BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Affirmative Action

Kingdom of EndsIn a civilized society, we as humans must live together peacefully. One key issue is that we should move to create a Kingdom of Ends. The Kingdom of Ends is where people are treated as an end of themselves, not a means [1]. This is important as it is part of the soceity that we should strive to as it maximizes human equality and the ability to live together peacefully. The Kingdom shows that many people can live together under common just laws as they are able to live as ends instead of means. At the End, they are able to live together as citizens in this Kingdom to be treated as ends and this will lead to an equality through individiual rights [2]. Affirmative Action violates the Kingdom of Ends as it uses the instance of a racial or sex that was discriminated to institute a punishment on the firm to higher a set standard. This isn't equality towards the Kingdom of Ends as you are using the individual as a means, not an end. Harming this violates the Kingdom of Ends which makes things harder, as a society, to move towards this utopia and this plan is unethical due to this.UtilitarianismThe second main aspect of this debate should revolve around Utilitarianism, which can best be sumed up as the greatest pleasure of the greatest sentient beings. This is an important aspect of this debate as we look at how it affects the most people in this debate. We would have to look at any situation where the discriminatory action that would happen and see that one or a few members would be discriminated against by a firm. The people who were discriminated against are not compensated for with a hiring from the firm or any other. Instead they require the business to meet certain requirements that would harm the business with financial issues. Am I stating that the minorities aren't as skilled as white males? No. The Oppertunity cost of Affirmative Action is over $200 billion [3]. We can see that there really anyone that actually benefits from Affirmative Action, but a small select few. Those discriminated against aren't helped and businesses tend to suffer financial losses. We see that there is more of a harm to more individuals than would great a net benefit and as a result, we see that Affirmative Action is unethical. Sources1. (http://tinyurl.com...) 2. Stephen Palmquist "'The Kingdom of God is at Hand!' (Did Kant really say that?)", History of Philosophy Quarterly 11:4 (October 1994), pp.421-437.3. (http://tinyurl.com...)
Affirmative Action

Just a little reminder: For this round, I will give several arguments and my opponent will provide a counter-framework. There a few reasons that support the idea of affirmative action being good. But first of all, what is affirmative action? Affirmative action is the policy of favoring members of a disadvantaged group who currently suffer or historically have suffered from discrimination within a culture (1). So why is affirmative action good? 1. Affirmative action breaks down barriers. There have been many barriers over the course of our history. Man against woman, black against white, rich against poor, and so on. It is true that many of these barriers may have been broken, but there is still another barrier we have to break: the barrier if acceptance. We have to learn to accept one another regardless of race, gender, or income status. Affirmative action was introduced United States first by John F. Kennedy in 1961. He wanted to "ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin" (2). In other words, this helps to protect workers and it gives them rights. Why wouldn't we want that? Court cases have been held regarding college admission based on race, gender, or beliefs including the Fisher v. University of Texas in 2013 and 2016 (3). Both cases ended fairly. 2. So what can we conclude from this? Based on this information, it seems that affirmative action benefits everybody, so why would we want to get rid of something like this? Affirmative action protects workers and gives them rights, it makes sure that students are accepted into college regardless of race, color, religion, and gender. Affirmative action breaks barriers, but we still need to break the barrier of acceptance. All people should accept one another. I hope that this is a good start for this debate. These statements that I have made help support the idea of affirmative action being helpful, not harmful to people. I look forward to my opponent's response. Sources: (1) en. m. wikipedia. org (2) huffpost. com (3) en. m. wikpedia. org
Affirmative Action

I am doing several debates on the Big Issues. This is the second. My opponent and I will debate on the topic of affirmative action. I am for affirmative action while my opponent is against it. Round 1is for explaining rules and acceptance. Round 2 is when I place down several arguments and my opponent provides a counter-framework. Rouen 3 is for rebutting the arguments placed in Round 2. If either my opponent or I forfeit a round, voters should be aware of this and penalize that person by voting against them. If any of these rules are broken, voters should also penalize that person who broke the rules.
Not all girls share secrets

Yes, But girls in general cannot keep a secret even if they tried. I mean ask a girl, Not to tell other people who you like and next thing you know all the people, Even staff knows. It takes more than just one girl to spread a secret. I think God made all girls that way, Just like He made them all emotional. Maybe it was to keep men on their toes. Wow! I still have 1, 600 characters remaining.
Let opponent choose topic. I will be Con.

