BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Santa Claus is REAL!

Lo, there is a disastrous myth, so unfortunate, which has been floating about on the chilled winter winds this season! Lest ye not be taken in and snared by it's deceptive lure, I have hence felt upon me an empowerment to unveil the truth before your humble hearts! Verily, Father Christmas is alive and well! Alive, well and does with beautiful precision as he always has, bringing joyous Christmas cheer to all the good young girls and boys! I graciously thank, full-heartedly, whomever shall accept this challenge(be them a lowly scum, deceived by the viscous vexation of a charade lade upon us by a dubious society of nit-wits) and wish them best of luck in the coming rounds. A presentation of definition is rightfully in-order: Santa Clause: noun The legendary patron saint of children, commonly identified as Saint Nicholas, who brings presents to children on Christmas Eve. http://www.thefreedictionary.com... Real: adjective Being or occurring in fact or actuality; having verifiable existence. http://education.yahoo.com... Whomever accepts this blessed and vindictive debate agrees to an equal burden of proof. I shall hence-with allow my opponent to set forth first arguments, in-step with my usual custom.
Scientifically speaking, abortion should not be legal.

In response to... IA) Oh, I agree. I think personhood is what we need to define, as that is when the application of laws becomes necessary. Sorry if my previous post made that ambiguous. IB) Individual cells and bacteria are all living. Even if a cell is not separated from a person, we do not have laws to protect every individual cell composing a body. While they may not classify as human, they share the same genetic code, so you can see why applying laws based on genetics is flawed. IIA) Dolphins and bonobos are among a few animal species I do believe should be protected by stricter laws, as they have exhibited a higher level of intelligence than other animals. However, there are easy distinctions between the intelligence of a dolphin and of a child. Regardless of whether or not the child is not more intelligent because he/she isn't developed enough to be, or simply just hasn't been exposed to or taught enough, the fact remains that: humans have a much higher capability for knowledge than dolphins. A dolphin will never reach a higher level of intelligence than a child, but a child is constantly taking in more information and becoming more neurologically developed at that rate. However, I do think strict laws should be enforced for the murder of either. IIB) I support euthanasia, but it's a broad term. Generally, I believe if a person is in a vegetative state, it is perfectly acceptable and often humane to pull the plug on them. They are mentally vapid and only waiting for their body to die - that is no condition to live in. I'd like to point that I don't believe it is a condition to live in because of the mental capacity of the person. So if you believe, as I do, that it was perfectly acceptable to end Terri Schiavo's life, then we're generally on the same level for determine when it is acceptable to end a life. IIB) I don't have any qualms with euthanasia, nor do I see how it presents any dilemma with my views on abortion. When a
Scientifically speaking, abortion should not be legal.

I apologize for taking as long as I have to respond, but I haven't been feeling well lately. First, I tip my hat to you. Your post is worthy of refutation. It is nice to see that the opposition can come up with good arguements as well. It might seem funny for me to say that, but due to the politically homogenous nature of my environment, I wasn't sure. I). Now, for you arguements. Your first one is a good counter, and if you would allow it, I'd like to develop my arguement a little further. A). I would point out that it is scientifically indisputable that a fetus is living, and is human. What is in question is whether or not that makes it a person. B. Before I read your topic, I would have said absolutely, yes, a living human is a person. You quite reasonably point out that this might qualify single skin cells as people. I would counter that seperated skin cells are not living (which I believe is accurate, though I might be mistaken). A similar objection would be cancer cells. I don't believe they would qualify as human, but not having a degree in biology, I can't be sure. II). You pose sentience as an alternative definition for personhood. Even if you find genetics a flawed arguement, I believe you will find sentience to have considerably more in the way of problems. A). You talk about about animal rights activists with some disdain, but you would be giving them logical legitimacy. A dolphin has about the same level of intelligence as a child, which would mean we would either have to reduce the rights of children to the level of animals or raise the rights of animals. I think this is a far larger hole in the sentience arguement than any whole in the genetics arguement. There are no advocates for skin cell rights. B). The same goes for the mentally impaired or comatose. The government can ban a breed of dog and put down animals against the will of the owners in some cases. Should they be able to do the same thing with a father in a coma. Again, it is not unprecedented that governments remove "burdens" on society by euthanasia.
Scientifically speaking, abortion should not be legal.

