BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
The Travel Ban is a benefit to America

Thanks for the debate Pro.I accept.America is a big place, so protecting the whole thing is difficult.Supplying definitions is less so.*The Travel Ban*Trump's travel ban, in its now "watered down" phase, prohibits immigrants from 6 Muslim majority countries who lack a bona fide relationship to some US citizen or entity from entering the United States.You wanna know the problem?Trump's travel ban doesn't go far enough!This paltry ban only bans entry into the United States and utterly fails to ban entry into any other countries, so the ban is hardly expansive enough to be considered beneficial for America or Americans.*Pro's Case*Pro claims:"The travel ban imposed by President Trump is beneficial to America's safety."My response:Really, Pro?How does this benefit Panama's safety?What kinds of improvements to security does this give Argentina?Is Canada safer from Trump's exclusive travel ban?Pro continues:"[The ban] allows a time for us as Americans to regroup and figure out how to fight Radical Islamic Terrorism."My response:Why should the likes of Colombia, Bolivia, Chile, and Belize regroup to fight terrorism when the ban doesn't even consider their immigration security?Pro is inherently asking citizens of countries not involved in Trump's ban to join together and fight something that only the United States will be protected from with Trump's ban.How arrogant!*Conclusion*The United States is only one country in America, and United States citizens are only one type of American.The Trump travel ban necessarily excludes all 34 other sovereign American nations from protection, leaving the Travel ban only relevant to 3% of America.A travel ban that fails to protect 97% of America cannot be considered a benefit.I therefore reject this resolution.DefinitionsThe Travel Ban - U.S. Executive Order 13780 places limits on travel to the U.S. from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen.https://en.wikipedia.org...benefit - an advantage or profit gained from something.https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...America - a land mass of the western hemisphere consisting of the continents of North and South America joined by the Isthmus of Panama.https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...American - a native or inhabitant of any of the countries of North, South, or Central America.https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...
If rich countries eat less, poor countries could eat more

First, notice that I qualified my 4th point with (might). It depends on what kind of reduction, and by whom. "currently, we Americans eat too much" Clearly not every American can be eating too much. Some are obese, others are healthy, still others are anorexic. "If we ate less, we'd be less fat, and thus happier and more productive." You might be more productive, particularly if your work involves physical labor (which is rare for Americans anyway). But do you really believe that all the teenage girls that starve themselves are happier for their lower weight? More productive? It has been proven time and time again the foreign aid cannot alleviate poverty and hunger, though it might hold of a famine for a bit. In fact, foreign aid often hurts the recipient more than it helps, since the precious resources of a developing country are diverted from what the locals think is important, to what foreign beaurocrats think is important. In addition, you make the claim that eating "less" will reduce spending on food, but your argument only works (more happy/productive) if people are more healthy as well. In reality, being healthy has to do with a lot more than eating "less." One might take protein supplements, food substitutes etc (expensive products) vs buying cheap (and efficient) hamburgers from McD's. If he wishes to show a correlation between healthier eating and lower expenditure on food, my opponent has all his work ahead of him. As I talked about here -> http://arg.umentum.com..., the social ideal for a healthy male is not a "thin" physique, but a muscular physique, which to acquire generally requires a high calorie diet. If certain males were to disregard this social norm and go on diets, they would soon find their ability to attract mates greatly reduced, and thus be further saddened and unproductive. There are some Americans who could stand to eat less, there are others who might benefit from eating more. What they don't need is extra pressure either way that results from this ridiculous notion of American consumption being responsible for all the world's evils.
If rich countries eat less, poor countries could eat more

"4. Reducing food intake in rich countries (might) make their societies less happy and productive, leading to a slowing of growth and innovation. " The above statement is false. Currently, we Americans eat too much. . http://www.livereal.com... If we ate less, we'd be less fat, and thus happier and more productive. Furthermore, we'd spend less on food and healthcare. With less spending in those two areas, we can increase spending in other areas, such as foreign aid. Therefore, if Americans ate less, they'd be doing themselves a favor, and would have more money and productive ability with which to improve the standard of living for poor kids in Africa. The resolution is affirmed.
If rich countries eat less, poor countries could eat more

This is my first debate here, so I'm not sure about the format. I was having an argument with my friend, who argued that excess consumption in rich countries causes starvation in Africa. You could read his original argument here->(http://arg.umentum.com...). My main points are/were as follows: 1. Historical evidence demonstrates the opposite; that as the world population rises (hence increasing total food consumption), PER PERSON food production has also been shown to increase. 2. Therefore, food is not a limited resource, but instead depends on changing technology, a more efficient market etc. 3. Food production would improve more through technological innovation (creating more food) than economic redistribution (sharing whats already there). 4. Reducing food intake in rich countries (might) make their societies less happy and productive, leading to a slowing of growth and innovation. 5. Therefore, the more we eat in the USA, the better we will one day be able to help feed the starving kids in Africa.
You cannot absolutely disprove the existence of the Christian God.

