BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Genetic Modification of Animals is not beneficial to humanity

First I think I should clarify what genetic modification is. Genetic modification according to the CSIRO is "the use of modern biotechnology techniques to change the genes of an organism, such as a plant or animal." I am going to assume that you include cloning as an example of genetic modification, though that is not technically correct. "Animal cloning is a method of asexual reproduction, and results in the birth of one animal (the animal clone) that is a genetic copy of another animal. If the animal clone becomes a parent, its children are not clones, because they will have been born through sexual reproduction." "Genetic engineering is a method of introducing new genes into an animal. Thus, it is a method of altering an animal, not copying it. A GE animal contains new DNA (the rDNA construct) that gives the animal new traits. If the rDNA construct is stably inherited, then future generations of the initial GE animal will also contain the rDNA construct, and will also be GE animals. So, while cloning is a method of reproduction, genetic engineering is a method by which the genetics of an animal can be altered." http://www.fda.gov... Your primary argument is fundamentally flawed. The point being debated is, "Genetic Modification of Animals is not beneficial to humanity", not whether it is harmful to the animals being genetically modified. The mutilation and killing of animals in the process of making clones does not have an inherently negative affect on humanity. Genetic modification of animals have an overwhelmingly positive effect on humanity. The following points are a basic overview of these effects: "GE animals can improve human health by producing novel replacement proteins, drugs, vaccines and tissues for the treatment and prevention of human disease." "Animals that are genetically engineered have improved food production capabilities, enabling them to help meet the global demand for more efficient, higher quality and lower-cost sources of food." "GE animals can contribute to improving the environment and human health by consuming fewer resources and producing less waste." "Genetic engineering offers tremendous benefits to the animals by enhancing the health, well-being and welfare of the animal itself." "Genetic engineering can produce high-value industrial products, such as spider silk, for both medical and defense applications." http://www.bio.org...
Genetic Modification of Animals is not beneficial to humanity

I claim that genetic engineering of animals will not benefit humanity. We believe this because many animals are mutilated or even killed before a successful clone is made There were a total of 277 attempts to clone Dolly before scientists succeeded. Only a 5% average of cloned embryos are born and then survive.When an animal is cloned, the genetic makeup is that of an adult, so you could say that Dolly was an adult in a baby"s body.Although Dolly was successfully cloned, she had many problems with herself. For one, she had a type of lung cancer called jaagsiekte.(Jaagsiekte (yaag"zeek"te) is a chronic and contagious disease of the lungs in sheep and goats first described in 1865). Scientists say that this was caused because of her living conditions, or that it may be probable its genetic because most of the flock had died from this disease. Scientists also state that Dolly was born with the genetic age of 6 because of the sheep she had been cloned from. This shows that genetic engineering will not benefit humanity because it changes your genes. This may not help, because if something goes wrong, the offspring may be in a worse state depending on the outcome.
PC vs. Mac? You Decide

wow I had none from the built in firewall and soretment of spam,junk and mail needs to be filled in hfgjfjkgjfpSDOFHAPSBFASbfkasbfklasjjhfb kjvb kjszbfkjzshbfjhbkjblkblkjjblksdhbl;ksdjhfksdflksdahlkjsdflkjshfdlkjashlfkjjsahdlkfhaslkjjhflkasdhflasjkdhfalskjdhfslakjfhalskjflasjdfhlksajhflkajjfhlakjfhlksjdhflkasjdhlkjhasdflkjhaslkfhlksafhlskhflashflkasdjhflaskdjhflaskjdfhalskdjhfalsjdfhlskjdfhlsdkjfhsaldkjfhlsdjfhlsajfhlskdjfhslkjdfhlsadhflskfjhalsdjhfalks
Gay Marriage should be legal.

It is true that we could consider homosexual marriage, but that just kills the tradition of heterosexual marriage. Also, people would be so entertained by gay marriage so then homosexual marriage would be literally forgotten. Now I would like to refute the opponent's argument about adoption. Adoption is a good point, however that defeats the purpose of having actual children. And also many agree that gay couples would not treat an adopted child properly. Lastly, I would like to go over my points. 1. Gay people cannot reproduce. 2. It defeats the whole purpose of heterosexual marriage. Thank you.
Gay Marriage should be legal.

I'm not saying we need to get rid of heterosexual marriage, but we need to consider homosexual marriage. Yes, heterosexual marriage is a tradition many carry, but some traditions need to be changed. Homosexuals are no different than heterosexuals really they both love one person and just want to be able to be accepted. But, sadly homosexuals can not be accepted because of the staggering amount of people that bash on them and send hate in their direction. Just a final thought it's straight people that bring gay people into the world.
Gay Marriage should be legal.

