BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Rap Battle (Practice for TV's Tournament

Yo kid your rap is just pathetic Is your inability to rap genetic Now I mean you no illwill But next time you should step up your skill You can't begin to rap like a master I can rap better, I can rap faster While I'm sitting here chugging beer My opponents is just bein' a qu33r I've got a hundred babes for spankin' And my opponent is left with only wankn' Staring at a screen all day I will crush you, come what may He calls himself the nerdykiller His puny rhymes are merely filler He calls himself a master rapper Ha! I'll flush it down the cr@pper What? This rap is coming to an end? Oh, but I still of alot of things to mend No matter, my opponent may be crude and crass But I can pull a rap far better from my @ss Well damn I'm running out of thought Oh well, it was one-sided battle we fought If you ever wanna do another rap battle I'll go an' shake yo head like a rattle
Rap Battle (Practice for TV's Tournament

Thank you for this type of debate.I always wanted to this kind of debate. :)Sorry if its mean...-------------------------------------------------------------------------My friends call me nerdykillerAlso known as Mr. Thiller Come on you can't even spellI am gonna take you to hellYou got nothing not even hopeYou dead cause I am so dopeI am the boss, king, CEO of allI am gonna be watching you fallYou are the worst at rappingI am gonna give you such a beatingSay bye to your family you goneIn this game your only a pawnYour ugly face is so terribleYou make my day so horribleWhat you doing fatty, what you gonna doI just shank you I bid you adieuBring it on what are you gonna doYour late to your period you are overdue What kind of name is BrainmasterI just shot you with my blasterYou are known as Brainmaster, but you are brain deadYou don't know how to debate even making a thread I await my oppenets comeback if he has oneI bet the number of comebacks he has is none
Rap Battle (Practice for TV's Tournament

I'm saving some of my best for my debate for TV's tourney if it gets off the ground but I will try... ___ Hey kid what's up Nothing? Yeah, uh-huh I'm to busy kicking @ss to care Rap against me? You wouldn't dare Throw me your best raps It's still crap You may have good rhymes But mine will stand the test of time You're just another DDO noob While I'm over here, gettin' free boob You're just another little whore I can rap something a hundred times more Oh what's that, you duel me? You can't do battle with the king MC Now I'll leave you for a minute But everything you do is pathetic sh!t.
Pedophilia is not curable - give them the death penalty

Pedophilia is not curable, sedating someone or loading them up with drugs to stop the urges to molest young children is not a cure for pedophilia, that is like putting a band aide on a bullet hole. The condition of being a pedophile does not go away with time, there are no medications to get rid of it like a virus or common cold, we only know how to suppress the condition with drugs. The problem there is that drugs need to be administered daily and we leave it up to the pedophile to follow these directions and take his medication, this absolutely does not work because people can not be trusted to take their medication. People come off of medications all the time for whatever reason, schizophrenics stop taking their Med's, people with depression stop taking Med's, we can not trust a pedophile to keep taking their medication for the rest of their lives. This is the same argument as if we found a wonder drug to keep serial killers from the urge to kill, as soon as you stop taking the medication you are back to you old self. Pedophilia is one of the worst crimes in society, it leaves our most vulnerable beings, the children scarred and traumatized for life, what at the expense of some perverted persons fantasy. Execute them all, I have no sympathy for pedophile scum. As to your point of this being a medical condition, I DON'T CARE IF IT'S A MENTAL CONDITION, people make excuses for every condition, a killer kills someone and we are supposed to feel sorry for him because maybe he had mental illness, bottom line you killed someone, mental illness is not an excuse, you are a sick freak It's the same for pedophilia, if it's a mental condition then why do these people still function and hold down regular jobs and function like normal people in society. Lets stop pretending to make excuses for these people. I'm calling for genocide to all pedophiles, you don't belong in our society, our kids should be free to explore the world without having sick freaks praying on them.
Pedophilia is not curable - give them the death penalty

The resolution: “Pedophilia is not curable - give them the death penalty” This is a compound proposition. Pro must substantiate the claim P, that Pedophilia is not curable, and that Q,this necessarily entails that they should be awarded the death penalty. I can negate the resolution by either A) Establishing that it is the case that pedophilia is curable, or B) Establishing the case that pedophilia does not warrant the death penalty I shall put forth two primary lines of argumentation: Pedophilia is curable, depending on what is meant by curable. A distinction must be made. From pro’s opening, pro seems to be concerned with recidivism, not the complete elimination of pedophilic urges. So if pro is equating cure with non-recidivism, or even if urges are reduced to such a level that recidivism is a non-concern, then I will argue that it is curable. I shall need pro to clarify. That if it is not curable, then there is an underlying psychological/neurophysiological/genetic cause that negates the free will of the afflicted, and as such, the afflicted can not be held morally accountable, and thereby, that the notion of retributive justice relating to the afflicted is non-applicable.
Pedophilia is not curable - give them the death penalty

