BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Beer in the UK is too expensive

Hi, thanks for accepting. This is my first debate (on this website I mean!), so go easy! Cider is my most favourite drink in the world. A Pint of Thatchers Gold in my local on a warm day is just above the birth of my child in terms of highlights. However... Beer in the UK in my opinion is far too expensive. I think it accentuates the problem we already have with binge drinking. I think that because as young adults we are so prohibited from experiencing alcohol in general, it creates a taboo when we arrive at 18 to drink excessively. In European countries such as Italy and Spain, children are encouraged to enjoy a glass of wine with an evening meal. In these same countries, beer is far less expensive but they do not have the same issue as we do with binge drinking. Surely this is due to the earlier exposure eliminating the mystery. Raising the prices of alcohol does NOT in any way reduce the amount people drink. It simply alters what it is they drink. The lower to middle classes are those principally affected by this, as disposable income is obviously a big consideration. For example, it is unusual now to find a pint of average strength lager in a pub in the North of England for less than "3. When faced with the option of a "3 pint, or a 3 litre bottle of cider from the shop for "2.69, which is the obvious option? I feel the price of beer is driving business down in pubs across the UK, as it become prohibitive for the average consumer. This in turn, leads to drinking across homes and the outdoors by younger people doing far more damage to their health than they realise. It is now quite common amongst people of all ages to 'pre-drink' cheap vodka etc before going to any kind of function, thus reducing the required cost of beer to fulfil one's 'quota' if you will. My point is that I think this is not only an issue regarding cost, but also an underling concern about long term health caused by the price of beer, something which is essential to our culture and has been for hundreds of years.
Beer in the UK is too expensive

Thanks for the debate! First and foremost, we need to knock out the argument concerning the drinking age. It doesn't have anything to do with the price of alcohol and is generally a question of morality instead of economics. The drinking age in the United States for example is a staggering 21, yet the average price of beer in the US isn't all the expensive[1]. [1]http://www.wineaccess.com... Moving on we have to consider the real impact of Pro's arguments; he urges a world where the drinking age is lowered. Not a world where the price of beer is lowered. This is the solution that would help to solve for binge-drinking, but it doesn't have anything to do with the price of beer. It's natural that when something is forbidden, you want it all the more. But when you are allowed to have things in moderation, you learn to discern quality and things like binge drinking are no longer problems. Naturally there will be people with alcoholic tendencies who will continue to binge drink despite the removal of the negative stigma, but those kinds of people suffer an addiction and are outside the scope of this debate. That said there isn't really a reason to vote for Pro based on the arguments he as provided. The drinking age is wholly a non-issue and the argument of pubs closing is one of personal responsibility. Something I'll cover while making my own argument. So onto my own arguments, beer is expensive in the UK, yes, but it's not too expensive because the price is justified. In the United State you can buy a pound of rice for about 50 cents[2]. Rice isn't a high demand item so it doesn't cost too much to purchase. However that same rice costs a whopping 3 dollars a pound in Japan[3]. Rice is much more highly valued in Japan than it is in the United States and the higher rate of consumption and demand for it justifies the higher prices. So while I would pass on a 20-pound bag of rice that costs $60, a person in Japan wouldn't think twice about it. [2] http://www.walmart.com... [3] http://www.amazon.com... In the same way, beer is expensive the UK, but the price is justified. As Pro said alcohol in general has a huge cultural significance in the UK and cutting corners in it's production to lower the price just isn't going to happen. Pubs may be closing in the UK, but it's not because the price of beer is driving them under, it's because there were too many there in the first place. These pubs were opened when such an endeavor was financially viable or because of some kind of romantic draw to owning a pub blinded the owner into making a financially foolish decision. It always sucks when your favorite hang-out has to close, but if the owner can't make the right financial decisions or if the customers aren't willing to support the business, then it's irresponsible to blame the good instead of one's self. While some pubs may have to close, there are others which remain big successes. Vote Con! Back to you Pro.
Catholicism