Think gay people may not be able to reproduce themselves, but they could always adopt. Their are plenty of children out in the world looking for a loving home. Many couples gay and heterosexual couples not can not have children. Gay people also make up around 6 million people in population. Homosexuals can adopt or have a surrogate mother to carry their child. Homosexuals may not be able to psychically carry their child they are still able to have one with the DNA and or adopt.
Stem Cell Research

I will be con on this debate, in this debate I most prove why stem cell research ought to be banned in the USA. By ban I mean made illegal by a federal law. Pro most prove why stem cell research ought to remain legal in the USA. Stem cell research- An undifferentiated cell of a multi cellular organism that is capable of giving rise to indefinitely more cells of the same type, and from which certain other kinds of cell arise by differentiation. Rules No forfeiting There will be four rounds in this debate. First round is accepting the debate. Second round is first argument. Third round is the counter argument. Four round is the conclusion. I will pick who will be pro on Monday. If you want to be pro then please tell me in the comment section.
Maths is taught badly at school

There is no particular teaching style that's preferred [1], and this is because the fairest way to ensure you receive a good education is by being taught in different ways. Some teachers may challenge you more than others, some may make the subject more fun etc. This is why you will usually have a new teacher each year I'm not going to argue that children should be taught a topic to the full extent, I accept we have to learn things gradually by starting with something simpler such as plane trigonometry and progressing to spherical trigonometry at a later time. Below is a list of some topics from the top of my head which I believe are taught badly. 1) Trigonometry Students should be taught how to calculate the smaller legs of right angle triangles first without using Pythagoras theorem. Students should be taught how to calculate the legs of any angled triangle without using trigonometric functions. Proofs should be taught first, not last, or if you are lucky. 2) Times tables After spending hours remembering each time table you stand up in front of your class and then start counting in 8's or whatever. What happens when you forget what 6 x 7 is? Do you guess? If you think 'ooh I know what 6 x 7 is' and write down an answer without thinking, sure it's quick, but that method is not mathematical, and leads to mistakes, yet it's still taught, children might even have to learn their 12 and 13 times table. 3) Prime numbers When I was a child I was shown a table resembling a snakes and ladders board (numbered from 1-100), and every prime number on it was highlighted for us, we didn't have to calculate them or understand what they were exactly, we just had to remember a definition, and to this day I don't why everyone must know about them. 4) Angles How can children understand angles when they use semi circle or full circle protractors? It's ridiculous. Note: It's been a long time since I was at school, so Cons's memory will be more reliable than mine on this. I look forward to hearing back, ad please free to add more topics, thanks sources: [1] . http://www.clerktogovernors.co.uk......
The Pelt the Paedos Show will enhance public confidence in the judicial system

~~~~~~~ Rebuttals ~~~~~~~ ///Mt opponent opened his argument by admitting that paedophiles are often attacked and killed in prison. With this being the case, surely it would be better that these types of incidents were witnessed by the general public, and more importantly, their victims. This would thus ensure that decent, law-abiding citizens could verify that child-molesters were receiving the punishment suitably befitting their heinous crimes./// I would think that the announcement of said inmate's death would serve as verification as to punishment served. The viewing of the actual acts by a law-abiding citizen would not change the outcome of said act. It may be more entertaining for the general populace to see these despicable monsters destroyed, but the purpose of the justice system is not to entertain. The purpose of the justice system is to mete out justice. ~ ///My opponent then goes on to fret about the possibility of being prosecuted for killing an inmate but he should not concern himself unduly. With so many rocks being thrown by so many people, it would be impossible to prove who was responsible for a kiddy-fiddlers death. In any case, any such legal action would not be in the public interest so the state would be very unlikely to pursue it./// I agree that it would be difficult to identify a single killer from a mass of stone-throwers normally, but this is on a television show. Television shows have cameras in place that capture all of the 'action' going on for any given show. These cameras would easily record the lethal stone-thrower. Even if pedophiles don't really deserve life the law says that they do unless given the death sentence. Even though this is not my personal belief, murdering those who deserve it is still murder. ~ ///Finally, convicts are generally given the opportunity to seek parole, the condition on paedophiles to take part in a televised stoning would only stiffen their sentence, not weaken it./// This statement contradicts what you claimed in round one. You stated, "...the sentencing judge could offer the child molester the possibility of parole..." this implies that at least some of those on the show would not have previously had this possibility. If, as you said in this round that they did have it, where is their incentive for coming on the show? ~ I thank brian for another enjoyable debate.