You have provided zero sources and have barely rebutted my arguments. I extend all my arguments that weren't rebutted and rebut your arguments below."School uniforms are not always a financial burden...." Yes, they sometimes are. That's the catch. I could say that without school uniforms, it is sometimes a financial burden. Thus, buying school uniforms are similar to buying normal clothes. Besides, parents complain about the school uniform prices, as stated in source [1] (citation is above)"...clothing and accessories can be distracting, revealing and outright bad in taste...." that is exactly why choosing clothing will prepare children for a job that doesn't require uniforms. If students learn what not to wear when they are still students, when they grow up, then they know what to wear. This is also in source [1] (citation is above) " If one girl is dressed as a prep and another is dressed as a skater than they are less likely to find something they have in common because they don't dress alike..." What? What study shows this? It is highlighted in this source: http://glob.hubpages.com..., that because of our "more civilized countries, discrimination towards other races - and interracial couples- have decreased very noticeably over the last decade; homosexuality is now very common, and has become socially accepted throughout our society; and women are now properly accepted into society, and are able to do everything a man had only been allowed to do in the past. " Because "our population is becoming larger and much more varied", we don't judge others by their appearances anymore. Sure, long long ago, black men were hated by whites, women had no rights, but now, America has grown into a free country and no longer do people think men better than women or whites better than blacks. There is no reason a prep would not interact with a skater. This is like saying there is no point for a computer programmer to interact with a lawyer. Sure, their jobs seem to have lots of difference, but they can comfort each other in their job difficulties, and help each other if they can. Your prep girl and skater girl, if interacted with each other, would probably like each other well. It is all on our personality, not on what we dress! "but they would only get picked on more if they didn't dress the way the crowd wanted them to"...What?! What do you mean by "the way the crowd wanted them to"? Oh, you mean violating the dress code. Well, this only teaches children even further what not to wear for the future. If a student's future job did not require uniforms, it would be quite difficult for this student to choose the right clothes to wear.Onto you, con!
Let opponent choose topic. I will be Con.

Yeah, my mistake or whatever, I guess. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ School uniforms are not always a financial burden, many schools actually offer lower priced versions of school uniforms for sale at the school or at district office. In fact, many schools will give uniforms to the parents that cannot afford a lot of things. School uniforms are usually more expensive when they have the schools logo or crest on them, which is not required at most schools. As well as there are low cost uniforms available at many stores. At schools, clothing and accessories can be distracting, revealing and outright bad in taste, but school uniforms allow students to look disciplined, neat, and, well uniform. In quite a few jobs, one is expected to wear a uniform, so uniforms also give them a hint of what is expected of them and how to look. And if students do not work a job requiring uniforms or a certain type of dress, then after school is always the time they get to choose what to wear. Also, there is more than one way for a student to express themselves. There is dance, poetry, music, art, sports and more. One does not simply have to use clothing to express themselves or their individuality, they can express their interests by joining a club or talking to people that could have the same interests as them! If one girl is dressed as a prep and another is dressed as a skater than they are less likely to find something they have in common because they don't dress alike. School uniforms encourage social interaction because you are not as likely to make snap judgments. Yes, one may get bullied for physical inabilities, but they would only get picked on more if they didn't dress the way the crowd wanted them to. Not all people that can't do something get bullied if some people find them to be a good person.
Let opponent choose topic. I will be Con.

That's it? I was only "accepting" the argument, handing over you to say everything on your side. Well, since you rebutted my summarized argument, I shall overwhelm you with my actual argument. In the adult world students have to make their own choices and school uniforms exclude that "training excercise" of having to choose what clothes to wear. [1] School uniforms send out a sense of anti-individuality that goes against our personal liberty and freedom of expression. A nation should not go against its beliefs. It would not really matter if this was not in the constitution in the first place, but seriously--the constitution is the basic belief of America, and breaking it is a big blunder! [2]Although school uniforms can bring a sense of unity among students, the unity is too robot-like! As shown in source [3], a parent openly states "I believe we should...advance independent, creative thinkers -- not standardized, uniformed thinkers." Frudden said. "To do anything less is to do our children and our society a disservice."As shown from source [1], parents are unsatisfied with the school uniform prices, indicating that school uniforms don't exactly save parents money. They would not complain if the school uniforms actually saved money!People usually judge other people based on the clothes they wear, I agree, but a person's clothes really have nothing to do what goes on. If someone isn't very smart or physically capable they will still get bullied regardless of the fact that they look the same as everyone else. In other words, bullies can still persist, teasing other students concerning their mental ability instead of physical. Furthermore, not everyone bases people on their clothing. Sure, nobody's like the Beauty from "Beauty and the Beast", but everyone can see some desirable traits underneath the ugly face! (No offense, Mr. Beast)Onto you, con! ALL SOURCES IN MLA CITATION[1]Brosnan, Peter, and Alexis Brindley. "What Not to Wear: A School's Dress Code Limits Clothing Styles and Colors." Current Events, a Weekly Reader Publication 28 Mar. 2011: 7. Opposing Viewpoints in Context.Web. 10 Feb.2014." [2]Fetzer, Kent J. "School Uniforms Stifle Freedom of Expression." Salt Lake Tribune [Detroit] 18 Apr. 2002: F2. Opposing Viewpoints in Context.Web. 10 Feb.2014." [3]Dolan, Maura. "CALIFORNIA; Court Rejects School's Shirts; Judges Say Requiring Students to Wear the School's Motto Is a Free-Speech Violation." Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles] 15 Feb. 2014: AA3. Elibrary. Web. 21 Feb. 2014."
Let opponent choose topic. I will be Con.

