BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
I can eat more bacon than you

I'm surprised that you found out that goku(rice) is my father (i have gone to great lengths to make sure this was kept secret). but, its not unlikely considering he is your grandfather! yes I said grandfather! that means- IALWAYSWINDEBATES, I AM YOUR FATHER!!!!!! yes it was me all along! that time you saw a shadowy figure during your boxing championship in armenia- IT WAS ME!!! that redhead with the crossed eyes akwardly standing behind you after your anauguration as president of the moon- IT WAS ME!!! the informant that told mario you were banging his girlfriend- IT WAS ME!!!(and by the way you were the father) and i know another thing you don't know! so i won't tell you till the very end! but for now, my rebuttle: you said that you spewed out the bacon as soo as you think-implant into your stomach/black hole. but my good sir, does that really count as eating bacon? the definition (as laid forth by the ancient elders of Pandarthia) doesn't agree: "to eateth bacon, trulyeth and even more trulyeth. one must devour it as the dictionary says: "-to destroy something rapidly and completely be eating" so the all holy dictionary sayeth, and so it iseth, as long as it is not by means of black hole or dragon ball z moves" so you see you can't break the rules of the ancient elders of Pandarthia, so your argument is rendered invalid by means of absolute illogicality.(also by the way princess peach is your mom) maroon 5 has sold 10 million albums in the us so far DBZ ran from 1989 to 1996
I can eat more bacon than you

Yo yo, I know you're wielding that Knife of ever loving D as I am rocking that chalice of harmony, but there is no need to get mad at me on your pro 'sport' W.O.W team. Sorry about that I've been listening to too much Maroon 5, the rhyming just got the best of me. Next I must bring up the fact that you're wrong the man who invented it was Rice-Chan, and you should now this because YOU ARE HIS SON!!!!! But I was wrong about something its full name is "Rice Buncher Cruncher Duncher Puncher Mc Funcher Lee Duncher Kuncher Basher Tosher Usher Lucher" Now I under stand this is a hard name to comprehend for someone of your level of stupidity. I never said I invented the move I copied it, for no mere mortal such as your self could ever comprehend what I can do with Bacon, every time a signal strip of bacon enters me vicinity I can by thinking implant it into my stomach (or black hole) to then spew it out again, not is we go over the rules set by the ancient elders of Pandarthia 'Thee great bacon eating contest counts for any type of bacon that has ever been eaten by the person for whom no man or women can ever change thee rule) In lame ens' terms no matter what condition the bacon is in, if it is eaten it counts of which includes regurgitated bacon (Going into the black hole and coming out) now imagine if I was doing this with the '999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 metric crap tons of bacon (1 metric crap ton = 10000000000 regular metric tons).' instantaneously! Of which as I type I am. Did you know that Kara's Flowers was the old name Maroon 5 went by. (From this point on all people must along with a maroon 5 fact must also put a fact about DBZ)
I can eat more bacon than you

Do you think I'm so stupid to not Know who REALLY invented the move 'Rice Cruncher Buncher Duncher'?! Of course it wasn't you it was Edgar Allan Poe! Everybodey knows that! I mean who do you think I am? Spongebob? Now you will have to pay copyright infringement fine for saying you invented that move! Next, the Fork or Truth and the Spoon of Dexterity are SWTOR weapons, this is world of warcraft so they do not apply to this debate. However, I drive Hitler's Volkswagen, a level over 9000 mount that makes me invulnerable to all attacks and creates a feild of electrons with a circumference the size of earth that prevents the use of any 19th century moves (exept in france of course). And the saddle connects to my stomach via portal gun to my other stomach on romulus that can hold 999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 metric crap tons of bacon (1 metric crap ton = 10000000000 regular metric tons). By the way, after some hard addition, I have summed that after about 5 seconds the amount of bacon (disincluding all the other matter you would be consuming) injected into your bloodstream via black hole would entirely replace your blood stream with bacon molecules. shortly after which the tooth fairy would come and freeze you solid for going over the legal bacon molecules per blood cell set by the galactic federation of planets founded 12 second ago. NEW RULE TO THIS DEBATE! now every post must include at least 1 fact about maroon 5. the band maroon 5 was founded in 1994. your turn IALWAYSWINDEBATES, but i think you will need a new profile name after this...
I can eat more bacon than you