My opponent explains that " The christian god exsists in their reality based on their perception" , This statement confuses me, what reality, how many different realitys are they? Perception, or being "perceptive" does not hold much significance to the real world, Say if you were to hallucinate a talking tree due to drugs or what not, would it be right to say that there was a " talking tree " because of the persons perception ? I think your whole arguement is based more on psychological fantasy rather than reality as people don"t have to" percept " god exsists because there is facts there that tell them he does and facts that tell people he dosent. There is such thing as incorrect perceptions such as not understanding something or someone and then making an opinion about it, this could be called an incorrect perception , or say a man who was falsely accused of murder for years and people accused and branded him this could also be called an "incorrect perception. Therfore i believe as much as christians can "prove" the exsistence of god , people, athiests etc can "disprove" the exsistence of god. Thankyou.
You cannot absolutely disprove the existence of the Christian God.

You cannot absolutely disprove the existence of the Christian God. For some people, the Christian God exists. In their reality, based on their perception, God exists. Our reality is based on our perception of reality. You cannot prove that their perception is incorrect. This is because there is not an absolutely correct perception. There is also not an absolutely incorrect perception. That would be a purely subjective assumption. I rest my case.
You cannot absolutely disprove the existence of the Christian God.

You wrote the following: "My opponent explains that " The christian god exsists in their reality based on their perception" , This statement confuses me, what reality, how many different realitys are they?" I am writing about the individual's reality. Everyone that has the ability of perception has a different reality due to their own personal perception. You also wrote the following: "Perception, or being "perceptive" does not hold much significance to the real world, Say if you were to hallucinate a talking tree due to drugs or what not, would it be right to say that there was a " talking tree " because of the persons perception ?" Actually what you perceive to be true is your reality. If I see God, then God exists in my reality based on my perception. I cannot speak for you. For you, God may not exist in your reality. So you cannot absolutely disprove God's existence. In the case of "hallucination": You assume that the hallucinator's reality should be the same as your own. You assume that there is one absolute reality instead of many different realities that are relative to individuals' perception. You have the burden of proof. You cannot prove that a "hallucination" is not actual a reality to someone who is hallucinating. During the time-frame of their hallucination, their reality may include a talking tree. This does not mean that the talking tree does not exist absolutely. It simply means that realities change when you hallucinate. You then wrote the following: "I think your whole arguement is based more on psychological fantasy rather than reality as people don"t have to" percept " god exsists because there is facts there that tell them he does and facts that tell people he dosent." There are no "facts". There are only opinions of reality. None are absolute. So therefore, you cannot absolutely disprove the existence of the Christian God. Then you wrote the following: "There is such thing as incorrect perceptions such as not understanding something or someone and then making an opinion about it, this could be called an incorrect perception , or say a man who was falsely accused of murder for years and people accused and branded him this could also be called an "incorrect perception." What is an "incorrect perception"? Do you dictate what is the correct perception of the world? This is an individual matter. As for the case of the jury: Who is to say that the jury was NOT right the first time? Based on the evidence they had, their perception led them to believe that the alleged murderer was a murderer. In their reality, he was the murderer. Perception and reality change. Then you close with the following: "Therfore i believe as much as christians can "prove" the exsistence of god , people, athiests etc can "disprove" the exsistence of god." What I am arguing is that you cannot ABSOLUTELY disprove the existence of the Christian God. In some peoples' reality, God exists based on their individual perception. Thank you as well.
Free will and god... either Free Will doesn't exist or it favors evil and hate

Besides, you cannot prove that it is unsound, it is more accurate then the Bible itself (I'm not saying that it is not neccesarily more important though). Morminism is perhaps the best religion, it teaches everybody the best moral standards and whatnot. Besides, YOU said yourself anywhere that MY Christian God says something to the effect of "I the Lord thy God, grants man free will. " Those were youur exact words were they not? MY God is the one that is in the Book of Mormon and D&C and POGP. And don't say that I can't use these sources because as stated earlier, I used these books in my first argument without retribution. Zit cream, really? Is that the best you got on me? (ROFL all the way)Deuteronomy 30:19Old TestamentI call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore CHOOSE life, and both and thy seed may live. Choose life eh? Sounds like God wants us to make a choice. Whats that? You need free agency to do that? WOW. *NOTICE*This scripture is in the Old Testament. Chew on that. You may think of me being fed the the shredders, but thats why they invented glue.
Free will and god... either Free Will doesn't exist or it favors evil and hate

