BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
It is Biblically ok for a Christian to raise dogs for food

I know this debate may offend a lot of people, so let me state at the outset that I am IN NO WAY, shape or FOAM in favor of actually eating dogs. I love pugs, in particular, and I would rather not eat one, even if forced to because of circumstances. I think eating dogs should be illegal everywhere in the world for the simple reason that dogs are really cool, and are more beneficial as companions, guards and seeing-eye-helpers. I also like Boston terriers, French bulldogs, and English bulldogs. However. . . here is my contention: It is Biblically ok for a Christian to raise dogs as a food-source. The Mosaic food-laws were done away with because of this Biblical proof-text: Again Jesus called the crowd to him and said, "Listen to me, everyone, and understand this. Nothing outside a person can defile them by going into them. Rather, it is what comes out of a person that defiles them." After he had left the crowd and entered the house, his disciples asked him about this parable. "Are you so dull?" he asked. "Don"t you see that nothing that enters a person from the outside can defile them? For it doesn"t go into their heart but into their stomach, and then out of the body." (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean.) (Mark 7:14-19) The Hebrew word for "clean" is kosher, so Jesus was saying that you can eat any animal you want, and this includes dogs. And by dogs, I do not mean "hot dogs". I mean actual canines, like labradors, chihuahua Mcnuggets, whateaver that dog was that was in Beethoven 1-20, etc. But I am not just saying that it is just ok for a Christian to eat a bulldog to prevent starvation. I am saying that a Christian can, in good conscience, own a farm which exclusively raises bulldogs in little, bulldog sized cages. They can be fattened up with sticks of butter. Once the bulldog is suitably fat, the Christian may then slaughter the bulldog, and sell the meat, or serve the meat to his or her family. The Christian can do this no matter how many bulldogs are served. Like McDonalds, the Christian could, in good conscience, say "Over a bippity-bip-billion bulldogs served", for instance. If the Christian wants to sell bulldog veal, they can use puppies. DO NOT enter the debate if you still think kosher laws are in effect. The debate assumes that kosher laws are NOT in effect anymore. Also, Con must assumes eating dog is socially acceptable. I'm not looking for a "It would make people hate us" argument.
It is Biblically ok for a Christian to raise dogs for food

Who asks a question theres no answer to? This is reality, not nacy drew Its stupid to, ask Like expecting a car to run with no gas A side effect of having no class, Does actually arguing give you a rash? No logic like saying tom hanks is an Arab You had to expect this, you think you smashed it But honestly from the get go The whole point was always trashed Saying you won a one sided argument is like spending counterfeit cash Like a zombie, mindless, behind the times, like nerves to your iris, Language of a drunk Irish, I wish, You would of asked an actual question Instead of just declaring yourself right, Taking away all the means for an opponent to fight, I wish you could see the light, Im hoping for a round two, that way my logic could surround you, mentally pound you, drown you, I can see the future, in the trash can is the only place they found you
It is Biblically ok for a Christian to raise dogs for food

Closing Battle-rap: Oh, so because they're apex predators we can't eat dog? if that's true, then on the same basis, we can't eat hog because a pig is fouler than Travolta in FACE OFF chew you up like Twizzlers Pull & Peel, no steak sauce and by that same logic, we can't eat Koala Bears neither face it --- I ruined you --- your arguments are Selena Gomez --- I'm Bieber Bible says all food is kosher, including terriers & poodles neither of which can possibly be more toxic than Ramen Noodles so, in summation, I clearly won this debate, DUN Silly Rabbit, dogs aren't for pets, dogs are for plates, SON your slogans remain lazy stupid, my facts remain crazy nice your lies remain halitosis, my truths remain Dentyne Ice so stop frontin with your nonsense and stop all that noise my style is WU TANG, your style is Backstreet Boys and, sure, your heart might be in the right place for now, Rick Grimes but watch my Walkers DEVOUR THE WHOLE EARTH --- Season 9 what?
Darren Wilson is innocent