Haha, very funny that you bring this up because last time I saw you, you could barley scarf down three pieces of Bacon, and scenes last time we fought I've gotten a black hole implanted into my stumic in hopes to consume all of thi food in the world. As well as I've surpassed sir Rice-Chan in the form oh the ultimate move 'Rice Cruncher Buncher Duncher' of which causes all food that goes into my mouth to brake to the molecular level, to then be absorbed into my blood stream. Not only that but I also wield the Fork or Truth and the Spoon of Dexterity (Both are level 99 food eater weapons).
I can eat more bacon than you

I CAN EAT MORE BACON THAN YOU IALWAYSWINDEBATES!!! you may have been able to eat 12 pigs feet at that christmas party last year but bacon is MY territory! i can swallow 5 pounds of bacon without any lube! and my endurance is unmatched the multiverse over! I HEREBYE CHALLANGE THOU TO THIS DEBATE TO ATTEMPT TO TRY TO PROVE ME WRONG!!!
Religion is good for humans while homosexuality and gay marriage is bad for humans

As a homophobic atheist, I prefer to debate an atheist because most atheists are pro gay and anti religious. Even though God is fake, religion is a psychological immune system so it's good for those who believe God exist 1. Gays triggered the HIV epidemic in North America according to the timeline of aids from Aids.gov " Source Aids.gov 1981 "270 reported cases of severe immune deficiency among gay men, and 121 of those individuals have died" 1982" "CDC reports cases of AIDS in female sexual partners of bisexual males with AIDS. " 1984 San Francisco officials order gay bathhouses closed due to high-risk sexual activity occurring in these venues. New York and Los Angeles follow suit within the year. Gays refuse to adopt and reopened the bath houses "even though their were high health risks of contracting and spreading hiv. Source 1984. HIV/AIDS: The closure of San Francisco"s bathhouses. Part One. 2. Gays stopped syphilis from being eliminated and triggered another syphilis epidemic Syphilis epidemic among gay men (Gail Bolan 2015) The gay HIV epidemic is increasing in all nations. Source 3. The gay HIV epidemic is increasing in all nations (aidsmeds 2013) 4. Gay marriage and other gay serious relationships increase HIV infections among gay men " The effects of sexual partnership and relationship characteristics on three sexual risk variables in young men who have sex with men. Michael E. Newcomb, Daniel T. Ryan, and Brian Mustanski 2011 Here's a quote from the study "The majority of new HIV infections occur within serious, gay relationships" " Religious people are less likely to commit suicide" Kanita Dervic, Maria A. Oquendo, Michael F. Grunebaum, Steve Ellis, Ainsley K. Burke, and J. John Mann. "Religious Affiliation and Suicide Attempt" (161:2303-2308, December 2004)." Thinking about God reduces distress but for believers only Prayer reduces Stress J Tartaro, LJ Luecken, HE Gunn - Journal of Health Psychology, 2005 - hpq.sagepub.com thinking about God reduces stress Michael Inzlicht, Alexa M. Tullett. Reflecting on God: Religious Primes Can Reduce Neurophysiological Response to Errors. Psychological Science, 2010; DOI: 10.1177/0956797610375451 prayer" reduces anger and aggression Bremner, R. H., Ko "ole, S. L.,
Religion is good for humans while homosexuality and gay marriage is bad for humans

Homosexuality Pro yet again only focuses on my genetic fallacy critique despite there being two other rebuttals that I’ve made in round 1. He states I’m trying to win on “petty technicalities” despite that fact that I specifically said that it being a genetic fallacy or not is irrelevant. I still demonstrated the line of reasoning is false. He claims that his argument is also based on current meaning and facts. Well, certainly he does present arguments of that manor, which is why I made two other arguments to respond to those. The genetic fallacy critique was on the arguments that had to do with his argument about epidemiological origins. Pro also never addresses my attack on his misused source in his last round. Religion Again, I never said religious people necessarily commit more serious crime. Nor would such a thing be relevant to my argument. I argued that religious crime (in a human rights sense) may be committed because of tribalistic thinking at its worst. People who are religious who happen to commit crimes would be completely irrelevant as it doesn’t entail they committed it because of their religion. The fact that there was some atheists who committed serious crime or a peaceful nation that is religious is equally irrelevant, as I’m arguing on the average. It is a sweeping generalization fallacy to take the status of a few men and one nation and apply that to what is good for humanity on a whole. On a side note, Pro demonstrates yet again his misuse of sources. He states Qatar is the safest nation in the world, even though his source says no such thing. His source says right at the top “This statistic shows the countries with the lowest risk of natural disasters according to the Global Risk Index in 2014. At this time, Qatar, with an index value of 0.08, was the safest country in the world” [1]. This doesn’t deal with the general safest countries, only the safest from natural disasters. Pro then says that religion helps people with stress, dropping my arguments that it’s not the actual religion itself and that it needs to be religion-specific for his BOP to be fulfilled. He also dropped his claim that I’m committing a Tu Quoque fallacy. Conclusion Pro has failed to fulfill his BOP. He never addressed my two other arguments in the homosexuality section and strawmanned my genetic fallacy response. He commits multiple strawmen in the religion section. Two of my arguments had to do with the undesirable mental aspects that religion can cause along with it maybe leading to actual religious persecution. Pro took this to be an argument solely about religious people committing serious crime. He never addressed the paper by Zuckerman I cited, nor did he respond to my objections to his argument that religion helps with stress, suicide, ect. He mainly reasserts his position while copying and pasting information from sources. I’ve demonstrated that Pro has misused his sources twice and have refuted all his arguments solely because he doesn’t respond to a majority my objections. Sources [1] http://www.statista.com...
Should killers go to jail for life

