BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Hitler Hated Christianity

1. My definition of Hate is the same as the dictionary: "to feel intense or passionate dislike for (x)" [1] And as you are about to see NO he didn't only hate Jews. 2. Your quote is extremely misleading, in fact, that was Hitler's intention: "Hitler, attempting to appeal to the German masses during his political campaign and leadership, sometimes made declarations in support of religion and against atheism"[however] the wide consensus of historians considers him to have been irreligious and anti-Christian." [2] This is further confirmed when we look at Hitlers actions against the church, Clergymen teachers were removed from virtually all state schools. [3] Priests were frequently denounced, arrested and sent to concentration camps. [4] "Backed by Hitler"the Nazi regime intended to destroy Christianity in Germany, if it could, and substitute the old paganism of the early tribal Germanic gods and the new paganism of the Nazi extremists" [5] The"Nuremberg Trials"concerning the Nazi persecution of the churches, the American"Office of Strategic Services (a forerunner to the CIA) compiled a report entitled "The Nazi Master Plan" which examined the Nazi persecution of the churches and found that the Hitler regime had a plan to subvert and destroy German Christianity. [6] In Hitler's own words: "Christianity is an invention of sick brains : one could imagine nothing more senseless, nor any more indecent way of turning the idea of the Godhead into a mockery. A negro with his tabus is crushingly superior to the human being who seriously believes in Transubstantiation." [7] Sounds like the next Billy Graham! [1] https://www.google.com... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org...'s_policies_towards_religion [3] Richard Overy;"The Third Reich, A Chronicle; Quercus; 2010; p.157 [4] Paul Berben; Dachau: The Official History 1933"1945; Norfolk Press; London; 1975;"ISBN"0-85211-009-X; pp. 142 [5] William Shirer;"Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany, p. 240 [6] http://www.nytimes.com... [7] Hitler"s Table Talk, pg 144
Hitler Hated Christianity

"In this hour I would ask of the Lord God only this: that He would give His blessing to our work, and that He may ever give us the courage to do the right. I am convinced that men who are created by God should live in accordance with the will of the Almighty. No man can fashion world history unless upon his purpose and his powers there rests the blessings of this Providence", Hitler says in 1939 at his grand speech in East Berlin. I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE THAT: I'M NOT A CHRISTIAN, JUST SAYING THAT BEFORE WE START That may sound like an ideal leader, but that speech was given in 1937 by the Chancellor of Germany, Adolf Hitler. In his speeches, he challenged people to love their neighbors, to care for the poor and sick, and to take a stand against violence. Hitler was Christian and burned and killed Jews there is proof he went to church and prayed to God. Those who say that Hitler was an atheist or non Christian is false because he supported Christians during the holocaust, and usually American media, like CNN lie about things related to the Nazis like saying he isn't Christian, just to not make other Christians look bad (not saying to thing they are bad, but it's a fact). To end this, some people say he wasn't any religion but followed Christianity, but either way he didn't hate christianity. One more thing to add, you aren't specifying what you mean by hate... what do you mean hate? He despised Jews and only Jews, I need proof. I now close my first argument. Thanks!
DDO 2014 Olympics Super combined Round 1: Story Telling.

Sky turned and finally realized who I was. "Oh my, it's you again.""Look, I know we got off on the wrong foot last night. Why don't we sit down at a booth and talk over breakfast?"She looked reluctant but agreed to eat breakfast with me. I tried to make small talk, "So, what do you do?""I'm a student at Colombia University.""No way! My friend John said that you were an easy girl. I told him there was something special about you."Sky looked disgusted, "You are a creep. Already talking as if you know who I am.""Look, I'm trying to find out who you are. Why are you being so standoffish?""I already have a boyfriend, okay?" And with that, Sky stormed out.I brought breakfast back to John. "Man, that sucks. I'm sorry to hear that happened agian. I'm telling you, she is no good man.""It's okay. Maybe you are right. Maybe I have been desperate since my last girlfriend.""You know what you need? You need to rebound. No strings attached, just some good ole fun. Tonight we're going clubbing. I'm going to call all of the guys and have them come. We're going to have a heck of a time. Sorry that this round is short, something came up. I'll make up for it next round.
DDO 2014 Olympics Super combined Round 1: Story Telling.

