It is a proven fact that the man will overwhelmingly lose in court even when he wants to the marriage to work out. The man stands to lose everything for doing nothing wrong. A man can live a much better life staying single and not giving a woman control in his life. Statistically it is the woman who cheats on the man and the man will lose financially in court as a result. Divorce, promiscuity, and infidelity are all at record highs and will continue to increase. Erosion of your freedom. A man will no longer be able to do what he wants most of the time. He must do what his wife wants or pay the price.
One Direction is better than Justin Bieber

One Direction is better than Justin Bieber. First of all, they are better people and have morals. Justin Bieber has been caught doing drugs multiple times and his songs have messages. The members of One Direction care about their fans and they haven"t let fame get to their heads. One Direction are kind people and try to be nice to everyone even their haters. Zayn Malik stopped smoking for his fans while Justin smokes all the time. Justin is rude to his fans but when One Direction members see cuts on a fan"s wrists, they talk to them and tell them that cutting isn't worth it. Once when Niall Horan saw cuts on a fan"s wrists, he kissed them and said, "Please stop. I love you." One Direction worked hard to get to where they are now and have not given up. They give so much to charity and try to help people in need as much as possible. 1D is more talented. They have broken several records, topped the charts of topped the charts of many markets, and have many hit singles like What Makes You Beautiful, Live While We"re Young, and Best Song Ever. They have sold nineteen million singles and ten million albums. They have won two BRIT awards and three MTV Video Music Awards. They won the Best International Artist, Pop International, Best British Album, Best British Music Act, Best British Single, Top Duo/Group, New Artist of the Year, Top Pop Artist, British Single of the Year, BRITs Global Success, Best Fans, Best Group, Best Guest, Best Song, Best Video, Best Newcomer - International, Best New Act, Best UK and Ireland Act, Biggest Fans, Most Share-worthy Video, Best Song of the Summer, and Best Band Awards. Up All Night went straight to number one on the United States Billboard 200, making One Direction the first British group in US chart history to achieve this feat with their debut album. They write many of their own songs and when you hear one of their songs on the radio, you can immediately tell who it is because they have very unique voices. One Direction is more popular. They have two million more subscribers than Justin and they are the most googled people on the planet. Also, they are the most popular boy band on Earth and are number one in thirty-seven countries. Everyone knows who One Direction is whether or not they like them. Justin has been forgotten about but One Direction has stayed strong throughout the years. They get more fans every time they release a new song and they have the biggest fandom in the world.
the u.s. should make school optional instaed of mandatory

Our Country is already behind others in terms of schooling. Japanese students are far more advanced in math and science, and so are German ones. If anything, our school system needs to be revamped and taken more seriously. Pro, your argument of some are going to drop out anyway is slightly ridiculous. Yes, a small percentage of people will drop out. Which is unfortunate. How does this justify our country completely ignoring the problem all together? Let's say that your wish comes true, and school is no longer mandatory. There will be thousands of unaccounted for youth's running the streets during the day. Schools keep American youths controlled and educated. As an American, I find it necessary to educate today's youth for tomorrow's progress. Without school, working parent's would have to pay double, triple, or quadruple what they would otherwise for daycare. The literacy rate (which is at 97% right now) would plummet. A lesson that all must learn in life, is that we must sometimes do things we don't necessarily want to. Not only is school teaching children math, science, history, literature, grammar, and countless other things; it is teaching them a sense of personal completion and assuredness. You must complete things. When things get difficult, you must stick it out and keep on trucking! Isn't this the spirit that America embodies? So, your theory of: < > won't work. A 16 year old kid won't wake up and say to himself... "hmm... I don't have to go to school... so I think I will. The 16 year old wakes up, and thinks to himself: " I have to hurry and get to school, or I'll be late". Structure, discipline, and certified education. Parents, and children should be held legally responsible to educate the youth of this country.
The minimum wage should be abolished