It is most unfortunate that my opponent appears to have forfeited the previous round. Nevertheless, I shall present my rebuttals this round. I all extend all arguments from the previous.When someone kills one person they take the life of a they have no right to taking. A crime is a crime even if it is the nicest person alive who just switched they have no right to get away with making the most important choice there is to life. There is a hidden assumption in my opponent's statement: That if someone performed an action to which he has no right, then he or she deserves jailtime for life. This is obviously untrue. For example, stealing is taking something you have no right to take, but theft alone does not merit suh a harsh sentence.My opponent is also confusing getting away with a crime and not getting a life sentence. A person who does not receive a life sentence can still face other judicial sanctions other than jail for life. Thus, not sentencing killers to jail for life does not mean they get away with their crime.
Should killers go to jail for life

I will now present my arguments. C1) An unfair sentenceIdeally, in a system of criminal law, the sentence received by a criminal would be congruent to the crime committed. In the case of killing, a life sentence can be disproportionally severe or lenient. Allow me to provide a few examples. The first is when the crime committed is not murder, but involuntary manslaughter. Involuntary manslaughter is also a crime, but the person committing this crime does not always qualify for such a long sentence. Let's say a tired driver accidentally hits and kills a jaywalker. Should the driver be sentenced for life? I doubt it. Another example is self-defence. 'Justifiable homicide' is 'committed with the intention to kill or to do a grievous bodily injury, under circumstances which the law holds sufficient to exculpate the person who commits it. ' (1) The most common type of justifiable homicide is self-defence. Imagine someone whose life is endangered by an armed robber. Should he be sentenced for life for this act? Clearly not, for he may otherwise have died. In some places, justifiable homicide is further realised in 'stand your ground' laws, which protect victims from conviction when their lives are threatened. This has the added benefit of deterring criminals, for they know their victims are not helpless. (2)On the other end of the scale, there are crimes for which life imprisonment is insufficient. Robert Blecker, professor of law, made the case that 'worse-of-the-worse' criminals, like those who burn children or commit mass murder through bombing, deserve death. Having committed heinous crimes against humanity, it would only serve them right to die. (4)As you can see, there are instances of killing (homicide) which should not be punished by life imprisonment. Even if there are cases which should, I have already negated the resolution by showing the cases that should not. C2) Public financeThe tremendous cost of life imprisonment creates a heavy burden on public finance, which is funded by taxpayers. Food, shelter and medical care must be provided to the criminals for life, all of which substantially increase the costs of maintaining the judicial system. (3) If all killers. including those who committed involuntary manslaughter, justifiable homicide, etc. were sentenced to prison for life, the increase in costs would be unthinkable. Thus, sentencing killers to life is financially unsound. C3) Lack of rehabilitationSentencing criminals to a life sentence (provided parole is impossible) does not, by any means, encourage rehabilitation. The criminals have no hope ever of escaping prison anyway, so they will have no incentive to become better people. Moreover, as they come in close contact with other career criminals, their tendency to commit wrongdoings will increase. (3) (1) . http://www.lectlaw.com...(2) . http://usconservatives.about.com...(3) . http://apecsec.org...(4) . http://www.nyls.edu...
America Should Transition to Democratic Socialism

A comment made by leiferickson summed up my point: How can OP claim to be supportive of empowering the people to govern themselves while simultaneously arguing for an ideology that requires heavy restrictions on people's ability to run businesses how they wish and place a heavy tax burden on them to be used for programs that not everyone in that society agrees with? Democratic socialism is not democratic at all unless you just do what Hitler did and kill anyone who won't oblige to your policies. And not only is this itself morally wrong, but objectively destructive to society as it causes successful people who would keep the economy up with their businesses to flee and leave those who weren't planning to work in the first place as the only ones remaining. And even if you expect that everyone will have the exact same view and continue working even when they don't have to, that still doesn't change the fact that government programs for things like education and healthcare are observably inefficient and rely on external competitive markets to subsidize them.
America Should Transition to Democratic Socialism