Much of the debate surrounding abortion is whether or not a fetus is a person. If they are a person, I think most agree that they should have some fundamental rights. So what does science have to say about all this? Well, genetically speaking, a fetus is genetically indistinguishable from a baby, a child, or an adult. If you define personhood genetically, a fetus is as much a person as you or I, and entitled to the same fundamental rights. Now, this definition of personhood may not be the correct one, and I admit that. Many competing philosophies define personhood differently. However, I think this definition is superior to others because it involves as little philosophy and as much science as possible, which seems to be what we want these days. Even if you disagree with this definition of personhood, you have to wonder about it. And once you wonder about it, you've lost. If you went hunting, and you had cause to think that there MAY be a person hiding in a bush, you would be morally and legally responsible if you fired into that bush and killed a person.
Anxiety improves performance

Anxiety assists in preparation, Function and relaxation which improves overall performance in any activity or task. Preparation: Test anxiety can help students confront their anxiety to avoid failure, According to the University at Buffalo Counseling Services. They can overcome their fear of failure by focusing on an exam and the actions needed to pass the test. They might study harder because of the anxiety and feel more confident because of the information they gather. When the test is taken, They can use positive self-statements to convince themselves that the test is not as difficult as they thought it would be, And feel pleased with what they have learned. Function: Physical reactions that stem from anxiety also can help people. The fight-or-flight response created from anxiety makes people either confront a situation or flee to safety. Sweating, Heavy breathing and rapid heartbeat can occur during an anxious situation, But the body also produces a surge of adrenaline to make people stronger, The Anxiety Support Network notes. It allows people to accomplish things they did not think possible, Such as running faster or moving heavy objects to help themselves or others. Relaxation: Stress and anxiety increases the levels of the brain chemicals known as endorphins, Serotonin and dopamine, Which help relax people during uncomfortable times. Competition, Whether among athletes or coworkers, Can produce anxiety, But the anxiety only helps them make plans or aim for goals to achieve successful results. The competition often becomes fun.
Anxiety improves performance

Anxiety has a negative effect on not only athletes, But also students and young people, Particularly in when it comes to tests and exams. This "test anxiety" occurs in 33% of students and can interfere with academic performance and overall achievement. As time goes on, The age in which children suffer from anxiety is becoming younger and numbers more frequent. Anxiety leads to poor academic performance & under- achievement. This is because the anxiety becomes so overwhelming, You lose the ability to think clearly and therefore perform well in test situations. It has been proven that students with anxiety score lower on tests than students who do not suffer from anxiety. Anxiety can also affect students" willingness to engage in class or participate in class discussions. Again, This can have a negative impact on academic performance because they are unable to communicate with the teacher by asking questions or clarifying an instruction. This then leads to confusion and further worry about a task, Resulting in additional anxiety. This same worry also applies to peer learning. Because this involves sharing ideas with other students, A student with high anxiety is unable to share these ideas, Meaning they withdraw from activity and their learning is limited. Anxiety reaches such a point that it becomes so debilitating and the student either refuses to go to school until they are able or they drop out completely In fact, 49% of anxious adults report having left education early and 24% indicated anxiety as the primary reason. How can a person possibly learn something or perform well when their mind and body is in a constant state of terror and worry?
Anxiety improves performance

Anxiety produces motivation. When something troubling occurs, People become motivated to do whatever they can to overcome the problem. Rather than always being considered a hindrance, Anxiety may actually help you feel more motivated and prepared when faced with challenges. Research has shown that students and athletes who experienced some anxiety actually displayed improved performance on tests or while participating in competitive sports. Likewise, Some degree of anxiety in those who have a good working memory may actually enhance performance on cognitive tests. Anxiety creates an incentive for you to be successful in some areas of your life. For instance, Anxiety assists in putting extra effort into work or personal tasks, Making a good impression, Or moving towards personal goals. When considering your own anxiety, People can use it to inspire personal growth and self-improvement.
Anxiety improves performance