Per bobtheponderer's request, I'm going to re-hash this debate once more--my third time in the past week, actually. Definition and ParticularsResolved: The minimum mage should be abolishedPRO will argue that the minimum wage should be abolished, whereas CON will argue that it should not be. The resolution is normative in nature, and thus the burden of proof will be evenly split.Minimum Wage: "an amount of money that is the least amount of money per hour that workers must be paid according to the law" (1). The resolution does not specify who sets the minimum wage--be it a federal or state government--so this will simply apply to any minimum wage law, whereby CON defends their existence and PRO argues for their abolition. Abolish: "to officially end or stop (something, such as a law) : to completely do away with (something)" (2). 1. http://www.merriam-webster.com...;2. http://www.merriam-webster.com...;StructureRound 1: CON provides rules and structure. PRO provides affrmative case.Round 2: CON provides negative case. PRO rebuts CON's case. Round 3: CON rebuts PRO's case. PRO defends his case.Round 4: Con defends his case. PRO passes to even out the rounds. Rules1. Accepting this debate is consenting to the rules and guidelines laid out in this opening post. 2. Failure to adhere to any of these rules will result in forfeiting this debate.3. Forfeits are not allowed. 4. Any semantial games or resolution trolling is not allowed.5. Be respectful. No personal attacks or changing the goalposts. 6. The burden of proof is equally shared. 7. No new arguments in the final speeches. Thanks to bobtheponderer for this debate. I look forward to a lively exchange.
Flash VS The Justice Leauge

Yet, you did not rebutt to speed steal, infinite mass punch, the oxygen vaccum, and Flash can run into the batcave, find somekyrptonite and stab it in supermans head 4000 times in a second.If you think about it, it all comes down to the writer. In a cross-over Venom has beaten super-man (See photo at end)Writers dumb down Flash's power, A LOT. If he wanted to, he could defeat all of the bad guys and put them in jail. In a blink.His opposite self could kill all of the justice leauge. In a blink as well. I am working on a school computer so I cannot see the photos you posted. But I am pretty sure that something can't react as fast as an atto second.You rebutted to 1/4 of my sayings. Tell me how the JLA will withstand infinite mass? How will they withstand a pebble going to thier heads with such force it could destroy a whole building?Idk bruh. Show me a feat how Super-Man survived infinite mass.
Flash VS The Justice Leauge

This round will be rebuttals=======================================================================Pro states, "Before Batmans hand tells his brain to unsheathe his 'weapon' he could kill him. "I wonder if my opponent even read the second comic strip that I showed him. It clearly states there that Batman has spent Billions of Dollars in order to make sure that the computer servers on his mech-suit could detect the Flash. The fight is over before he even knows it. Next, Pro states, "I said before. 'Fastest man Alive'=Flash. Batman>Flash Flash<Batman"Um. . I'm not sure what exactly Pro was trying to do here, but he seriously just stated that Batman is greater than the Flash, and that the Flash is lesser than Batman. I obviously agree with this point, and it seems that my opponent has openly admitted it. Next my opponent copied and pasted a bunch of the Flash's abilities. I could do the same, by posting the abilities of every Single Justice League member, but that would be pointless. Pro states, "Plus, I said no prep time. . No help from other people. You have a picture of a Batsuit right there. "I once again repeat the fact that Pro did not mention this in round 1 when I accepted this. Furthermore, no prep-time doesn't mean that he can't use the suit he's currently using, as he made it a while ago. When we say "no prep time" That means that all of the Justice League Members get a call that they will be fighting the Flash, and they have no time to prepare. Batman has had this suit made for a while, and has a whole armory of suits. He simiply puts on the suit, and goes to the location. Again, everyone must be assembled, and then the fight should begin. Next, Pro tries to prove to me that the Flash is faster than Superman. Even if this is the case, the Superman can DEFINITELY keep up with the Flash's movements and can fight with him, as can be seen with the picture shown in Round 2. The thing is that, Superman beats the Flash in every other category besides speed. Considering the fact that Superman can keep up with the Flash's Movements, he should have no trouble taking him out. Also, Superman's ability to fly puts him at a considerable advantage. Look forward to more rebuttals =)
Flash VS The Justice Leauge