Amazing! I was always against school uniforms. And i'm prepared for a few topics. School uniforms may not provide a sense of individuality, but they do not encourage brand discrimination or bullying because someone does not have the "right type" of clothing. Everyone makes snap judgement on people, and if everyone is wearing the same or similar clothing, then one cannot so easily decide that someone is cool or someone isn't worth it. This causes people to also have more opportunity for friendships or to get to know others better.
Let opponent choose topic. I will be Con.

You want to increase your debating skills, eh? Well, here's a challenge for you: School Uniforms Shouldn't be Required. I will be pro, you will be con. (You will argue that school uniforms should be required) Warning: I have done this twice, and to no avail, both my opponents had forfeited at least one round and lost to me. This is actually pretty much the only topic I'm prepared on.My opening statement: School uniforms shouldn't be required because they create a sense of anti-individuality, going against the Freedom of Expression, being forced to choose clothing can help prepare children for the adult world, and requiring school uniforms causes rebellion among the general student population.So state your case, con!
Drug Legalization

AIRhino you challenged me to a drug legalization debate. Such challenge I accepted with the idea of looking forward to separate facts from fiction the many misconceptions the general public haves about drugs in general. Patiently I waited for your response on the issue and as time went by. I was optimistic that in the 2nd round you would bring the heavy firepower of ideological, Statistics and Socioeconomic rhetoric in the issue that pertained to the wide range of drugs in general. There is an old saying " I'm responsible for what I say ; not your interpretation of it ". Your clarification into the specifics totally changes the dynamics of disputation. There are 3 more rounds to go and I'm not the type of person that goes Ted Cruz mode about debates in General. The crime in Legalized Cannabis is not in the product, But in its pricing. And that's part of my Con position in a nut shell on the issue. The next reason is well expressed in your statement " marijuana is addictive for the same reason that masturbation is addictive ". Great example. Most people who start masturbating in their youth later on move up to having sex with multiple partners later in life. In simile the majority of hard drug users will tell you they started doing Marijuana before they ended up in skid row snorting coke and sucking pipes. There is nothing recreational in lives spiraling into a vortex of self destruction.
Drug Legalization

Well, My arguments will consist of arguments for Cannabis legalization. I believe that Cannabis should be legalized for recreational use, But most other drugs such as pills should stay purely for medical use. If you agree with Cannabis legalization, Then I shouldn't have challenged you and I apologize for doing so. Marijuana has been proven through many studies to be less harmful to the human body than cigarettes. THC doesn't have addictive properties. Studies suggest that only 30% of marijuana smokers have some sort of marijuana use disorder. Which is still a somewhat high number, But marijuana is addictive for the same reason that masturbation is addictive, Because of dopamine receptors. Cigarettes however harm the body with Nicotine, And smoking tobacco is proven to cause lung cancer, Which is pretty much common knowledge at this point. I feel that the only reason that cannabis is illegal in most states is because the government cannot tax the people who grow and sell it on their own. I have a feeling that if people couldn't grow it in their homes that it wouldn't be illegal. I will spare you a super long argument because I don't even know if you disagree with me.
Drug Legalization

Let's disseminate in the next 4 rounds this myth. I will lay the fact for my taking the con position with the hopes that a well versed and educated individual can further enhance his understanding far and beyond from that of a Layman's comprehension of the topic. I would like to inform that the opinions and views I expressed here are of my own and not those of any Political, Religious, Philosophical, Economic nor my Mommy and Daddy. AIRhino you called me out. I just hope my expansive lexicon in the subject of thought doesn't gas you out and make you default.
There is evidence for the existence of a God.

First of all, I never said that God has to be infinite, but let's assume that. Plus, I'm not saying I have a proof as in proving that the angles of a quadrilateral equal 360 degrees. I'm just talking about evidence as in if I had to defend for the existence of God, I could bring a piece of evidence to the court that the judge will not immediately knock down. Anyway, I believe that the universe is so fine-tuned that it would be difficult for it to happen without a God, like if I had the source code for this website and said that nobody created it. Sure, I could have a random text generator, so it would eventually create the source code, but I would need the source code for the random text generator, which would also be difficult to imagine to come about without a creator.
There is evidence for the existence of a God.