Sexual activity that doesn't have the intent of making children doesn't cause bad things to happen unlike drinking too much alcohol. Unless you do it wrong of course. The thing about what you keep saying is you make long paragraphs but you never quite get what i'm saying, think about this for a minute. Who would come to a conclusion that masturbation is a bad thing to do? Seriously, who logically would come up with the statement that homosexual behavior is bad and that masturbation is bad. Also i'm saying that catholics pray TO saints not PRAY ABOUT them. Also yes we should worry about sinning, but we should worry about what we can logically conclude is bad. Catholics view everything not in a rational logical way, but in a irrational nonsensical way. Also to add yet another topic to this debate i HIGHLY disagree with priests not being allowed to have children have sex or even masturbate. That is over the top. You know why so many priests raped little boys? Because you stripped them of EVERY OTHER MEAN OF PLEASURING THEMSELF so instead of pleasuring themself IN A NORMAL WAY they're doing it in a OBVIOUSLY WORSE WAY. How could you strip such things from a persons life, it's not right. Stripping people of such things also can lead to all that pent up need for love to come bursting out leading to sexual harassment or possibly rape. I can hardly go a week withought masturbating let alone not have any sexual activity unless it's to have kids for the rest of my life. Catholicism asks of you to do ridiculous things that me personally could never do.
Catholicism

The point is there is nothing wrong with homosexual behavior. Some people are just made that way by god, god made them that sexuality. Masturbation isn't a sin, it's natural. How is it bad? What is so bad about it? I don't think god cares what the hell you do to pleasure yourself. Yes you do worship statues, you bow down to them while in the church, don't deny that because I have been to a catholic church before multiple times. Also i was trying to add that the catholic denomination is too strict. It makes people worry too much about tradition and what is and isn't a sin. So not only with homosexuals but in general the catholic church hates the idea of sexual behavior other than having children. But finally i also have yet another point, catholics believe in saints. Not only do they bow down to saints, but they pray to them aswell. You never AND I MEAN NEVER should pray to anyone OTHER THAN GOD HIMSELF. That's disrespectful, you're supposed to respect saints but you shouldn't bow down or pray to them. Catholicism also contributes to strict parenting, which can ruin a persons life. So in conclusion become a protestant instead.
Catholicism

To offer a rebuttal to your points: 1) Catholics believe that homosexual behavior (A man lying in bed with another man) is a sin. We do not believe that being gay is a sin. The action with intent is a sin, the temptation is in no way a sin. 2) It's not like God saying blondes are sinners. It's Him giving us all different temptations. Through these temptations, we can learn more about ourselves and, more importantly, Him. 3) Masturbation is clearly a sin. The fact that it is a biological urge doesn't justify it, as it is also a biological urge for me to have sex outside of marriage. It is also a biological urge for me hurt others when they hurt me. These aren't suddenly okay because "God made my body that way." Such an argument wildly misinterprets the idea of choice. 4) We don't worship statues and portraits. Do you have a photo of your grandmother? Do you look at it? We have photos of the mothers and fathers of our church. We look at them just like you do of your grandmother. 5) Right. We have holidays. We have days of fasting. How is this contradictory to anything taught by either the Church or Jesus? 6) What do you mean by the statement "strict chastity?" Aren't all Christian doctrines calling their congregations to be free of sin? With that argument out of the way, my constructive: Catholicism is a Christian denomination. It doesn't argue much other than that. Differences exist, yet the overall message is the same: Jesus Christ saved us from sin, and it is up to us to accept this. These differences can easily be explained, yet it appears Con is more interested in defacing Christianity than attacking Catholicism. If Con would like to discuss the differences between Catholic theology and other denominations, that would be a topical argument. Yet, as the judges ought to note, Con has attacked not Catholic theology, but what almost all Christians view to be immoral (such as masturbation or homosexual behavior). As such, Con's argument is off topic, and the only arguments he has given have been rebutted and found to be incorrect. I ask the judges to take this into account when deciding arguments. If Con has any further points of contention, I would be more than willing to refute them.
Catholicism