Pedophilia is not curable, there are drugs to suppress it but drugs can be omitted and skipped by the pedophile. If you get convicted of pedophilia you should be either sentenced to death or put on an isolated island in the pacific like the British did with convicts in Australia. The problem today is that a pedophile who is charged and sentenced for a couple of years will be out and will do it again. Instead the government gives them new identities and places them in our communities with discretion's like you can't be within so many yards of a school or playground. This does not work, is someone watching these people, they stop taking their meds and are back at it. The reason I call for the death penalty is because a pedophile will ruin an innocent child's life for ever for their own sexual gratification and then they will do it again when they get released from jail, there is no cure for it!!! If you get sentenced for pedophilia you should be given the needle.
Gun control should be limited to age and only non-rocket weapons should be allowed.

"Why did anyone decide to control guns, it is only metal, and not control knives, screwdrivers, cars, etc. (answer this first)" Because A) Guns are usually more destructive than knives and screwdrivers. You can kill someone with a knife or a screwdriver, but guns are generally more effective. B) People are more afraid of guns than cars. This has nothing to do with the lethality of either, by rather, the perception of "scary" guns are and how "not scary" cars are, despite cars killing a few thousand more people each year.[1] C) An argument made for gun control that if you make guns illegal or heavily restricted, then gun crime will decrease. "Guns have been demonized and all a gun is is metal." And usually plastic these days, and sometimes more exotic materials. More to the point, it's a "piece of metal" that can be used to kill people with greater efficiency than pieces of metal that aren't guns. "People kill, not guns" While it may be technically true in the sense that a gun cannot act independently, a person with a gun is demonstrably more dangerous than an unarmed person. "I believe that if a person is over 18,""If it is limited only to age," There are legitimate reasons why a minor could arm themselves: target shooting, hunting, self defense, and practice for all of the above. "he or she should be able to buy any gun" Define "any gun". Are you including gyrojets and air rifles? "carry it anywhere" There are legitimate reasons why someone would want to restrict where one could carry guns. A politician making a controversial speech might rather not be shot at. An explosives storage facility might not want to risk a negligent discharge setting off an explosion. One might not want a murderous, psychotic ex sneaking into your house armed[2]. I do think that the carry laws as they are in the US in some places in some circumstances are too restrictive- but allowing people to carry guns literally anywhere is not a reasonable solution. [1] http://1.usa.gov... [2] http://bit.ly...
Gun control should be limited to age and only non-rocket weapons should be allowed.

One, I would like to say thank you for debating. Now on to discussion. Guns have been demonized and all a gun is is metal. People kill, not guns Why did anyone decide to control guns, it is only metal, and not control knives, screwdrivers, cars, etc. (answer this first) If it is limited only to age, everyone is more apt to defend themselves and it could encourage learning about guns from earlier ages. When you respond, do not address tanks and rocket launchers, just rifles, shotguns, AR's, and handguns.
Gun control should be limited to age and only non-rocket weapons should be allowed.

I believe that if a person is over 18, he or she should be able to buy any gun and carry it anywhere. When you respond, keep in mind that I am no idiot and when I say gun, I mean it shoots lead, not a rocket launcher. Furthermore, I would like this to be based on common sense instead of fact. Keep vocabulary at a high school level for the ease of reading for the voters please.
Gun control should be limited to age and only non-rocket weapons should be allowed.