You want to play the source vote game? Okay. Nice definitions you showed, they are literally not an argument. Now time for some source pow-pow. https://www.centerforinquiry.net... Heres the basic argument showing why there"s no proof for God (as defined above). 1. Humans will never have the cognitive capacity to directly understand anything with infinite powers or qualities. 2. Humans will never have intellectual reasons to indirectly demonstrate the existence of anything with infinite powers or qualities. 3. There are only two kinds of proofs for God: direct understanding or indirect demonstration. Conclusion: Humans will never have any proofs for God. Oh wait, I only needed one, would you look at that?
There is evidence for the existence of a God.

https://www.merriam-webster.com... capitalized : the supreme or ultimate reality: such as a : the Being perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness who is worshipped as creator and ruler of the universe b Christian Science : the incorporeal divine Principle ruling over all as eternal Spirit : infinite Mind 2 : a being or object believed to have more than natural attributes and powers and to require human worship; specifically : one controlling a particular aspect or part of reality Greek gods of love and war 3 : a person or thing of supreme value had photos of baseball's gods pinned to his bedroom wall 4 : a powerful ruler Hollywood gods that control our movies' fates https://www.merriam-webster.com... 1 a : an outward sign : indication b : something that furnishes proof : testimony; specifically : something legally submitted to a tribunal to ascertain the truth of a matter 2 : one who bears witness; especially : one who voluntarily confesses a crime and testifies for the prosecution against one's accomplices " in evidence 1 : to be seen : conspicuous trim lawns " are everywhere in evidence"Amer. Guide Series: N.C. 2 : as evidence In short, God does not imply an inability to prove the existence of God, and evidence is not conclusive proof. Anyway... there is research concerning how many factors are necessary to create a stable universe, and it shows that it is difficult to have the factors line up just right to create a universe suitable for life.
Bbq Sauce is the Best Sauce

Ok, although your argument is acceptable, it seems unauthentic, as anyone can copy and paste such information. Now here is my argument, 1: High in Antioxidants, barbeque sauce reduces the effects of free radicals such as stress and other toxins, In depth, based on experience, I know that after eating barbeque sauce I feel comforted, happy and at peace. 2:Much like marina sauce, bbq sauce also contains a lot of tomatoes, and therefore lycopene, you have already stated the effects of lycopene, which includes a reduced risk of prostate cancer and heart disease. Speaking of heart disease, bbq sauce has a high potassium count, which reduces the risk of said condition. Moreover, potassium reduces the effects of depression and strengthens the immune system. 3:Low fat content in comparison to marina sauce, per 100gs, marina contains 1.5g of fat, whereas bbq sauce only contains 0.6g, meaning you can enjoy more of it without worrying about gaining weight. 4:Typically, Barbeque sauce doesn't contain alcohol, whereas marina does, therefore it is more compatible with non alcoholics, especially people with liver problems, not forgetting religious reasons. 5: Highly versatile: Can be used as a side, and a marinade. Goes on pretty much anything from chicken and beef, to pizza and pasta. 6:Taste: Because of its perfect blend of herbs and spices, this sauce comes with a certain richness. Obviously I am bias, but its hard to ignore these great points.
Bbq Sauce is the Best Sauce

Hello. I will be arguing that marinara sauce is actually the best sauce. I will post my arguments and will save my rebuttals for Round 2.1. Best Nutritional Value A half-cup serving of marinara sauce contains 82 calories. Eating this sauce by itself is possible but not common – you’ll more likely top a plate of pasta with it or serve it as a dip with mozzarella sticks or other fried foods, so account for all the calories when planning a meal. Marinara sauce is quite low in fat, with 2.7 grams per serving. A serving provides 14.2 grams of carbohydrates and 3.1 grams of fiber as well as 3.8 grams of protein. [1]2. Vitamins and Minerals Marinara sauce is a rich source of vitamin C. Each serving provides 67 percent of the daily recommended value based on a 2,000-calorie diet, making marinara a good choice for promoting a strong immune system. You also take in 40 percent of the vitamin A you need each day as well as 10 percent of the iron and 7 percent of the calcium when eating the marinara sauce. The vitamin and mineral content of tomatoes in marinara sauce may have benefits for diabetics. Research published in the December 2010 issue of the “International Journal of Food Sciences and Nutrition” reported that eating tomatoes may help lower the risk of hypertension. The researchers theorize that this can help diabetic patients lower their chances of developing cardiovascular disease, a risk factor for diabetes. [1]3. Contains high levels of lycopene.Because tomatoes feature heavily in marinara sauce, the sauce contains a high level of lycopene. This nutrient has antioxidant effects, and it may also help prevent a range of cancers. Evidence in the December 2010 edition of the “Journal of Oral Pathology and Medicine” indicates that the lycopene in marinara sauce may stop oral cancer by treating premalignant lesions in the mouth. More research is going to be needed to support these findings, so take this with a grain of salt. [1]Those are my arguments for Round 1. I put the floor to Pro.Source: https://www.livestrong.com...