I'm going to try and keep my rounds as long as my opponents, for consistency. So that's ~4000 characters at the upper limit. If he wants to go over, I'll match."Hey there. I can tell you are new here. You look far too dashing to be a regular at this type of place," I said with my most enchanting voice."You're a regular?""Regretfully, yes. My friend loves this place. My name is Richard by the way," it was hard to get a reaction from her stone-cold face."That's nice." She began to turn around as if to leave."What's yours? Do you want a bear? Come sit down.""You can call me Sky, because I'm way out of your reach." Just like that she left.With a feeling of defeat in my gut, and surely on my face, I trudged back to the table that John was sitting at."Damn man, you got rejected fast. Keep that up and I might have to start calling you Richard Bolt," John laughed far too much at his own jokes.I remained silent. For once I just wanted to listen to the music. God was it awful though. I'm referring to both the music and the rejection. That girl was fine, but there was also something about the way she spoke. She knew what she was looking for and it was obvious when she walked in that this place wasn't it. Was she so confident that she was too good for me because I was hanging out here? No way. I'm not the most attractive man, but I'm good looking. I'm 5'11", dark haired, lightly tanned and fit. That's pretty much girl code for McDreamy. There had to be some other reason she rejected me. I got out of my seat and darted out the front door. I looked left and right for that girl. It was dark out, but the city lights illuminated the streets. Damn it, it's too crowded. I started walking down the sidewalk and saw the crosswalk light flick on. I figured I would have a better view from the street, so I ran to the center. That's when I saw her getting in a taxi on the other side of the street. Before I could do anything it was driving away.
DDO 2014 Olympics Super combined Round 1: Story Telling.

John and I went out to our usual spot that night. We were having an awesome time. Dudes with Bad Haircuts were there and apparently they had a new electric guitarist who had just shredding it all night. We were jumping around drinking beers taking shots, passing out shots, the ladies were flocking to us. This is exactly what I needed to get that stuck up blond out of my mind. 8 drinks in, this fool challenges John and me to play beer pong. John and I are awesome at beer pong. I think these guys know it, are reading us as drunk, and want us to pay for their beer. But that doesn't matter, a challenge is a challenge, and nobody backs down from a beer pong challenge. So we're headed over to the beer pong table and John has to go to the bathroom. As I'm sitting there waiting for the bartender to bring the pitcher and get the cups, guess who walks in. You got it. Sky. Who's the stalker now? This is absurd. I didn't expect it. The bar tender finally bring the beer and sets it on the counter. I'll get it later. Sky is here.So, I walk over to her and stab her. I don't know how many times. I just keep stabbing her. Everyone is looking, she is screaming, it's all null to me. I'm just thinking over and over, I hate being rejected. I hate being rejected. Suddenly I stop. I look around, the band isn't playing the bouncer is standing there looking dumbfounded, no one is moving. I don't know if it was instinct or a higher power compelling me, but I bolted for the door and started running down the street as fast as I could. I wasn't sure where I was going, but I knew that I had to get there. I wish John was there to see it. "IN THE NEWS TODAY, SKY JOHNSON WAS BRUTALLY STABBED AND MURDERED BY HER BOYFRIEND AT A NIGHTCLUB IN THE CITY LAST NIGHT. WITNESSES SAY THAT SHE AND HER MURDERER RICHARD WRONGPATH FREQUENTED THE CLUB TOGETHER OFTEN AND WERE COMMONLY KNOWN AS AN EXPERT BEER PONG TEAM. WITNESSES ALSO SAY THEY NOTICED RICHARD AND SKY HAVING FIGHTS IN THE PAST COUPLE OF WEEKS OVER CLAIMS THAT SHE WAS CHEATING ON RICHARD. SEVERAL WITNESSES ALSO REPORTED THAT THEY COMPELLED MRS. JOHNSON TO LEAVE RICHARD DUE TO HIS REGULAR DRUNKEN AND OBNOXIOUS BEHAVIOR. SKY HOWEVER ALWAYS PLAYED THE LOVING GIRLFRIEND AND OFTEN ACCOMPANIED HIM TO THE APERMENT THEY SHARED IN THE DOWN TOWN AREA. MR. WRONGPATH IS CONSIDERED TOBE AT LARGE AND DANGEROUS. IF YOU SEE HIM CALL THE POLICE IMMEDIATELY. POLICE ARE SPECULATING THAT HE MAY HAVE A PSYCHOLOGICAL DISORDER KNOWN AS PROJECTIVE DISSOCIATIVE DISORDER IN WHICH HE PROJECT PEOPLE AS HAVING MULTIPLE PERSONALITIES. CALL 911 IF YOU ENCOUNTER THIS MAN."
Minecraft sucks 3