Catholics believe that being gay is a sin but that's dumb. God made them gay. That's like god inventing blondes and then saying if your blonde your a sinner it's ridiculous. Catholics also believe that masturbation is wrong which it isn't, its a biological urge that god allowed you to have. Catholics also pray and worship statues and portraits and in the christian bible it specifically states not to do that. Catholicism is also extremely strict when it comes to what to do and not to do on specific times at specific dates. It's ridiculous and dumb. Catholicism is basically a very strict chastity supporting version of christianity.
Being in a casual relationship is better than a marriage

According to a source, the reason marriages fail is because there is no real connection involved and both people are not working as one (1). Casual relationships are bound to break up sooner or later and cheating can still exist in casual relationships. If you get in a casual relationship, your wasting your time as there really won't be anything to learn with the quality of time you spend. Not to mention the risk of abuse when coming to physical attachments at an immature stage. Sources: 1. http://living.msn.com...
Being in a casual relationship is better than a marriage

Although I see where you are coming from I have to agree to disagree, in a casual relationship people break up but in a marriage the break is a divorce which is worse to encounter, relationship experts say 59% of young married couples divorce down the line and according to the national center for health statistics 60% of married couples eventually get divorced... I mean lets be honest here in a casual relationship you still have the same amount of commitment, people are still living together the only thing that differs them is a ring think about before marriage your dating (casually) loving each other (casually) when your in the fianc" stage (casually dating) and to top all this off people are still cheating while married, married couples are divorcing etc. so explain how that does not connect or have similarities to a casual relationship?
Semen should be bottled and sold as a teeth whitener.

I thank the rich atheist for his arguments.<3 you cheesedingo!!!I love you more. I win.It is a wonder of life itself, filled with energy, carbs, proteins, nutrients, micronutrients, sub-micronutrients, and infra-sub-micronutrients, ad infinitum. Crap for deoderant works the same way. It is full of nutrients that our body hasn't completely prossesed. If the ejaculator consumes pineapple prior to expulsion of man-goo, voila! you've got a veritable pina collada a la homo.I assume you said this because of hot tub time machine. In the movie, the black dude that thought that he jizzed all over his friends face was horified, and we all should be. Jizz in the face is disgusting.Semen is so complex and dynamic of a taste that a book has been written that utilizes semen in all of its recipes. The book is called Natural Harvest - A Collection of Semen-Based Recipes. Don't ask me what I was searching for when I came across that. lol "came" across that. Lick it up! --->http://www.goodreads.com......;My God.... where the hell do you find this stuff? There is so much wrong with this....C2) I've tried literally dozens of products to clean my teeth: hand sanitizer, soap, tooth paste, baking soda, crystal meth, packing peanuts, seagull ribosomic diclastiphoids, plasma-treatment, UV light, etc.. Nothing has worked but semen. You should get that checked out..... Have you tried actually brushing? Beleive it or not, brushing your teeth cleans it....Then my opponent goes on to say advanced ways how semen cleans teeth, but doesn't say how I am wrong with saying it doesn't work since it is a base and not an acid. Therefore, my argument is still strong.Two last final question: If semen didn't whiten teeth, why do 99.999% of all female porn stars have excellent smiles? Quite simply, they gargle masculine mayonaise. Pornstars have white teeth because they have to whiten them up with products not related to semen. In order to see if my opponent was correct and 99.999% of pornstars had white teeth, I watched hundreds of pornos. I agree with him, but honestly, does a male pornstar want a girl with ugly teeth deepthroating his supreme emporer? I know I wouldn't. If using semen as mouthwash didn't whiten teeth, why do 4/5 tribal dentists recommend the treatment? Because, they are in tune with mother nature and her miracle cures! [NOTE: the 5th dentist was totally stoned on peyote buttons. Source please? He has no source so I assume this is fake. 4/5 i'm sure said that they should BRUSH. Brushing works better than semen.My opponent made incredibally weak arguments so I didn't have much to base my argument on. I hope my opponent provides more next round so that I may rebutle his semen drinking ways evermore.Thank you all.
Semen should be bottled and sold as a teeth whitener.