Even if one could prove that what happened was illegal no one cold prove it was because of browns race. Again all the evidence shows that brown was charging Wilson. Brown was shot in the top of his arm meaning he didn't have his hands up . He also tried to grab Wilson's gun in the car. All witness testimony saying otherwise was deemed not credible by the doj as those peoples stories changed several times and weren't supported by physical evidence. 7 black witnesses support Wilson. Wilson is innocent.
Darren Wilson is innocent

Well, its a known fact that Darren Wilson was never convicted, or even tried for his reprehensible illegalities. As such, I will stipulate the crimes he committed and should have been convicted with: Murder: My opponent's rebuttal clearly states that "Michael Brown was robbing stores at age 18" (Paraphrased) which instantly suggests you believe that he had a discerning criminal record, this may very well be true. On the contrary, it hasn't been made clear that Michael Brown was armed when he was shot, and even if he was armed it is unclear as to whether or not he was surrendering both himself and his gun. Further, it is an irrefutable fact that the shootings occurred in Missouri and Missouri homicide law code clearly states: "Second Degree Murder (Killing without Premediation) . http://statelaws.findlaw.com... Even if Second Degree Murder is not an option as it is also unclear as to whether Darren Wilson inadvertently killed Brown or not. If so, then the grounds is manslaughter charges. Under Missouri law code, Manslaughter is defined as follows: "Voluntary Manslaughter (Heat (sic) of passion murder)" "Involuntary Manslaughter (Accidental Killing)" . http://statelaws.findlaw.com... The second crime that Wilson should have been charged with - Police Brutality: Like with the first stipulated illegality, there are unclear circumstances such as Brown being armed or not etc. However, it is also unclear as to whether or not Wilson applied excessive force based on Brown's race: Under Missouri law, Police Brutality can be ambiguously defined as follows: Police Brutality: "Unequal Treatment based on race, gender, national origin, sexual orientation, religious beliefs". . http://www.stlcivilrightslaw.com... Lastly, the third crime he should have faced charges with is Hate Crime: Unless if contrary evidence is available to prove that Wilson was targeting Brown solely based on race, then Hate Crime is on the cards. In accordance of Missouri law, Hate Crime is defined as follows: Hate Crime: ". .. knowingly based on race, color, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, or disability of the victim. .. " Very similar type of extract to the previous, yes, although this source also clearly states Hate Crime is a "Class D Felony" under "Statutory law" (Act of Parliament). . http://www.moga.mo.gov... The reason for the similar extract to the previous was because I was stipulating a legal clarification to provide evidence of legal circumstance. The link I posted of the incident provides no contrary evidence whatsoever to rebuke the admonishing of the "college-bound" individual Michael Brown in stipulating how "justifiable" Wilson's shooting actually was, in my defense, it isn't. . https://firstlook.org... This is my rebuttal.
Darren Wilson is innocent

Thank you. I would like you to read the article I linked in my previous post. It has all the info about the false witnesses and so on, that prove that Wilson was justified in killing brown. Your article plays with emotions and doesn't present logic and evidence. For example they call Michael brown a college bound teen--yet this man was robbing stores at 18. He didn't have much of a future. He likely would have ended up in jail or working some dead end job. He might have even harmed someone considering that he attacked a cop. Three autopsies don't on his body show that he was shot at close rangs in the palm. Along with his blood being on Wilson's car, uniform and gun and gun res on browns hands and shirt, this supports wisp one claim that brown grabbed for his gun. The next white that were fired into browns body were done so as he charged the officer. The shot that he got ok his hands from a far entered him through the top of his arm. But if his hands were up in surrender position the bottom of his arms would be out facing Wilson making this impossible. How could you have the bottoms of his hands facing Wilson and a be shot in the top of the arm? 6 black witnesses claim that brown was surendering when shot. The DOJ deemed them un-trustworthy because their stories changes several times and weren't supported by physical evidence. 7 black witnesses support Wilson's claim, that brown was charging him. These witnesses are all anonomys understandably. If their names were relased they would be in danger. Dorion Jonson who helped brown Rob a store minutes before the incident lied to police. He said that brown was shot in the back-but when three autopsies showed that all the bullets entered through the front of his body Jonson changed his story . Dorion Jonson was arrested for drug offenses recently. I believe a cop with no disciplinary charges like Wilson rather than a criminal who lies to police, robs stores and is involved in drugs. Dorion Jonson is a criminal who lied to police so he wouldn't get in trouble. Brown was charging Wilson when he died and was shot out of self defense. Please read the article! Thank you!
Darren Wilson is innocent