Concluding statements: “Now debating is all about opinions, but if you are not convinced, i can use a few sources. .. Addictive-. http://minemum.com...; No, debating is about giving logical ground to your opinions so that it doeasn't just apply to you alone, but to everyone else too. And I stand by my assertion that a game being addictive isn’t a bad thing. It actually shows that the game is good. You don't get addicted to games that are bad and unpleasant, or in your words, suck, don't you? And this debate isn’t about whether Minecraft is addictive or not, you have to show that minecraft sucks and you have to show it by rationally establishing that such claims actually make minecraft suck. “Main source- . http://www.thetoptens.com...; This is just another page full of biased subjective arguments. “Its already too late. This is now a debate on how debates work. ” And there is no one else to blame, but you yourself. You made many claims like mine craft has bad combat, plays bad music, low graphics, etc. But you didn’t give any logical reasons as to why such things actually make mine craft bad. For example taking the issue of bad combat, it is, but a purely subjective issue, can you label flappy birds as a bad game simply because there is, no combat? How does combat become a criteria for deciding the quality, one might experience, from a game? PRO has failed to answer any of these questions, which he was supposed to under his BOP, in his case. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As Con in this debate it was my job to negate or cast enough doubt on PRO’s arguments and I believe I have done it adequately.
Minecraft sucks 3

Its already too late. This is now a debate on how debates work. With con failing to debate on the topic. So then con claims to make my assertion shaky or best negate it. by making it shaky and negate it, he is rebutting. The definition of rebut is: To PROVE that a statement or a change made against you is false. http://www.ldoceonline.com... Now debating is all about opinions, but if you are not convinced, i can use a few sources... Addictive- http://minemum.com... Main source- http://www.thetoptens.com...
Minecraft sucks 3

“Con claims that it is only me who carries the burden of proof. But he also HAS to carry his burden of proof, the proof that minecraft is a good game.” No, that is not my responsibility. As the person who made the claim and as the instigator you have the whole burden of proof to show that your claim is true. “Con accuses me cooking up stories, well the voters will see.” Sure. But if I were you I would start racking up OBJECTIVE facts to support my claim rather than just subjective complaints. “Con also accused me that mine supports are opinonated and biased, but that is what debating is all about! “ If we were discussing opinions then this would be a discussion NOT a debate. You have one more round, a last chance to fulfil your burden of proof which is to show that Minecraft actually sucks, not just for you alone, but for everyone. Hope you have understood what your position in this debate entails. Over to you PRO, awaiting solid arguments.
Minecraft sucks 3

Con claims that it is only me who carries the burden of proof. But he also HAS to carry his burden of proof, the proof that minecraft is a good game. Con accuses me cooking up stories, well the voters will see. Con also accused me that mine supports are opinonated and biased, but that is what debating is all about! To support your opinions! The opinions page in DDO is going to spark some convertsy and would increase the number of debates. Now con has to rebut my supports in the next round or this would be a debate not on topic.
Minecraft sucks 3

‘Con had also claimed assertions to REBUT me without providing any kind of evidences whatsoever too.’ PRO is the one who has made the assertion that ‘Minecraft sucks’ so he bears the entirety of the Burden of Proof and has to create a constructive case to support his assertion. As CON in this debate, all I need to do is cast enough doubt on his arguments and make them at best appear shaky, if not negate it. ‘Im using the "scenario " method to see whether the voters would agree that its true in some scenarios.’ Without evidences whatever you say will only be considered as cooked up stories that don’t have any ground PRO. PRO’s case: All the arguments that PRO has made till now are opinionated and biased. It’s a list of what he feels is bad in the game and that in no way can make the game itself bad. For example let’s consider a hypothetical person ‘A’ who hates chicken. To him the taste of the bird might appear weird or disgusting but that doesn’t mean, that it is so, for everybody. Hence, to uphold the resolution PRO must make an objective case on why Minecraft sucks. Over to you PRO!
Minecraft sucks 3