Now, LET US BEGIN! !! !! !A) While it is true that sperm donars have to go through rigorous screening processes, the same will happen if we do this. Just because we put our sperm to a different use, doesn't mean that we are going to have a larger amount of people doing it. They still want the quality sperm if they want to use it to clean up your mouth. B) If the United states is the only one doing this, won't other countries want this too? According to the NY times, only 44% of sperm donars worldwide are American [1]. This means that the majority is NOT in the United States, meaning that they will have to compete really hard to be at the top of the sperm chain. And anyway, does America want to be known as the worlds best sperm-heads? Come on now. C) As I said in my argument against A, there will arouse no new jobs, because the same rigourous screening process will take place. D) So, my opponent says that we should change our currency to sperm? This will only make women be segregated ever more, considering that they can not cum. Women gotta have rights too! Health:A) Teeth whitener may be dangerous, but semen will have no effect. Our little to-be children are more of a base[2], because women's vaginas are slightly acidic. Base's do not have acidity, therefore there would be no effect of semen. B) How is it beneficial to men to consume? I know not a single straight man that enjoys swallowing sperm. Fun: A)True it would be fun to trick your friends into swallowing sperm. But isn't the classics such as shaving cream and warm water better? They are all good fun, and your opponent will not question your manhood or try to kill you. B) While it would lead to fun with monkeys, showing monkeys it's fun to have sperm in your mouth might lead to questioning acts in the future by both you and the monkey. .. .Morality: A) My opponent is saying in this entire section of morality how it is right to put sperm in your mouth. He uses the bible as references, yet God's teachings are against gays. My opponent will deny that this is gay, but how in anyway is it not gay when one man puts sperm in his mouth without question? Sorry for my weak cases here, I will expand on them later. Now, onto my case.1) It is disgusting. Who in their right mind puts sperm in their mouth because they think it will clean their teeth? You are diliberately putting sperm in your mouth! Whats next, putting sh*t in our pits to use as deoderant? This is absolutely disgusting.2) It will not clean teeth. This is because as defined by my opponent "a substance that bleaches the teeth and makes them appear whiter by burning through the outer layer of enamel with specialized chemicals common in the procedures of general and cosmetic dentistry". Buring means acidic, and as I said, sperm is not an acid, but a base. So it will not burn through the outer layer of enamel. Conclusion: In conclusion, using sperm as mouthwash is gross and will not work. That is all. GOOD LUCK WSA! !! !! ![1]. http://www.nytimes.com...[2]http://answers.yahoo.com...
Semen should be bottled and sold as a teeth whitener.

I thank WSA for the challenge and look forward to this debate. I accept all terms and ruling for this debate and tourney.Good tidings returnedI wish my athiestic fried good luck during this momentous debate, which will be showered in overwhelming and support and praise from every active and inactive menber of DDO. But, the time must come for the gods to decide the outcome, and I have already slaughtered 26 and a half peices of cheese around a dingo as of the posting of this round to appease them in an ultimate act of unquestioning piety and cheesiness.May thee cheese flow forth from the wounds thou shalt recieve upon the ending of this quarrel of wits!All that's left to say is.....CHEESEDINGO1 ACCEPTS!
Semen should be bottled and sold as a teeth whitener.