My opponent does not state the situation in round 1, and yet in his opening argument states the scenario?? I was not anticipating such a scenario, and Pro really should have specified the scenario beforehand. Either way, here are my arguments: ===================================================================== FRAMEWORK This resolution asks us to see if the Flash could beat all of the Justice League. This is an interesting proposition; as Flash is supposed to be very fast, and it is reasonable for my opponent to think that he could in fact take down all members of the league with his speed. But, the Flash’s speed would not be enough to take down all members of the Justice League, especially when given prep time. Contention 1: Superman is faster than the Flash It has been seen in numerous occasions that Superman is actually faster than the Flash. If the Superman is faster than the Flash, then Flash’s “fast” factor is canceled out, that is, the fact that he’s fast doesn’t make a difference. If we cancel this out, we know that Superman’s Strength and other various abilities would easily be able to take out the Flash, especially given the fact that he would have the Justice League’s help. Especially with the help of Batman, which brings me to my next Contention: Contention 2: Batman’s Contingency Plan(s) Batman has already thought of a contingency plan to neutralize the Flash, and furthermore, in the latest issue of Batman (The New 52 Batman issue #35), has come up with a machine to neutralize the Flash. First, here is a picture of the Contingency Plan in action (this is from the Tower of Babel): Here is Batman in his Mech-Suit (which was designed to take out the Justice League), taking out the Flash: So, this proves that Batman himself could take out the Flash on TWO different occasions. And of course, with Superman on the team, there is no doubt that just Batman and Superman could beat the Flash. But considering that every single Justice League member is involved, this greatly increases the chances that the Justice League would win. I await rebuttals from my opponent =)
Flash VS The Justice Leauge

The setting where they are fighting is Gotham City. There is no prep, and they cant call anyone else to help. So, Flash vs Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Martian Manhnter, Green Lantern and Hawk Girl.First of all, Batman, Martian, Green Lantern, and Hawkgirl are out. (Or he could go back in time and kill them as babys)They wont be able to react in an atto second. The quickest time recorded by man was 12 atto seconds. Batmans head would explode from Flash hitting it so hard. Martian would also be an easy kill. Flash is able make a huge bonfire faster than they can think. Green Lantern is not really that powerful. A pebble with the amount of velocity flash can put into something would kill anyone!! Same with Hawk Girl Flash is able to run that speed. Flash is able to punch that speed also. He punched one of his villains 4000 times in one SECOND.When he fights with superman, he could literally just take some kryptonite off Batmans tool belt, (He always has some, superman gave kryptonite to him) and stab him multiple times. He could leave the kryptonite in his temple killing him. Alternativley, Flash can punchinfinite mass, nobody could handle infinite mass. Same with Wonder Woman, infinite mass to the face.
Not to convince but to rethink prior assumptions

1. Why and how would the book of Job assume that? What do you mean to place bets? Metaphor: Jesus and God are the generals of two armies. They can talk to each other like George Washington talked and sent a few letters to Lord Cornwallis and vice versa. 2. No Satan didn't become the King od Earth by being cast into Hell. He became King when Adam and Eve ate the Apple (it's actually a grapefruit) of knowledge. 3. No not permisques, She was a virgin. She was impregnated by the holy spirit. Btw the Holy Spirit is not a man or any gender at all so she is a virgin. 4. Virgin-birth would be accurate not a translation mistake. The translators would probably have had to come up with a new word or phrase because just birth assumes it's birth from a male, While Mary had birth from the Holy Spirit. 5. Yes, Jesus was not wealthy, He was middle class. Why would you assume he met wealthy people. You don't exactly have to be wealthy to bye woodwork/carpentry, Even if it was 2, 000 years ago. 6. What did you mean in your second to the last paragraph? Can you clarify? btw I was happy to answer these questions. :D
Genetically modified foods