The Pelt the Paedos Show will enhance public confidence in the judicial system

Mt opponent opened his argument by admitting that paedophiles are often attacked and killed in prison. With this being the case, surely it would be better that these types of incidents were witnessed by the general public, and more importantly, their victims. This would thus ensure that decent, law-abiding citizens could verify that child-molesters were receiving the punishment suitably befitting their heinous crimes. My opponent then goes on to fret about the possibility of being prosecuted for killing an inmate but he should not concern himself unduly. With so many rocks being thrown by so many people, it would be impossible to prove who was responsible for a kiddy-fiddlers death. In any case, any such legal action would not be in the public interest so the state would be very unlikely to pursue it. Finally, convicts are generally given the opportunity to seek parole, the condition on paedophiles to take part in a televised stoning would only stiffen their sentence, not weaken it. Thank you.
The Pelt the Paedos Show will enhance public confidence in the judicial system

I thank brian for creating another debate I will attempt to negate the resolution. I will argue that those convicted of pedophiliac sex crimes and sentenced to prison time are often killed by their fellow inmates. This is a much harsher punishment even though it is not official [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]. I do not think that anyone believes that those convicted of crimes of this nature deserve anything less. There is also the issue that it would be very possible that a 'thrower' would accidentally kill said pedophile. This would mean that they are guilty of murder and would be sent to prison, I would personally be very angry if I had to go to prison because I accidentally killed a person that raped a kid. This would not be an unlikely occurrence as it is widely known that stoning was a common method of execution many, many years ago and is still utilized in some areas today [7]. You also mention that in exchange for agreeing to do this show the criminal could be granted the possibility of parole. This is a horrible idea simply because it would mean possibly letting a child molester out of prison even sooner than their already too lenient sentence according to you. They would be free to begin raping again. Lastly, the only people that would be featured on this show are those currently serving time for a sex crime against a child. They are already in jail, therefore the legal system has effectively done its job. Your link (1) even describes going through cases considered too lenient and increasing the sentence. It may be entertaining to see pedophiles get domed with some rocks, but this activity would actually do more harm than good to the justice system. [1] http://www.komonews.com... [2] http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com... [3] http://www.talkleft.com... [4] http://www.cnn.com... [5] http://freerepublic.com... [6] http://www.nospank.net... [7] http://civilliberty.about.com...
The Pelt the Paedos Show will enhance public confidence in the judicial system

Ask most people what they think about the jail terms handed out to convicted child molesters and, unless they happen to be Catholic priests, they are very likely to say they that the sentences are far too lenient. (1) One way to satisfy the public's desire to see paedophiles punished more severely is to lock them up for longer. Unfortunately, though, the jails are already overcrowded and incarcerating prisoners is also very expensive. However, justice could still be served by allowing theatre audiences to stone convicted paedophiles that are chained up on the stage. These events could take place around the country and could be broadcast live on television. I propose they call this TV programme "The Pelt the Paedos Show" and they get Sheriff John Bunnell (2) of The World's Wildest Police Videos fame to present it. These performances would reassure the general public that justice is being done and they would also act as a deterrent to potential child molesters. This is how I envisage a typical broadcast: Off-screen Announcer - And now on Channel X, coming to you live from the Apollo Theatre, it's time join America's most famous law enforcer Sheriff John Bunnell for The Pelt the Paedos Show… {RUN OPENING CREDITS} {BUNNEL WALKS ON STAGE TO APPLAUSE} Bunnell – Thank y', thank y'all. Yee-Ha! Woo! Alright, welcome to the Pelt the Paedos Show – the only show in town where the audience get to throw genuine rocks at goddam no good sonofabitch kiddy-fiddlers transported to this very stage direct from the county jail. Yee-Ha! Bring ‘em on boys. Woo! {PRISON GUARDS LEAD CONVICTS ONTO STAGE. THEY ARE HANDCUFFED AND THEIR LEGS ARE CHAINED TO THEIR FELLOW PRISONERS} {AUDIENCE BOOS, SHOUTS ABUSE} Bunnell – Okay, ladies and gentleman, you've got your rocks, now it's time to pelt those paedos! Yee-Ha! Woo! {BUNNELL RUNS OFF STAGE, AUDIENCE RAIN ROCKS DOWN ON THE TERRIFIED PRISONERS WHO SCREAM IN PAIN} What do you think? Sounds good, right? Okay, there might be some human rights issues to consider there but the sentencing judge could offer the child molester the possibility of parole on the condition that he waives his human rights and agrees to take part in The Pelt the Pedos Show. Overall, I believe this measure will greatly enhance the public's confidence in the judicial system and, therefore, I urge you to vote Pro. Thank you. (1) http://www.dailymail.co.uk... (2) http://www.facebook.com...