According to the www. Dictionary. Com, Anxiety is defined as "A state of apprehension and tension occurring in some forms of mental disorder" I"m sure everyone has felt worried or nervous before a test or sports game, But this does it really have a positive impact on performance? Sportspeople are some of the people most heavily affected by anxiety. Imagine being in the AFL Grand Final, Standing in front of a crowd of over 90, 000 people and having thousands of people counting on you to perform well and, Ultimately, Win. This is an excessive amount of pressure for anyone and can lead to serious health problems such as depression, Ulcers, Damage to the immune system and obsessive-compulsive disorder. A study in 2000 found that "sports psychologist have long believed that high levels of anxiety during competition are harmful, Worsening performance and even leading to dropout. " An example of this is John Daly, An American golfer who was once one of the best golfers of his time. The enormous amount of pressure placed on him to win made him extremely anxious. His anxiety reached such a severe level, That he was unable to complete a tournament and walked of the course in the middle of the round. Over the course of his career, He withdrew from 49 professional tournaments due to the anxiety he experienced. Anxiety can also have a number of negative impacts and changes to the body, Mind and behaviour. Anxiety causes your body to tense up and increases blood pressure. When this happens, It becomes more difficult for your body to move fluently and efficiently meaning actions and movements become jerky and misplaced. The terror you experience as a result of anxiety is so overwhelming it may even lead to body paralysis. An example of this is stage fright, Which may be experienced right before a public competition. When feeling overwhelming fear, The athlete may be unable to move, Talk or act at all. Athletes who suffer from anxiety often develop an inability to concentrate on the task at hand meaning they cannot give their performance their full attention. One of the most common symptoms of anxiety is shortness of breath, However this can become extremely dangerous as athletes often struggle to take in oxygen, Resulting in hyperventilation. This deprives the brain of a sufficient amount of oxygen, Leading to dizziness and/or fainting.
Anxiety improves performance

According to the American Psychological Association, Anxiety is "an emotion characterized by feelings of tension, Worried thoughts, And physical changes, Like increased blood pressure. " The symptoms vary from person to person and depend on the magnitude of the perceived threat. Anxiety is a normal, Healthy emotion. It"s meant to alert you to danger. When you encounter a dangerous situation, Your fight or flight response is activated. That surge of energy encourages you take action that will keep you alive. But most people experience anxiety in situations that aren't actually life threatening. Going to a job interview, Speaking up for yourself, Or giving a speech probably won"t kill you. But when you"re in those situations, Your body may react as though you"re dangling from the edge of a cliff with one arm. Historically, Anxiety has often been viewed as the enemy. Athletes and performers are told to get rid of their stage fright or to rid themselves of their jitters. And for good reason"some studies have found that anxiety impairs memory and reduces concentration. However, New research suggests that anxiety doesn't always have to impair performance. In fact, It actually enhances it. A 2017 study published in the Journal of Individual Differences examined individual"s appraisals of situations. Those who viewed stressful events as challenges, Rather than threats, Gained energy from their anxiety. The boost in energy motivated them and improved their performance. The researchers discovered individuals performed best when they acknowledged their anxiety, As opposed to suppressing it. People who labeled their emotions and accepted their anxiety were better able to devote their energy to their goals.
Should there be strippers

I shall except this debate. Exotic dancing should be illegal because it is an immoral form of business. How does men and women spending thousands of dollars on strippers without a federal tax help the economy? And how is loosing your virginity to strippers a good thing? And so many young girls are put into the illegal sex trade and the kidnappers get away with saying there are 18 and "exotic dancers". This is a disgusting business and it should be more controlled.
A "Free Market" System is Not Sensible

I'm not saying you are straw-manning my argument but I never called anybody stupid/ignorant. Watching sports does not make somebody dumb. I also don't think they are "running society off a cliff" by spending their money how they see fit. People have paid to watch sporting events and entertainers for centuries, there's no problem with that. You didn't exactly address my claim that great minds are not treated poorly, you just talked about the hard work they have to put in to get to where they are. Not giving people money does not mean you are treating them poorly. I'm not quite understanding the "preference-based" vs. "utility-based" systems you are describing, so I'd like for you to explain them more. I agree that scientists and blue-collar workers are important for society, and they already do get paid for what they do. You just want them to get paid more, right? Where would this money come from? How would you control how much somebody else gets paid?
A "Free Market" System is Not Sensible