A majority of genetically modified foods don't help the environment either because a majority of the foods modified are not modified for the purpose of helping the environment at all. If every genetically modified food or crops did help the environment such as the tree then there would be a majority of benefits but since these GMO foods are not made to serve the environment they can have any number of negative affects on it due to introducing new or enhanced genes to the DNA pool and delicate mechanics of the ecosystem. But while it is in someway harmful to the environment it is also harmful to people. The EEH (exposure to environmental hazards) organization has shown that while almost all plants do produce substances that are toxic to humans, most of the plants that humans consume produce toxins at levels low enough that they do not produce any adverse health effects. But there is concern that inserting an exotic gene into a plant could cause it to produce toxins levels that are more dangerous to humans. Even a plant were damaged in its modification process it could cause the plants toxins levels to be altered making it more dangerous.
Genetically modified foods

Not all genetically modified foods are bad for the environment. In the article, "Genetically Modified Foods: Harmful or Helpful?" Deborah Whitman brings up how genetically modified foods lead to other genetically modified plants. Not all of these plants are grown as crops, and some of them even help pollution and thus the environment. A certain type of tree has been genetically modified to absorb pollution from bodies of water. Chemical spills and pollution by individuals and companies are not unknown and these trees can absorb these damages and improve water reserves. This benefits the environment and people. You cannot generalize and say that genetically modified foods lead to environmental damages when they also lead to environmental benefits.
Genetically modified foods

Genetically modified foods have proved useful in a number of ways but the truth is that they do more harm than good. Genetically modified foods are the alterations of a food type or plants genes in order to give it a certain trait such as making it larger or grow faster. But the modifications of these foods have a lot of down sides to it, one such being the amount of harm it does to the environment. A laboratory has study shown that due to a crop of genetically modified corn there was a large fatality rate of monarch butterflies and caterpillars. This was due to the pollen from the corn being blown into milkweed plants in the surrounding area. The butterflies and caterpillars would eat the pollen causing them to die. Other non-government research groups including the USDF and EPA showed the same results.
Genetically modified foods

While that ay be true, there are many benefits to better-tasting and healthier foods being produced from genetic modification. According to healthandresearchfunding.org in the article, "Pros and Cons of Genetically Modified Foods," a food"s quality and taste can be improved with genetic modification. Flavors can be enhanced, difficult flavors can become more pleasant, and foods can be changed to become sweeter or spicier with genetic modification. The article also mentions the nutrition benefits that come from genetically modifying food. Vitamins and minerals can be added through genetic engineering. This can be very helpful in developing countries that do not have the resources to obtain much-needed vitamins and minerals.
Genetically modified foods

Despite the harm some genetically modified foods may cause, these foods can also benefit countries all over the world. Deborah Whitman writes about an example of how genetic modification can improve nutrition in developing countries in the overview of the article, "Genetically Modified Foods: Harmful or Helpful?" She writes that genetically modifying rice crops could prevent malnutrition in countries who depend on the rice, because rice does not contain many needed vitamins and minerals. These benefits of genetically modifying food will make food taste better and provide better nutrition all over the world.
Genetically modified foods

Vaccines are enough of issue as it is with people not trusting them so imagine how many people will actually be pro for them if the now come from genetically modified foods. While the GMO foods no longer require pesticides they still can do a lot of harm to animals and insects. In the article "Damning New Study Demonstrates Harm to Animals Raised on GMO Feed" by Leslie Hatfield, it states that pigs raised on a mixed diet of GM corn and GM soy had higher rates of intestinal problems, "including inflammation of the stomach and small intestine, stomach ulcers, a thinning of intestinal walls and an increase in haemorrhagic bowel disease, where a pig can rapidly "bleed-out" from their bowel and die." There were also reproductive effects such as the uteri of female pigs raised on GM feed being 25 percent larger (in proportion to body size) than those of control sows.
Genetically modified foods

This may be true but there are not only benefits to the environment but also humans. For humans the possibility of edible vaccines is a major benefit. According to wisegeek.com in the article, "What Are the Pros and Cons of Genetically Engineered Food?" genetically modifying food to create vaccines and medicines is possible and will make them cheaper and easier to obtain. Another human benefit is the genetically modified plants assist farmers. Dr. Keith Kantor, in the article, "GMO"s " Pros and Cons," writes that genetic engineering of crops allow farmers to skip using pesticides and herbicides, since the plants are already resistant. He also writes that it will cause more efficient production.