Con had also claimed assertions to REBUT me without providing any kind of evidences whatsoever too. So to make it more detailed, I will begain my support on why minecraft sucks. In fact con is just saying the opposite of everything. Im using the "scenario " method to see whether the voters would agree that its true in some scenarios. Lag- Lag in big TNT explosions. Hanging in pvp(very raging) Everybody freezes and realise they have the same lag situation Glitchy- Seeing a x ray of caves after a big explosion Getting stuck in between a block when logging into a server or fall into the void and see an enderdragon?(mindplex has. ) Using gliches to cheat like the cops n robbers camping cheat. Great combat? You swing a sword one way and your left hand is useless. No variety in weapons and only different in material. Especially bows do not have a different material(save more for the future). Plays music at the perfect time- Listen to the gameplay music which is relaxing music. They play randomely when fighting, exploring or building, all peaceful. Appreciative graphics- The game is badly pixelated. And you are supposed to like low paid graphics? Ubisoft graphics are appreciative. Addictive- Its addictive BECAUSE you cant stop playing the game as there are so many things to download and do. Addiction is bad because you can get distracted from work, throw tantrums when stopped and doing, talking and thinking minecraft But that are not the consequence: The consequence is that They can have lack if sleep Affect their studies(no mood to study but play) Have fever And worst of all die from exhuastion. Affordable merchandise. They are affordable but considered expensive for their merchandise. A plastic hard slime sword which is too dangerous to be fought is $24 and a minifigure of sky and some of his stuff are $34. The toys are ment for display. You dont actually need the handbook as you can just surf the net. Kids just want to feel happy of having a book of their favourite game
Minecraft sucks 3

PRO has made a variety of claims without providing any kind of evidences whatsoever. To rebut them I make the following assertions:Minecraft : is not laggy at all. Has appreciatable graphics Has great combat Plays the perfect music at the perfect time(minor) not at all glitchy Addictive(I don't see why this is a bad thing, games are addictive ONLY if they are good.) And minecraft did too much bug updates that keeps on fixing its problems. Minecraft merchandise and handbooks are also very affordable. Now it's my word against PRO's. But since he has the burden to prove that Minecraft sucks, I have an upper-hand over him.Will add more in the upcoming rounds.Over to you PRO.
Resolved: H.S. PF Debate should not confront sensitive religious issues

Hi, I decided to challenge you because you were the closest to my age and it seems that you are a good debater :D. So if you would, I'd like to debate with you, please? Public Forum Format: Round 1 = 1st Pro/1st Con Round 2 = Crossfire Round 3 = 2nd Pro/2nd Con (Summary/Final Focus) ===================================================== I'd like you all to realize that having to debate on sensitive religious issues could negatively affect a person's family, social, and personal life. I will express why this resolution affects so many aspects of one's life throughout my arguments, which are laid out in two main contentions. Contention 1) One should not be forced to debate against his religion Contention 2) Endangers what America was founded upon and the future of liberty C1) One should not be forced to debate against his religion According to the National Forensics League (NFL): Normally, a debater is allowed to opt out of a debate if he finds the topic or resolution offensive, explicit, contrary to his beliefs, (etc.), and be assigned a new one; however, in this case, we find that this is not possible. In this instance, if a debater would happen to find a topic offensive and did not want to debate it, he would have to quit the debate for the month altogether. Therefore, this debater must be required to debate against what he believes; as a result, this goes against his freedom of religion and his choice to defend his beliefs, therefore, the resolution is unconstitutional. Public Forum debate should NOT limit us to the choice of quitting for the month or debating a topic against our religion. What this does is that it gives debaters an ultimatum if they do not accept the resolution, which leads us to my next contention. C2) Endangers what America was founded upon and the future of liberty The United States of America was founded upon freedom. Freedom of religion, speech, assembly, and press. If we are forced to debate on this topic, then we are leading towards the communist ideas of Soviet Russia, along with the dictatorship ideas of 1936-1945 Germany (Adolf Hitler), and totally negates the work of our founding fathers! Who are we to annul work that is not ours? If my memory serves correct, our high-school generation is the future of America, so why should we corrupt our minds even more and risk the future liberty of America? What we learn now, will determine what we believe in the future. We, as Americans, need to realize the risks that we are taking by restricting our freedom of speech (the freedom to halt our speech/defend our religion) in this case. Thank you.
Retribution is more beneficial than rehabilitation