Hey. I think a free market system is perfectly sensible. If I understand, your basic argument is that intellectuals such as scientists and engineers deserve a lot more than entertainers. I agree with you that a lot of consumers don't exactly have their priorities in order. However, here's what I think: you really can't judge a person's worth by his/her occupation. I mean, if somebody is an unsuccessful engineer then naturally he/she does not deserve a lot of money. I disagree with your claim that the great minds are treated poorly; I think scientists are highly revered but the question is what exactly are they supposed to get paid for? They can invent things and profit off of those, they can write books and collect royalties, and they can make TV appearances. Money is basically a trade-off: somebody gets paid to sell stuff. Entertainers/athletes get paid to sell their entertainment/sporting events, and scientists can get paid to sell their ideas. A lot of scientists are not exactly motivated by money, they just have a passion for what they do. Bottom line: no matter who you are or what your occupation is, you will only get paid if people think watching/listening to the stuff you do is more valuable than the money they have.
Gay Marriage should be legal in all States.

Do all 50 states really NEED to legalise gay marriage? I say no. I say no for several reasons. 1) Marriage, as defined not only by ancient text, but by most societies, is one man and one woman. We cannot rewright the definition of a word to fit our agenda or ideals.2) A species needs to procreate in order to survive as a society. If they don't, the species eventually dies.3) It is not the government's business what couples do in their homes or who they prefer to have sex with. Therefore, it is not right for the government to decide who gets married or who does not. Legalizing gay marriage is not the government's job.4) Marriage is a privilage, not a right. We do have a right to happiness, but marriage does not fall under that right. There is no gaurantee that one will be happy in their marriage.5) Children need to be raised by a mother and a father. Depriving them of one or the other is wrong. It has been proven that children need both sexes as parents. Not that a gay couple can't raise a child, but studies have been done and they show that it is healthier for a child to be raised by a mother and a father. http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com...;I believe if we allow gay marriage, our society and country will eventually die. Since homosexuals cannot reproduce and there must be an adequate amount of procreation within a society to survive, I do not believe gay marriage should be legal.My opponent says religion has no say whether two people can be married. I say it most certainly does have a say. Most marriages are performed in a church. And even more are performed by a pastor, priest, or rabbi. To say that religions have no say in the matter is false. Leaders of most religions will choose to marry a couple or not marry them, based on their convictions. And if they feel a couple should not be married, they won't marry them.A government should have no power to force a marriage. It is not the government's job to do so.
Gay Marriage should be legal in all States.

Thank you for the acceptance. Hope we have a great friendly debate! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Lets start with response "Therefore homosexual desires can be controlled". This could not be more wrong, you cannot state this as a fact. Scientist have and still admit that they do not have 100% knowledge on how the brain works[1] so their can be no way to be 100% sure that something is causing people to be gay. Saying a gay person should be able to control their desires would be the same as saying you can control wanting women and just be gay because hey, that's what's cool (as an example). Until more studying is done on the human brain and how it works and functions we cannot give a definitive answer either way. Next, "Religion plays a big part in it, actually." It's true, religion plays a part in our government, but it shouldn't. There is a separation of church and state for the reason that our founding fathers never wanted religion to play a role in our government and how we make laws. Here is a quote from Thomas Jefferson, one of our Founding Fathers: "Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God...."[1] No one religion should have the ability to change how our government makes laws and discriminate against someone, if we can start discriminating against one group of people that can and will set the dangerous precedent that we can keep discriminating against other groups because we don't agree with what they believe. "Marriage is not a right. If it were a right, this debate would not be taking place." The Constitution does not say many rights that are given to you, it would be impossible for the Constitution to state all rights that are given to you[3]. You have the right to vote, although the Constitution actually never states it. There are an endless amount of rights you are entitled to since birth, not only the ones stated in the Constitution. Marriage is most definitely a human right. It is even stated in the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights (Article 16)[4]. Our States offer certain benefits to those who are married, whether it be access to their assets when they die without a will or their retirement if an accident were to happen. These benefits are only for those who are legally married and recognized by their respective State and for a State to discriminate against someone for loving a person of the same gender does not show America off as a open and free country. Instead it shows we still discriminate against those we feel are different and that isn't what our country is suppose to represent. We are suppose to be the leaders in Freedom and Democracy, even for the minority. Even our Federal Government recognizes Gay Marriage due to the repeal of DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act). We should start being a country that represents freedoms for all, heterosexuals and homosexuals, blacks and whites, men and women. Sources: 1.) http://www.pbs.org... 2.) http://www.loc.gov... 3.) http://www.lexrex.com... 4.) http://www.un.org...