BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
There is no evidence to believe that Jesus Christ ever existed - Debate 2

V2Starting another debate with a better opponent than the first.PreambleThere is no reason to believe that the Jesus Christ of the Bible, virgin-born, miracle-worker, itinerant preacher and political & religious agitator, killed and resurrected and became a deity every existed. Evidence 1: No Historical RecordThe strongest evidence is that there is no actual indepedent corroborating evidence that such a man ever existed nor of his miraculous deeds. For a man of such great acts, some affecting thousands (e.g. the feeding of the 5,000, the rising of the dead) it is surprising that no record would remain of such deeds - none first-hand and certainly none second hand, especially considering there are many detailed records that exist of that time.For the purposes of this debate, references to a 'historical Jesus' are invalid. Firstly, because we are discusing the existence of the religious figure and secondly because the term makes no sense.Evidence 2: Jesus Christ is a religious inventionThe only actual references we have are those found in the Bible, in particular the four Gospels. This Jesus Christ is a deity that performed miracles on this planet, a sort of avatar of the actual God - wholly God but also wholly human in that he was limited in his powers. His mission was to not only resolve the Jewish religion as a returning Messiah but also as a message to the rest of humanity that should they follow his Path, they too would have access to the Jewish deity on their death.All this is, of course religious invention, with no bearing or evidence other than what a group of people, who call themselves Christians, choose to accept on faith is true. The Bible is replete with references to Jesus being a deity and having great powers - supernatural claims common for their time and largely unseen since: without evidence these events happened, one must conclude these are wholly religious inventions to impress believers.Evidence 3: Jesus Christ only exists for Christians Being a religious invention then, jesus Christ has to compete in the market-place of religious ideas and here his existence (and all the contingent claims that make Jesus, the Christ) is also disputed.Beginning with Judaism, the original religious Jesus is the Messiah of, it's progenitor, there is enormous dispute as to whether he truly was that Messiah. Therefore, by definition Jesus Christ - the Messiash - does not exist according to Judaism. He was a fraud.Then we have the cousin religion, Islam, who only accepts Jesus as a prophet and not the deity that claimed by Christians.Within Christianity, the thousands of different denominations and cults should put at rest that there is any single definitive way to even worship - thus proving that religious claims are not even internally self-supporting and therefore unreliable historical documents to begin with.ConclusionWith no historical record, where there should have been, it is impossible to conclude that Jesus Christ existed other than in the minds of Christians.
MIG'S TOURNY: Contradiction Debate

== Contradictions ==1) Obama and OsamaThere was only a 50% chance that Osama was in the compound. [1] And many other politicians, like Mitt Romney, would of searched more primarily in Afghanistan. The ultimate point is that both Osama and Obama ordered an operation, both good and evil, to take place. Both should get credit or fault in what they did — order an operation. Pro says Osama should, but Obama shouldn't. Even though they did the same kind of thing (morality was different though — they both basically ordered an operation). Contradiction on Pro.2) Pro-LifeSo Pro-life is an example of political framing designed to help that side. Nobody is legitimately pro-abortion. As I said earlier, just because you are partially supportive of something (life) and opposed in helping life elsewhere, it is not really pro-life. You have to support the saving of 45,000 human lives to call yourself pro-life, or else I have to call you pro-fetus, as it is more accurate.I'll let the voters have the verdict on this point, but this point isn't the one we need that much.3) Work For a LivingPro basically distracts us from the real question. Helping your parent occasionally is not "working for a living." Inheritance taxes make the heirs less likely to leech off the work their parents (other people) did. Pro basically let this point slide. In R2:"4) Should people have to work to earn their money, not rely on others who work hard?Yes"But Pro thinks it is okay if many wealthy kids do not have to work to earn their money and rely on others (their parents) who work hard.But Pro also thinks that other people must earn their money, not rely on others who work hard. Pro is fine with people (mostly rich people) inheriting money, which is the exact contradicition of the question.Contradiction here.4) TaxesRule 2# of the official rules says that we "may have an explanation" when a yes/no answer is inadequate. Pro could've taken the liberty to say "I agree with Romney that we should cut taxes -- for the middle class."But Pro didn't say that. Romney wants to cut taxes, primarily for the wealthy (they gain the most). Pro said we shouldn't cut taxes for them. Possibly a contradiction on this point.#Rule violationMy bad on that part. We both made minor errors, I don't think we should take the text that literally.*Side note:I forgot to add a contradiction on this debate. It was on jobs and Obama, and small gov't, and forgot to add it, I apologize for missing a potentially laughable contradiction.[1] http://www.cnn.com...
MIG'S TOURNY: Contradiction Debate