It appears to me that you perhaps missed throughout this whole debate that I am pro-2nd amendment, and am arguing against your resolution, not concealed carry for self-defense. "By the way, the theatre and Aurora was a gun free zone. Sandy Hook Elementary was a gun free zone. Columbine was a gun free zone. " Actually, in the case of Columbine, the presence of an armed guard helped save the lives of children there. [1] a/b/c I was presenting a response to "Why did anyone decide to control guns", not arguing in favor of A/B/C. "When you respond, keep in mind that I am no idiot and when I say gun, I mean it shoots lead, not a rocket launcher. ""When you respond, do not address tanks and rocket launchers," If you're going to craft legislation regarding how to regulate or how not to regulate guns, "shoots lead" and "not a rocket launcher or tank" are not sufficient, as they do not cover the variety of odd guns, such as gyrojets. Furthermore, "shots lead" would include missiles which contain lead compounds (such as lead oxide used in thermite, or lead picrate used in primary explosives), and would exclude many bullets used for hunting (Hornady"s GMX) and self defense (Winchester PDX1 .410). "Yes, allowing people to carry a gun anywhere is perfectly reasonable. " I'm not arguing against the right of self-defense. But, I am arguing for reasonable limits on where you can carry. "Besides, the criminals already do it, so why not be able to defend yourselves at these places. " Murder is illegal, and yet people commit murder. "It is illegal to carry a gun in a church. Problem is, the phycopaths don't care. Where better to shoot up. Plenty of people, Christians, defenseless. You mentioned a phycotic ex breaking into your house, shoot him. Problem solved. And still, removing the guns will not prevent him from walking in with a crowbar to beat you to death. That hurts more than a gun anyway. The politician making the speech can shoot back, along with all the other people in the audience who sees the shooter. That way we don't even have to waste tax dollars on a trial either. " That doesn't always work. At the Gabrielle Giffords shooting, there were concealed carry permit holders, who did not shoot because they would have hurt bystanders[2]. I the case of the killing of Travis Alexander, his ex, Jodi Arias, ambushed him in the shower. Even if he had a gun, it wouldn't have helped him unless he was carrying a water-resistant gun while showering. As I mentioned, earlier, at the Columbine shooting, an armed guard saved lives- but not every shooting is like Columbine. In my opinion, my opponent has not met his BOP in this argument. He failed to demonstrate why tying gun control to age was positive, why limitless concealed and open carry should be allowed, and even what his exact definition of gun was that he was discussing. I submit to you, ladies and gentlemen, that in this argument, my opponent had the burden of proof, and failed to meet that burden. [1] . http://exm.nr... [2] . http://bit.ly...
Gun control should be limited to age and only non-rocket weapons should be allowed.

A. Fine, guns are more destructive. But, here is what is more destructive. A person who has access to the internet. That has plenty of recipes for nice bombs that can take out a school caffeteria. Personally, I would rather take my chances with a person with a gun than a merciless bomb. What are you going to do? Take away fertilizers, disable the internet, shut down pharmacies. B. People are only more scared of guns because society, for unknown reasons, has demonized them. They should demonize cars, they are much more deadly. C. You claim that by restricting and taking away guns gun violence will decrease. I will take two different routes for this. One, the only people who obey the gun laws are the law abiding citizens. The law abiding citizens do not hurt people. However, the outlaws, people who do not obey the law, will not obey gun laws, because they do not obey the law. Thus, these people can be significantly more destructive because no one can defend themselves. Route two. In a perfect world where all guns would disappear from the homes and the street, criminals will still be criminals. They will use knives, bows, blowdart guns(sarcasm, but you never know). I would rather be shot with a gun than with a broadhead arrow(ouch). Still, people will not be able to defend themselves from criminals. Not to mention that you have read my bomb comments earlier. I already defined what I mean by any gun. It is toward the end of the previous debate. D. It is illegal to carry a gun in a church. Problem is, the phycopaths don't care. Where better to shoot up. Plenty of people, Christians, defenseless. You mentioned a phycotic ex breaking into your house, shoot him. Problem solved. And still, removing the guns will not prevent him from walking in with a crowbar to beat you to death. That hurts more than a gun anyway. The politician making the speech can shoot back, along with all the other people in the audience who sees the shooter. That way we don't even have to waste tax dollars on a trial either. E. Who is morally superior? A woman who has been raped and strangled or a woman with a smoking gun and a dead rapist at her feet(even if the rapist had no gun). Yes, allowing people to carry a gun anywhere is perfectly reasonable. Besides, the criminals already do it, so why not beable to defend yourselves at these places. By the way, the theatre and Aurora was a gun free zone. Sandy Hook Elementary was a gun free zone. Columbine was a gun free zone.
Revenge of an atheist

Revenge of an atheist Few years ago I told my parents That I was an atheist That I don't believe in God That I think God doesn't exist They were outraged They acted as if I was possessed by a demon They quoted verses from Quran Just so that they would cure me of my illness I was outraged at their reaction In the years that followed I stopped studying and nearly failed high school I just watched child porn and played video games all day Today, Me being an atheist is their least concern They are more worried about my problems with police and the law They are more worried with my mental health And all the disorders I developed over the years I am glad that I caused them problems I am their only child Their only child is a failure They must be really proud, Not I am glad it turned out like this If I was successful in life It would be a reward for them But instead, They experience punishment They will never get over it They will never forgive themselves
Effort to regulate our countrys borders