You're welcome. After some online research, I ascertained that Darren Wilson was never convicted so instead I will post links to sites with legal clarifications. The illegalities committed will not be stipulated in this round for that will make it a rebuttal, however, I will post links in this round. Homicide law code in Missouri: http://statelaws.findlaw.com... Police brutality law code in Missouri: http://www.stlcivilrightslaw.com... Hate crime law code in Missouri: http://www.moga.mo.gov... These will be stipulated and justified in the next round. I only placed the title above the URL links to clarify my sources. Incident of shooting: https://firstlook.org... The above URL link is my stimulus for the next round.
Darren Wilson is innocent

My argument will be in the form of an article. The washington post article is called 'hands up, don't shot' was built on a lie". It is by Jonathan Capehart. Here is the link www. washingtonpost. com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/03/16/lesson-learned-from-the shooting-of-micheal-brown This article is by Jonathan Capehart, a man who initially believed the wrong side of the story, as to what happened to Michael Brown, the day he died. What happened was a tragedy but it was done justifiably. If Darren Wilson had not shot Brown, Wilson would have likely been harmed. Excerpts from the DOJ report on the incident are included in the article . These exerpts include facts that prove Darren Wilson to be innocent.
The United States is in a permanent decline and will cease to become a major world power

The resolution states that the United States is not presently in decline and that it will cease to maintain it's position as a major world power. Let me clarify that my opponent said "decline at -present- and will continue this way for a very long time -or- a short time. " I will present the case that the contrary is true. The United States is presently declining in several ways: - We are in the middle of an economic decline that will continue to decline - The rate of poverty is increasing and people are becoming more desperate - There is a decline in freedom with new unnecessary security laws and surveillance - The U. S. is selling its infrastructure, corporations, and land to foreign interests - The U. S. now serves the wealthy, not the middle class - The quality of life is declining for the middle class - We are wasting money on an invasion and are prepared for war with N. Korea - The value of the dollar is declining and a global currency is set to replace it The United States will cease to become a major world power for several reasons: - The existence of the North American Union - The Pope of the Vatican has the power to abolish any law in the United States - Some of America's sovereignty has been lost to the United Nations - America's sovereignty will be completely lost due to Globalization - The U. S. Treasury is now the IMF which is an agency of the U. N. - Our Social Security numbers are issued by the IMF (U. N. Agency) As you can see, the U. S. is clearly in a state of continuous decline and is currently in the process of and will lose it's status as a major world power. . http://en.wikipedia.org... . http://www.foundationwebsite.org... . http://www.prisonplanet.com... . http://www.youtube.com... . http://www.youtube.com... . http://www.youtube.com... .
The United States is in a permanent decline and will cease to become a major world power