That's the beginning and end of my argument. The socialism aspect is a posteriori the democratic. There really isn't anything else to argue. 1) Any argument for the case of democratic socialism that lays out a framework subordinates democratic pluralism to ideology. 2) Any argument against the case for democratic socialism based on a framework (i.e. capitalism, libertarianism, or any other ism) necessarily subordinates democratic pluralism to ideology. I have my own thoughts on some services that I believe should be socialized and I believe that capitalism should be fettered by the right of the people to govern themselves (under the aegis slow and steady wins the race). However, my personal thoughts are subordinate to the right of the people to govern themselves. Ergo, I win.
American Football should be renamed "HandEgg"

In most sports, the name of the event is based on the princioke defining action of the game at hand.Football is called football because the entire game progreses based on people kicking around a ball using their feet.Archery involves archers using bows and arrows to hit targetsBasketball is a game where a ball must be dropped into a basket to score pointsCycling involces riding a bicycleBo-Taoshi, translated - staff take-down - a sport where a large upright staff must be brought down to at least a 45 degree angle from the floorthe list goes onyet, American Football is called American football without just cause.point 1Foot-The game is played primarily with the hands, not the feet. Feet are almost exclusively used for mobility, which is true for any mobile activity. The hands are the primary agents of the game as they are the ones grasping the ball and tossing it, which are the two important actions of the game. Running with the ball while holding it, and then passing it to someone else using the hands who then catches it with their hands.point 2Ball-The ball in question is in fact not a true ball. A ball is defined as a three dimensional spherical sphape. And an Amerian Football is most definitely not spherical. It is in fact oblong shaped, which much more closely resembles the appearance of an egg than a ball.point 2Having two different sports that are both called Football is confusing. The name Football is already taken by Football. The naming of Football is much more accurate than American Football, and thus Football should be the one to retain the name Football, and American Football should be renamed to something ese. Even in terms of precedence, the sport of Football appeared long before the sport of American Football, and thus should be considered the "original Football".Thus, for the purity and truth of the sport naming system, American Football should be renamed to Handegg.
American Football should be renamed "HandEgg"

American Football should be renamed HandEgg.First Round acceptance and definitionsAmerican Football - the popular rugby-like sport played in North AmericaFootball - the globally popular sport known in North America as "Soccer".Foot - the appendage of the human body located on the bottom of the lower two limbs, used for displacement and stability.Hand - the appendage of the human doby located at the ends of the upper two limbs, used for holding and using objects/toolsEgg - the pseudo-spherical three dimensional shape closely resembling the egg of a bird.Ball - a spherical object, often designed to be easily grasped and enhance the elasticity of its collisions (i.e. it bounces well)Sport - a gathering of people for ritual competitive exercise.
American Football should be renamed "HandEgg"

American Football should continue to be called so, and not changed to Handegg.On the point of Naming precedence, it is can also be said that each sport holds a name that inspires pride in the people who participate in it. Each sport name is designed to be graceful and pleasing to hear. For a sport to have such an awkward, ungraceful and embarassing name as Handegg would be an unprecedented insult to professional sportsmen.Pro point 1:American Football uses direct foot-to-ball contact, just like Football/Soccer. Many of the game's elements depend on a player kicking the ball at a goal or into the other side of the field. The game would be completely different if there weren't any ball-kicking action using the feet.Pro point 2:A ball is a ball, regardless of it's shape. A Football/Soccerball is in fact not a sphere but a three dimensional shape formed by fusing together flat pentagons and hexagons at each others' sides, achieving a pseu-round shape, though it is not perfecly spherical. Balls vary in size and shape depending on the sport, and thus just because an American Football's shape is slightly oblong does not disqualify it from being able to carry the name "ball". It is still much more of a ball than an egg.Pro point 3:American Football has a unique name, thanks to the "American" prefix attatched to the name Football. It is not Football, it is American Football. Americans are fond of placing themself apart from the world, and have exceptionalist tendencies. The same is true for sports. Americans don't necessarily want to play Football just because it is globally famous, rather, Americans would rather have pride in their own unique version of Football, American Football. What right do we have to go deciding what nations can take pride in, especially if it is a culturally unique tradition that gives Americans a sense of national identity that relates them to each other.For the sake of greater justice, American Football should not be renamed Handegg