==Contradictions==Obama and OsamaThere is a crucial difference between fault and credit. Both of them are at fault for their actions, but Osama did something that normal people wouldn't do, as he is a terrorist. On the other hand, many smart politicians would have attemped something similar to Obama. Osama did something many people wouldn't do. Obama did something many people would do. Osama gets credit; Obama doesn't.Pro-life Well, my opponent is continuing to try and twist the definition of "pro-life".Merriam Webster states that pro-life is "opposed to abortion [1]"The Free Dictionary defines pro-life as "Advocating the legal protection of human embyos and fetuses, especially by favoring the outlawing of abortion on the ground that it is the taking of a human life. [2]"No where in any definition does it state that I have to absolutely value human life over anything else. Being "pro-life" doesn't mean I only have that as my only standard in life. On the other hand, people have many things that they value, and as for me I might value certain things over my "pro-life" stance. This is another flaw in my opponent's question and analysis.Once again, the death penalty saves lives through deterrance and punishes inhumane criminals.The War in Iraq help to improve human rights there, ultimately giving more value and meaning to some lives.Being "pro-life" doesn't contradict my stance that stem cell research is immoral.Rights should be valued over life, and universal health care forces people to buy certain things. This is an abuse of power. Work for a livingNot all people get their inheritance free, as they still have to take care of their aging parents. Furthermore, inheritance taxes isn't exactly that well of a method to seperate heirs from their money.DictatorsMy opponent is somewhat correct - I disagree with Obama's action. However, I'm completely fine with his target, a Libyan dictator.TaxesWhen I stated that taxes are fine right now, I was referring to the rich. There is no need to give the rich even more tax cuts. On the other hands, some taxes should be cut.#Rule ViolationI'm sorry, I read your question as "Do you support either Obama or Romney?" Anyways, it's pretty obvious that I would rather have Romney in office than Obama. This seems like a rule violation on your part, primarly rule 1:"1) In Rounds 1-3, CON will ask PRO 10 Yes/No questions."Your question: "Do you support Obama or Romney?" is not a yes/no question. Sources:[1] http://www.merriam-webster.com...[2] http://www.thefreedictionary.com...
MIG'S TOURNY: Contradiction Debate