I am against the above resolution. Now I must add a very important caveat. I am aware that the United States is not going to last forever. I am not arguing that it will. All my opponent must argue is that the U.S. is in decline AT PRESENT and will continue this way for a very long time or a short time and will level off or continue into destitution etc. Basically, this argument is about whether or not the U.S. is in it's death throes. My opponent bears the burden of proof Good luck potential opponent.
Challenge World Of God Is In Dream Of Humans And Dream World Only Proof 100% Original Truth

i added new chapter 32 in original torah please read it and understand it and practically test from where you are by trying to compete with your original religion genie with my holy book truth to see whether its true or not and if you lost then be my religion servant... chapter 31 is the chapter of my original torah which proves truth to every gods in this world and you can practically test it and if you lost then i am waiting for you to be my servant. i am not christian and many genies knows everything happens by genies in the world. genies means spirits who act on understanding of anyone who lives in reality of universe. if i say i am original jewish god of universe will you believe in me ? you must believe in what i told in my holy book original torah and if my mind is not blocked and if you believe in my holy book original torah then if you are genie or spirit you will be able to show miracle by believing in my holy book original torah. that believe is always true which never becomes wrong by anyone and its those who knows they are lie and to continue living they proof they are true so stay away from them.
Challenge World Of God Is In Dream Of Humans And Dream World Only Proof 100% Original Truth

Wow, you responded. I didn't think you were going to. Ah, well. I may as well see this debate through. I am tired, so please, not too much confusing stuff. At least, in this round, you're somewhat coherent. I do not understand your lecture. I do not think the world is controlled by genies and gods. I sorta believe in God, but I do not think he has anything to do with genies. That's something you just pulled out of your hat. I wish you'd use better grammar. What are you, two years old? Why do you treat life like a pack of Yu-Gi-Oh cards? It seems to me that your insane religion is somewhat polytheistic and monotheistic at the same time. And then something about how gods grow in power the more they're believed in. Isn't that the plot of that new show? "American Gods" or something like that? Are you just ripping that off? Judges, I'll leave something about American Gods here, so you can compare his incoherent babbling to the show and see how similar they are. https://en.wikipedia.org...(TV_series) You say that, to understand your philosophy, I can research your stuff and try to understand what it's about. I can't research your stuff, actually, because nobody believes it but you, and I'm not going to understand it or believe it if I do some research on it. I don't think you know how religions work. From the way you're writing, I'd assume you don't even understand English. Maybe a toddler in some Islamic country? Seems pretty much like that. I'm glad you're willing to provide a source, but, see, the source can't be by you. It has to be by somebody ELSE. You can believe it, but I don't get it until there are a few people who believe and understand it. I do like how you put in the effort to write your own bible, though. Very creative. And very entertaining. I also like how you call it "believerism". That's a pretty funny made up word. And I like how the moon and the star just repeat over and over, down the page. You couldn't even figure out a creative design. I'm not going to tell God about you. First, I'm not a prophet, so I can't talk that well with God, and also, I don't think you even know what Christianity is, or what Islam is, or anything like that. I'm not making fun of you. I'm just being rational. I'm not gonna believe your stuff unless you prove it to me. At least give me a news article about it or something. Your holy book isn't the original Torah. The Torah is the first few books of the old testament. You wrote your weird bible a few years ago or less. The real Torah was written countless millennia ago. So your bible isn't the Torah. It doesn't even have anything to do with the Torah. You can wait to get winning from me all you want. You're not going to win unless you do better. I await your next argument.
Challenge World Of God Is In Dream Of Humans And Dream World Only Proof 100% Original Truth

You need to understand my lecture like how the current world of god is controlled by genies and gods ? how there power increases and works on others ? Didnt you understand about the world of god that if any god is true his power increases with the truth he or his genies believes in. Understand from the point of view of human, if you try to research what i said as human then you will understand what is current world of god about ? I will make your believe perfect just understand my holy book http://believerism.com... If you read then it will be easy for you to understand it and if you can tell to your god and all other gods of current world of god then they will understand who i am ? I just want you to start making fun of current world of god after understanding my holy book original torah which is my believe only. Practically test out whether my believe is true or not ? if my believe is true then i won from you. I am waiting to get winning from you. Ahmed.
Challenge World Of God Is In Dream Of Humans And Dream World Only Proof 100% Original Truth