This is part of Famer's, "Extreme Troll Debating Tournament!"ResolutionResolved: Semen should be bottled and sold as a teeth whitener.Famer's Rules: All debates will have FIVE ROUNDS and will follow the the following structure:R1: Acceptance, definitions and your resolved resolutionR2: Opening Arguments ONLYR3: Refutations, extra arguments and defenceR4: Refutations and defence ONLY (no new arguments)R5: Refutations, defence and conclusionAll debates will have the following settings:5 Rounds8000 Maximum characters3 days debating period (each argument)2 weeks voting period DefinitionsSemen: A substance discovered by your mother that is produced within a male human's body and subsequently ejaculated with great vegenace after engorged penile stimulation [ask your mother for more information]should: reflecting an imperative of what is good, right, and justbottled: injected into glass, plastic, ceramic, fiberglass, concrete, stone, steel, animal skin, or Certified-EPA and Obama-Sanctioned Plant-Based Renewable-Resourced Green-Revolution Alternative-Material containers by foreign child laborsold: be available for sale at a specific price on the free-market utopian pseudo-intellectual nirvana-landteeth whitener: a substance that bleaches the teeth and makes them appear whiter by burning through the outer layer of enamel with specialized chemicals common in the procedures of general and cosmetic dentistry[Source: Black's Law Dictionary pgs. 287, 382, 761 and Tourqoise-Magenta's Law Dictionary pgs. 14, 940, 1265.2 section 6] Good TidingsI wish my furry friend good luck during this momentous debate, which will be showered in overwhelming support and praise from every active and inactive member of DDO. But, the time must come for the gods to decide the outcome, and I have already slaughtered several goats as of the posting of this round to appease them in an ultimate act of unquestioning piety and abject obsequiosness. May thee bloodshed commence after thine bidding!!
Gay Marriage should be Illegal

My response will focus primarily on premise (2) of my opponent's argument. Same-sex marriage should not be legal because the state has a compelling interest not to recognize it. This compelling reason is the fact that the very nature of marriage does not include same-sex couples within its purview. Marriage is fundamentally centered around procreative type acts. Since sexual acts between individuals of the same sex are not procreative in type, they do not qualify as marriages. This renders Con's response against the point that "Gays can't have children" to be irrelevant. Marriage is based on acts that are procreative in type, not whether they are procreative in effect. Infertile coupels are therefore irrelevant to the argument. Consider then the following argument.1. Heterosexual union is the indispensable means by which humans come into existence and therefore has special social value (indeed, the greatest possible social value because it is the first precondition for society).2. The indispensable means by which something of special social value can occur itself has special value.3. What has special value to human society deserves special social recognition and sanction.4. Civil ordinances which recognize gay marriage as comparable to heterosexual marriage constitute a rejection of the special value of heterosexual unions.5. To deny the special social value of what has special social value is unjust.6. Therefore, gay marriage is unjust. [1]Heterosexual marriage provides a framework under which future citizens can be raised and produced due to the fact that heterosexual union (The joining of a sperm/egg) is possible under this type of relationship. It is for this reason that the state confers legal and economic benefits upon married couples, for it recognizes that these notions are crucial for the maintenance of a healthy society. Thus, since procreation and child-rearing are essential to the advancement of society, the state has a vested interest in protecting a stable relationship under which this can take place. The state, therefore, ought to give special recognition to heterosexual unions, for they function as a precondition to a flourishing society. Relationships which do not have procreation as their core do not deserve such recognition, for they are not foundational to society. The recognition of homosexual unions as marriages would therefore be unjustly denying the special social value of heterosexual unions.Con anticipates this argument, he writes. "Allowing gays to marry doesn't stop hextrosexual marriage, nor does it in anyway stop or interfer with children being produced in a hetrosexual marriage."Unfortunately, this fails to capture the argument. I am not claiming that same-sex marriage would stop heterosexual marriage or that it would interfer with the production of children. Rather, I am claiming that since procreation is impossible between couples of the same-sex, that therefore their relationships cannot be counted as a marriage.Though I have more to say, I'll end on this note and turn it over to Con.___________1. http://wisdomandfollyblog.com...