2 Nephi 2:27 comes from the book of Mormon. Oh I get it. So now you want to go into something that is intellectually unsound that only a true idiot would dream up and or fathom. Sorry, Mormonism is perhaps the worst religion of all time and thus does not count. You can’t just pull a religion out of your hat and say POOF here you go, its acceptable. Same is true with Helaman 14:30. And D&C 37:4. They are all trash and will thus be instantly discarded. POOF. Gone. Done. You didn’t say you wanted to be treated like a child but you certainly acted like you wanted to be treated like a child thus I’m treating you like a child and if you don’t like it, leave. I---don’t---care especially with your Mormonism crap. I mean that’s the end all to end all. Talk about trying to grasp at straws in a last ditch effort because you 100% know that your case has failed and this is your only supposed out. Well it didn’t work bub. “And I must speak out about the way you have The Lord talking. Of course he would never say that Jesus can break his laws, he would never say that.” Really? According to what imbecile who is still in high school with a high school edumacation and will probably stay there unless he buckles down and GETS AN ACTUAL EDUCATION? What did YOUR god say of moses, abraham, Noah etc etc etc as far as their governorship? Plenty. Go back and read it. But not one fricken thing about your precious jesus and his stature to make your jesus equals with god and have powers to change your god’s laws, rules and regulations. So YOU believe that from NOWHERE this jesus guy is going to POOF have the same powers as god and the abilities that god has just because this who knows who jesus says so? = NOT. Try reading it. Its might do a teeny bopper like you some good. ConclusionNo you do not wish to continue this debate at all. You flatly proved it. All you want to do is act as if you want to put some zit cream on in the morning, pretend as if the worst religion practiced in the world actually has some meaning and go on with your life. Regardless, pretend that the verses you presented have their worth, they still in no possible way deny the videos. And its too bad that you don’t like it. You’ve been fed to the shredders. Sorry.
Free will and god... either Free Will doesn't exist or it favors evil and hate

27 Wherefore, men are free according to the flesh; and all things are given them which are expedient unto man. And they are free to choose liberty and eternal life, through the great Mediator of all men, or to choose captivity and death, according to the captivity and power of the devil; for he seeketh that all men might be miserable like unto himself. (2 Nephi 2:27)30 And now remember, remember, my brethren, that whosoever perisheth, perisheth unto himself; and whosoever doeth iniquity, doeth it unto himself; for behold, ye free; ye are permitted to act for yourselves; for behold, God hath given unto you a knowledge and he hath made you free (Helaman 14:30)4 Behold, here is wisdom, and let every man choose for himself until I come. Even so. Amen.D&C 37:4And I didn't say that I wanted to be treated like a child, nobody likes being called cowardly. And I must speak out about the way you have The Lord talking. Of course he would never say that Jesus can break his laws, he would never say that. I don't understand exactly what you mean by that, but by all means, feel free to elaborate.I, because I do want to continue with this debate, I did watch the links. But I refuse to move from my position, as I have my proof of His existance and gift of free will in my scripture verses. I know you won't believe that I watched the video's, but you never except my proof, so have at thee!P.S. those are real verses, if you think I made them up, then go use your valuable time to go check.
Free will and god... either Free Will doesn't exist or it favors evil and hate

I’m in a good mood even though I’ve had a very very very very bad, exquisitely bad day thus far. OK. Since you are a child and since you act like a child… I guess you must want to be treated like a child. Does that sound good to you? 1. There’s 0 way on earth I am going to lift a finger for you. If you want me to have a lookie at something, namely some verses here, then you need to open them up and present them all in their full glorious display, otherwise don’t present them because I will not waste my valued time looking them up. 2. With your lovely pointer, in which no one else has been able to do out of roughly 25,000 and since you think you are so smort, you go right ahead and you point out the exact verse(s) where your god states anything even remotely like (and one thing that I CAN do that christian punk kids like you CAN’T, is I CAN admit when I AM wrong) “I the lord thy god grants jesus to break my laws, rules and regulations and thus bring in your own laws, rules and regulations so that they remain truthful and true AND you will be my other half/ my equal with everything and have equal say.” And since your bible doesn’t, and you know it, then your god grants you no-free-will. Therefore, you have NO FREE WILL. None. Sorry you gotta bite the big one on that. So what will you do? Go digging for free will in the grand canyon? 3. And if you as a child wish to continue this debate into the 5th round, then it is required of you to debunk all 4 of these videos otherwise I will not play your pretend games. Its that simple. - All Knowing god versus Free Will: The Greatest Religious Contradiction - Free Will With god - god Favors Evil - god allows Free Will? Your choice. Those are the rules. Simple enough.
Free will and god... either Free Will doesn't exist or it favors evil and hate