Contradictions1) Obama and OsamaI asked "should Obama get credit for getting Osama bin Laden." Pro said no. I also asked "[was] Osama bin Laden responsible for 9/11?" Pro said yes.Basically, even though both of them (Obama and Osama) just ordered an operation, the same kind of procedural motion, Pro says that Osama should get credit, but Obama should not, even though ultimately they both just gave an executive order to carry out an operation. It is a contradiction then if one guy who ordered out an operation should get credit, but another guy who ordered an operation to go forward shouldn't get credit. Contradiction.2) Pro-Life confusionPro has said that he is "pro-life". However he also said he was in support of "the death penalty", the "war in Iraq", "opposed to stem cell research", and "against stem cell research". However, "pro" means in favor. Life means, well, human being life. You CANNOT be "pro life" and favor killing people through state power (death penalty). To compare it, it's like if I say I am pro-small government, because I support less gov't in the economy, even though I am supportive of a big brother, large gov't in social lives. You just can't honestly say that."We should invade a country and end up killing thousands of people!""The state should execute criminals in some cases!""Stem cell research is immoral and wrong!""Universal health care, which would save 45,000 lives annually [1], is WRONG!"-----I am pro-life. What?I will let the voters decide if this is a contradiction or not. If I say I am pro-veteran, then privatize and decrease their benefits, I am not pro-veteran. 3) Work for a LivingMy question: "Do you support the inheritance/ estate taxes?" Pro says "no." I ask if he supports the notion that "should people have to work to earn their money, not rely on others?" Pro says "yes." If a person on welfare doesn't earn their money and just uses the handouts, Pro thinks they should have to earn their money and not rely on others. If a lazy heir just uses their parent's money, Pro thinks that she should. So, some people can rely on others (their parents) but others cannot? Contradiction.4) Dictators Pro thinks that we were right to "invade Iraq and overthrow Hussein." However, Pro disagrees with Obama's action to help rebels overthrow a Libyan dictator. They were both tyrannical dictators who oppressed their people. This is a contradiction.5) TaxesPro says in R2 that "we shouldn't cut taxes for the rich" because "taxes are fine right now." However in R4 Pro says that he "agrees with Mitt Romney that we should cut taxes". A contradiction.#Rule ViolationIn R4 Pro did not answer my question 9 properly. I asked "do you support Obama or Romney?" Pro responded with "yes". I don't really understand, but I assume he supports Romney.[1] http://www.reuters.com...
MIG'S TOURNY: Contradiction Debate

==Contradictions==ProlifeCon has apparently misunderstood me when I stated that I was pro-life. The stance "pro-life" refers to my disaproval of abortion [1]. It can also refer to an opposition towards stem-cell research and euthanasia [1]. Hence, I am not contradicting myself when I say I am pro-life and against stem cell research.Obama vs OsamaIn this contradiction, my opponent is literally putting words into my mouth. I never stated that "Obama shouldn't get credit for the death of Osama, because he only carried out orders." Instead, I think that Obama doesn't deserve credit since his opponent (Mitt Romney and many others) would have done the same. Pro-life and protecting lifeOnce again, pro-life means that I'm against abortion and I believe a fetus has the right to life. Forcing people to buy health care is something different. Pro-Life and the Death PenaltyUltimately, the death penalty saves more lives than it kills through deterence. Killing someone can be justified if it saves more lives. This is also another misuse of the term "pro-life".WarThe War on Terror is to protect Americans, or in other words to save lives. My opponent once again abuses the term "pro-life."==Questions==1) Do you want a stronger economy (more jobs, GDP, etc.)?Yes, I want the strongest possible economy.2) Do you think the U.S. was right to invade Iraq to overthrow Hussein?Yes3) Do you support the estate/ inheritance tax(es)?No4) Should gov't interfere with people's personal private lives?This question is rather vague. Yes to more social issues, no towards more economic issues. 5) Should people have freedom to worship and freedom of religion?Yes6) Do you think it is okay that Muslims are creating Mosques in America?Yes7) Do you think we should continue Pell Grants and college opportunity programs?No8) Do you agree with Romney's position that we should cut taxes to stimulate the economy?Yes9) Do you support Obama or Romney?Yes10) Do you identify with the anti abortion activists who use force or even violence to stop abortion clinics from operating?If you mean "To associate or affiliate (oneself) closely with a person or group[2]", then no.Sources:[1] http://en.wikipedia.org... [2] http://www.thefreedictionary.com...
MIG'S TOURNY: Contradiction Debate