First of all, if the reason they cannot afford to become citizens is because they cannot take time off of their low paying jobs back from their home country to learn all the things that the citizenship test entails, they must get here quickly in order to get a job before they starve to death. Secondly they cannot become a citizen once here without a high risk of deportation which has serious consequences when they are returned to their home country. Sure there are some who are not willing to get citizenship but a large majority of illegal immigrants would like nothing more than the security against deportation of a citizenship in the United States. Finally, I fail to see how illegal immigrants are any more dangerous than the legal ones. I would say that the legal ones are often more dangerous than the illegals.
Effort to regulate our countrys borders

its not about paying your way to earn citizenship. you argued that it wasnt easy to be granted citizenship and if people were so willing to pay taxes and become a citizen then why do we have people in our country living here illegally while we pay high taxes ? i dont doubt that these people work as hard but if they want to be here they should undergo the process to get citzenship before coming into our country before they come here for the free ride. and its 100% accurate that their are people here not willing to get their citizenship, just work for labor jobs to bring back money to their country. either undergo the process to ensure our countries saftey and provide security for actual citzens here or get them out of our country
Effort to regulate our countrys borders

These people are just as hardworking as the rest of us, more in some cases. That they should be denied citizenship and entrance to our country IS unfair but they would be willing to pay taxes for the security of citizenship. Sure they come for economic reasons, but the opportunity here allows them to earn the money they need. It is reasonable for these reasons, and it is no less safe than the drug lords who can afford to get here legally.
Effort to regulate our countrys borders

yeah it would make things easier if become a U.s. citizen but not all immigrants wish to contribute to all that it takes to be a citizen. most illegal immigrants that are in our country come for economic reasons because their country does not have much of an economy or avaliable jobs, if they already face problems economically which is why they come to our country leads in unwilling tax payers that do all the same we do. im not referencing to all. its unfair but it should be harder to get granted citizenship because all that has happened in our country, we cant just let anyone in our country...how is that safe or reasonable?
Effort to regulate our countrys borders

The problem here is not in border regulation, which would only increase our taxes which are high enough already. What needs to happen here is for it to become easier to become a citizen of the United States. Immigration is the process of people coming to live in another country, and if they want to live here why shouldn't they? What makes someone who has immigrated here from another country different from those born here? These people do want to be citizens, they just can't be due to current immigration policy. If they were granted citizenship they would not be "stealing" jobs, they would just be the capitalist work force, since capitalism is a system in which he who offers the best product for the lowest price (in this case labor) wins. With more citizens and less immigration regulation, we have less government jobs which means lower taxes and more people to pay those taxes, which means even lower taxes than before.
Effort to regulate our countrys borders

Regulating American borders would keep illegal immigrants out. Our taxes are so high and for people from other countries to live here for nothing is unfair. We all know that illegal immigrants are here and although our country does export illegal immigrants without a green card back to their country, but we need to furthermore prevent this from happening. Tax paying American citizens are losing out of jobs because these illegal immigrants are taking jobs and being paid less. We need to stop the negative from coming into our country, and illegal immigrants our just starting problems for our economy and the rise on illegal drugs coming into our country. Regulating our borders furthermore can only benefit our people with available jobs to help bring stability to the economy and give deserving tax payers opportunities that could only benefit ourselves and our country by perhaps creating a more effective method of border patrol such as heightened security, barriers, etc..
Porn should be legal

We can now come to the conclusion that what my opponent is saying is BSSSS! ! Let's flip his terrible syllogism!1. If I don't like something, it isn't good2. I don't like porn.3. Therefore, porn isn't good. BOOOM! REFUTED! This is why you should vote CON. Another reason: Pro is clearly a liberal. All liberals are for porn. To exemplify the absurdity and fradulence of what my opponent is discussing, I refer back to an extremely experienced debater and one who has changed the psychology and ideas of all debate. org members, Crypto. Crypto: "All liberals are morons! They all lie! LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR"Thus my opponent is not only a liberal, but a liar. He also goes against one of the greatest philosophers of modern time, Crypto.
Porn should be legal

.. .but don't watch porn. It's bad for you. Conclusion: Even though I have technically forfeited I think the voters should vote on the individual that has proposed the best argument. We can further establish the criteria my opponent is advocating for is SQUAT. IT DOESN'T DO ANYTHING. Now looking back at the reason I have supplied: Porn is bad, we can come to the conclusion that the only viable and correct vote would be for CON.
Motions challenged on Debate.org are mostly not good enough

As we have seen in the recent topics of Debate.org, most of them have been simply indefensible. In most of the cases, it is seen that the one proposes the motion gets through the debate, which eventually tells us the story. From that certain point of view, my say is that the motions are not good enough though they may be good. By the passage of time, let us see how we fore.....................