It hurts to be called cowardly, alright? although I thought that we agreed on this during the first round; You said to show where MY particular God says that he gave us free will, and I did that. 2 Nephi and Helaman both belong in the Book of Mormon, which is a book that is excepted in My religion. D&C (Doctrine & Covenents) is something else entirely, but still religious text. I don't make up verses and invent fictional things. Of course, being older than your opponent means that you will obviously win, and I clearly don't know a thing about my God, Bible, and religion, because I haven't been arguing with you the past few days. Just to add, I never said anything about knowing a lot more then you, and judging by how much you probably hate me from the last 2 rounds, I was gonna guess that I wasn't going to convert you, or anything like that. Thats not what I'm trying to even debate! If you really did look at those verses I shared, then maybe it would be YOU that should admit your wrong. Also, could you stop saying your done please? Its annoying, and we still have two rounds left, and I only lose once our audience (Hi viewers!) votes your side of the opinion. See you later, and chin up dude, try not to be soooo negative.
Free will and god... either Free Will doesn't exist or it favors evil and hate

Didn't read it. except for the first fews sentences. I know when someone is so far behind that they are so cowardly that they cannot post any actual verses so they have to invent some and instead have to blatantly lie and invent excuses as well. I've been doing this for 42+ years and have talked with roughly 25,000 and YOU a 15 YEAR OLD WHO CLEARLY KNOWS NOTHING ABOUT HIS GOD, BIBLE AND RELIGION really thinks you can pull one over on me who knows one helluva lot more than you ---ever--- will on your god, bible and religion? WRONG. Again, you like EVERYBODY ELSE, NO EXCEPTIONS, NONE, still have no outs cannot find anywhere in his bible something to the effect of “I the lord thy god grants jesus to break my laws, rules and regulations and thus bring in your own laws, rules and regulations so that they remain truthful and true AND you will be my other half/ my equal with everything and have equal say.” Your bible says NOTHING like that. AND once again you have NOT looked at the videos, otherwise you would simply SHUT UP and or be a man and and admit that you are wrong or state those terrorists wrords "I don't know". We---are---done. You lose. Bye.
Free will and god... either Free Will doesn't exist or it favors evil and hate

You want to see more evidence hm? 2 Nephi 2:27.Thats all I need.Do you need more?Helaman 14:30.Need more?D&C 37:4Need more? I'm sure you don't. You say that there are no scriptures that have God and/or Jesus saying: "I the LORD thy God grants man free will." I just provided you with 3! There are plenty more scriptures to choosd from, but I think it would be boring and rather pointless if three would do the trick. And remember, while these passages don't say: "I grant you free will.", it still has the effect of those words, which you asked for.If YOU had read MY link that I shared, you would see that the commandments do NOT say anything about being put to death. I even looked in my scriptures, the King James version, which is the most accurate one to date as I am told by many other people. And you say that I don't look at your links? Try not being a hypocrite.Maybe you won't back down from your point, and always believe that God would'nt give us free will, but at least I can prove that he exists, maybe in a way that you will understand, with SCIENCE!!!#pressthelinkI do admit, you do make a fair point with not being put to death for not remembering the Sabbath Day, but then again, you don't.When God says that man will be put to death for not following the Sabbath, He says that your soul shall be cut off from among his people. Well, the soul is something completly different from the body. The soul shall be isolated (cut off) from the other spirits, and would not return to the Celestial Kingdom. What you are saying, is that the body of the "defiler" will be destroyed, when I believe that it is you soul that "dies". I admit, that could seem harsh, more so if not the same; But it is called the Holy Sabbath, and a time for us to be with the Lord (spiritually), so not contrubuting, well, you can but the pieces together yourself.Ah yes, honor thy mother and father. When this commandment was given I think it would be safe to assume that God meant it when parents were doing what they were supposed to do. I mean, everybody was supposed to be loving and kind. Or, maybe God was saying that you should honor them to the extent of honoring that they deserve (which should usually be a lot of honor). And about the punishment by death, I think that is still talking more about the soul instead of the body.To prove my point, in the example you gave of Matthew 15:4, Matthew says to "die the death". This death is special, not one that everybody experiences, like your soul perishing, not your body, because everybody will lose their body eventually.So once again, you do not know what you are talking about. I may not have looked at the videos (I didn't, but I also don't have to to prove you wrong), but my scripture verses prove the evidence that God allows humans to have free will. I had my chance, and I'm still standing. I'll here from you later then.
Mentally healthy adults have the right to use guns for lawful reasons.

All voters, Pro's final statement will be used to support my final argument, and conclusion. "I have the right to not be shot by a mental patient." -ProThis shows that the entire basis of Pro's argument was stigma, and stereotyping. I have shown that the mentally ill are far more likely to be victoms of violence than perpetrators, and Pro has made not even so much as one backed up argument against any of my points. Therefore I implore you to vote Con!I conclude.