Oh, yes, you got it right, here's another batty loon, and here to debate him, once more, is frankfurter50, a steely glint of determination in his eye, looking at the pitcher, ready to hit any curveballs that are thrown! Who will win in this daring game of wits and might? I hope I do. Here goes. Wow. that first paragraph, there, is a big, meaningless, incoherent string of text that sounds like it came from Charles Manson's jail cell. I can't combat that with common sense, I'll have to debate exactly like he does, incoherently. Everything about this is fake and you don't even know who God is much less what the bible is or what an apostle is I doubt you've even read the new testament so did you know that religion actually has very little to do with human dreams and dreams are the random firing of our nerves when we're asleep, and religion is the belief system is the belief system that we rely on to comfort ourselves so you should not connect the two things otherwise you are crazy because they really have nothing to do with each other. You are not not not funny and you should learn how to write a sentence if you want to engage in complex philosophy why do you use that word "adultry" that means cheating on somebody when you're married and you also spelled it wrong and I don't know what it has to do with God or genies or dreams can't you be a little clearer just, please, make sense, try to say something that I can understand. genies do not have anything to do with God because God is Christian and genies appear in a few Arabic legends so you should not mix the two up please in the next round talk normal and be rational, please your conspiracy theories are insane and genies do not have anything to do with what you're talking about did you just watch that Aladdin movie from Disney so you decided to make a debate about it what the heck are you talking about please tell me I want to know you're so weird and you don't know anything about the world. dream dream bla bla bla OK, I'm back to common sense mode. You're not true, you're not original, I've seen insane debates like this before. I'm not giving anything to your family, they have nothing to do with this. I'm not a genie, I'm not God, I'm not going to die or whatever. For cheesy sake, just tell me what you're talking about. OK? Until then, I think you're gonna lose.
Challenge World Of God Is In Dream Of Humans And Dream World Only Proof 100% Original Truth

Neat how you made THIRTY TWO freaking chapters in your bible. Too bad nobody will ever read or understand them. When I visited your thing, I didn't even read it, really. I just sorta skimmed it. Actually, I just briefly glanced at it, because I'm sure it's just as incoherent as your arguments here. I'm not going to be your "SERVANT" if I lose. What on Earth do you mean by that? Slavery is illegal, just so you know. You're not Christian, and that's OK, but it's not OK to be nuts. Genies aren't "spirits who act on understanding of anyone who lives in reality of universe". They're guys who live in lamps, and when you rub the lamp, they come out and grant you three wishes. That's how I hear it, anyway. If you say you are "original jewish god of universe" I'm not going to believe you. If you PROVE you're "original jewish god of universe," on the other hand, I'll go for it. I don't think you're "original jewish god of universe", for one, because the old testament doesn't say anything about genies. I also think you're not "original jewish god of universe" because it seems that an omnipotent diety would have a better grasp of English grammar and capitalize "Jewish". If anything, you're the god of being nuts. I'm not gonna believe your torah. It's not even the real torah, first off, and for another thing, I'm not a frickin' genie. I don't know what you're saying, with any of this. Your last sentence is basically just the same old anti atheistic baloney I've heard a billion times before, but much more incoherent than anyone else could do it. You really take the cake, sir. You're a walking babbler. You can't debate well until you at least learn how to talk, OK? You're going to lose unless you provide some solid evidence and a strong argument, OK? Go ahead and say something that makes sense. I'll wait.
A Progressive Tax is better than Flat Tax

I will argue that a Progressive Tax system is better than a Flat Tax one.Progressive tax (n): A tax system in which those who earn higher income pay a higher percentage of their income than those with lower incomesFlat tax (n): A tax system in which all pay the same tax rate regardless of incomeRound 1: AcceptanceRound 2: Opening argumentsRound 3: RebuttalsRound 4: Final rebuttals and final statements