Rap Battle: Vox Veritas vs. Imperfiect

(Note: This is Satire) Yo ma' name is Billy Bob, married to ma' pretty cuzin Mary Sue Gunnuh 'bellin 'ginst duh Gubbermint an stert owr nashun anew Iv bin chooting guns before the berthday dat I terned six Gunz God an Gators thers no Gubbermint in duh mix Iv gottuh big truck an a huntin' riful too I werk drivin' eighteen wheelers frum 6 to 2 'Nuff said 'bout what I bin doing fer a livin' Duh Gubbermint's bin doing too much takin' and not 'nuff givin' Im gunnuh derned darned be r'bellin' 'ginst duh Gubbermint! Its deir fault I weigh 350 pounds (though I only fast on Lent) If Obumuhcair getz pazzed Ima gonna derned darned taik up ma' gunz Gunnuh be goin' on duh warpath like Attila duh Hunz Gunnuh live out in duh woods an' wage gorilluh warfare Not as if Gubbermint have drones dat locate me frum duh air I gotz duh huntin' rifle Gubbermint gots duh M16A4 Odds are in ma' faver so its timetuh go tuh derned darned rebellin' war! DON BEE TAKIN' MUH GUNZUH!!!!!!!!
Rap Battle: Vox Veritas vs. Imperfiect

If you are reading this http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de... http://z0r.de...
Rap Battle: Vox Veritas vs. Imperfiect

Yo Danny it's the Voice of Truth You are the bat and I'm Babe Ruth I pronounce judgment upon thee Thou art wimpy as can be Here's my arm I've ripped it off 'Cause yo arm is way way too soft Here's my arm now you've got muscle But still you couldn't win no tussle Your skinny, wimpy, stick-like arm Is a cause for great alarm I've got six-pack like the Hulk I should just donate some bulk Ima ima not afraid of you Yo nose would tear off if you went kerchoo When you land in prison you will be in no peril The prisoners'll leave ya alone cause they'll think you're a girl 'Nuff been said about yo strength being low Let's talk about yo time on good DDO Yo conduct's more distasteful than a tootsie roll You chase 'way people for being a troll What's wrong with trolls? You're one yourself And you're not anymore of Santa's perfect elf All you can do is call someone a "f*g" You do this to cover for your lack of swag Half the people who you bullied on DDO Would IRL make your soul Let It Go So Danny boy here's some advice that is good Don't ever show yo face again in this neighborhood!
Shared BoP Is Elitist

I'm referring to a comment made in THIS debate, so it's relevant. And the other debate I sourced was meant to establish that my opponent is known for making his position the opposite of what he intends to argue for. These aren't off topic, they're directly related to the core issue of this debate, which is that Con has made an unclear resolution and scenario. If it's my burden to give an example of how sharing BoP can be elitist, then I've succeeded in doing that. If I'm arguing for the resolution and not my opponent, then I don't know why he is bothering trying to tell me how I ought to give my argument. I don't need a social program or a hypothetical injury to show what I need to show in this debate, and frankly it's still unclear exactly what Con means by these things. In short, an unclear resolution and position set up by my opponent, along with his refusal to explain just what he wants this debate to be about despite constant requests for clarification has made this debate unintelligible. The only thing I've gotten out of this debate is that I am tasked with giving an example instantiating how a shared BoP can be elitist, which I did last round. Since that's all I had to do, my BoP has been met.
Shared BoP Is Elitist

Pro is referring to comments, another debate, and is insisting on a prejudiced interpretation of "social programs" as if some social programs deserve preference before others. All of these are off-topic engagements, personal attacks, and poor conduct. Pro also ignores how resolutions are not oppositions. Con is not Pro. Furthermore, Pro is focusing on the result of a debate instead of the process of a debate. Burden of proof is a characteristic which is expected to be upheld during debate, not after debate has concluded. Even more so, Pro has not explained why anyone should care whether not an injured party is popular or not. Perhaps the injured party isn't popular such that outsiders view the issue with prejudice, but that's Pro's personal problem to be responsible for in overcoming. It isn't elitism at all. Everyone has to play the popularity contest. Finally, Pro also goes from better to worse in saying, ". .. the less-popular user deserved to lose for not fulfilling their half of the BoP, even if BoP was rightfully exclusive to the Pro of this hypothetical debate. " Now, Pro has removed any and all BoP from social program advocates, but rather claims that it's his personal responsibility alone to prove his injury.