There are many reasons why retribution is more beneficial than rehabilitation. One of which is if rehab fails, you are releasing dangerous people back into the community. Why give killers a second chance to murder? Releasing dangerous criminals back into society will put innocent citizens in danger. I understand that in some cases it is more expensive to house a prisoner than to pay for rehabilitation centers. However, which is more important;having a few extra dollars or safety? I choose safety
Basic Chivalry and "Ladies First" is sexist

However, in his first line he attempts to posion the well by asserting that I "created" a definition for the word sexism, in an attempt to be misleading. As it is shown to be the second definition of the word Sexism, i am unsure how it could be "self-created. " Going with the definition that i provided, prior to the debate beginning, it is evidenced by the second definition of Sexism and the definition of Chivalry that Chivalry is a Sexist concept. As Chivalry (and Chivalrous, as my opponent defined) specifically indicate "women" in it's definition, which implies that chivalrous behavior is behavior that speciafically singles out women. Especially 1. more than usually 2. used to indicate something that deserves special mention 3. for a particular purpose or personper merriam-webster. com The reason chivalrous behavior does not seem sexist by the first definition of Sexism is because (A) it is not a discriminatory practice against women and (B) because it is expected of men. However, if we dissect what "chivalry" implies, and how it is seen by a large portion of the public (through media, religion, personal interactions), we can see that not acting in a chivalrous way will bring a form of prejudice against men, by way of assuming he is disrespectful. My opponent also indicates this in his Opening Statement. (One Word: Respect). While not acting in a chivalrous way does not automatically imply disrespectful, the way a non-chivalrous man is portrayed, seen, and thought of is generally a way that assumes he does not respect women. This may be a hasty generalization, but as traditionalist values are still of high import (Ladies First, A "Real man" does not hit a woman), i do not believe it to be a fallacious argument to state that a non-chivalrous man is seen as disrespectful, due to him not giving special consideration to women. Chivalry, or lack thereof, is made up of, and begets, sexist attitudes, by both definitions of the term.
Basic Chivalry and "Ladies First" is sexist

OK, let's get started, I would first like to counter my opponent's seemingly self-created definition of "Sexist" Let's look at the actual definition of sexism from Merriam-Webster: Full Definition of SEXISM1: prejudice or discrimination based on sex; especially : discrimination against women2: behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex So, first off, my opponent neglected to show us that his definition of sexist is actually the secondary definition of sexism.Also, here is the full definition of Chivalrous:Full Definition of CHIVALROUS1: valiant2: of, relating to, or characteristic of chivalry and knight-errantry3a : marked by honor, generosity, and courtesy3b : marked by gracious courtesy and high-minded consideration especially to women.In this debate we will obviously be concentrating on 3b since this debate pertains to sexist attitudes towards women.Now, here is my main contention:Reasons for activities such as chivalry:Now, why exactly would a man be nice to a woman by holding a door open, letting her go first, giving her his chair, or offering to carry an object? Is it because we think women are weak and honestly are struggling to carry that stack of three notebooks? No, obviously not. When we pay for her meal do we honestly think she is too poor to pay for it? No, obviously not. Then why do we do it? One word: respect.Respect for a woman does not mean that we downplay her as a person, or deny her abilities. On the contrary, it means that I am respecting her as a person and saying that she is important, and that is in no way sexist. When, let's face it, it's really easy in today's culture to actually be sexist and treat women like objects desire, big and deliberate steps need to be made to make women feel dignified and of worth to men, but hey, if a woman honestly want me to forget all that and only think about her boobs, I can accomplish that too.Sources will be posted in a source bank in the last round.