I ask my opponent to wait until Tuesday to post their argument, or Monday, as I will not be back to present an argument until Tuesday.-----Contradictions So Far-----1) Pro-Life Contradiction Pro says that he is "pro-life." But Pro also says that he "opposes stem cell research." Which, would've if developed more vigourously, saved many thousands or even more lives. A contradiction.2) Obama vs Osama Responsibility Pro agrees that "Osama bin Laden was responsible for 9/11". However, he thinks that "Obama shouldn't get any credit for the death of Osama bin Laden", because all he did was order to carry out the attacks, which is exactly what Osama bin Laden did. A contradiction.3) Pro-Life and Protecting LifePro says he is "pro-life", but at a different point says he is opposed to the formation of "universal health care." Providing pregnant women with medical care and proper nutrition, which would reduce infant mortality is thus pro-life, and Pro being against it is a contradiction of his "pro life" stance. 4) Pro-Life and Death PenaltyPro says he is "pro-life" but also says that he is "supportive of the death penalty." Killing someone is absolutely against being not "pro-life", an outright contradiction.5) WarOnce again, Pro says he is "pro-life", but says that he "supports the War on Terror, including actions such as the War in Iraq". The War in Iraq has killed countless children, thus not being pro-life. A contradiction of being "pro-life".Questions1) Do you want a stronger economy (more jobs, GDP, etc.)?2) Do you think the U.S. was right to invade Iraq to overthrow Hussein?3) Do you support the estate/ inheritance tax(es)?4) Should gov't interfere with people's personal private lives?5) Should people have freedom to worship and freedom of religion?6) Do you think it is okay that Muslims are creating Mosques in America?7) Do you think we should continue Pell Grants and college opportunity programs?8) Do you agree with Romney's position that we should cut taxes to stimulate the economy?9) Do you support Obama or Romney?10) Do you identify with the anti abortion activists who use force or even violence to stop abortion clinics from operating?
MIG'S TOURNY: Contradiction Debate

1) Do you acknowledge the fact that Obama inherited the worst economy since the Great Depression when he entered office? [1]Yes2) Do you support freedom and small government when it comes to social issues?No3) Should Obama get credit for getting Osama bin Laden?No4) Should people have to work to earn their money, not rely on others who work hard?Yes5) Did you agree with Obama's main actions with dealing with Libya (providing support to rebels to take down the tyrannical dictator).No6) Do you consider yourself to be pro-life, meaning you support life and oppose any measures to reduce it (euthanasia, etc).Yes7) We must protect fetuses and go to great lengths to do so. Do you agree? (no tricks here)Yes8) Killing is wrong. Do you agree or disagree?Yes/No. It depends on who's doing the killing and what for.9) Do you support stem cell research?No10) Should we have a strong wall separating church and state?No
MIG'S TOURNY: Contradiction Debate

I ask that my opponent waits until Friday to post her/his argument, because I won't be back until Saturday to respond. Thanks in advance.-----Further Questions------ 1) Do you acknowledge the fact that Obama inherited the worst economy since the Great Depression when he entered office? [1]2) Do you support freedom and small government when it comes to social issues?3) Should Obama get credit for getting Osama bin Laden?4) Should people have to work to earn their money, not rely on others who work hard?5) Did you agree with Obama's main actions with dealing with Libya (providing support to rebels to take down the tyrannical dictator).6) Do you consider yourself to be pro-life, meaning you support life and oppose any measures to reduce it (euthanasia, etc).7) We must protect fetuses and go to great lengths to do so. Do you agree? (no tricks here)8) Killing is wrong. Do you agree or disagree?9) Do you support stem cell research?10) Should we have a strong wall separating church and state? [1] http://money.cnn.com...
MIG'S TOURNY: Contradiction Debate

1) Do you support President Obama on the jobs situation? If not, why not?No, since it doesn't seem like he's been doing a good job.2) Do you support the death penalty, because it justifiably executes those who are severe criminals? (at least most of the time!)Yes3) Should we have universal health care?No4) Osama bin Laden was responsible for 9/11. True or False (if false, say who was responsible). Yes (True)5) Do you support small government?Yes (In the economy)6) Should unions be able to influence elections?Yes7) Do you support the Patriot Act?Yes8) Do you want more tax cuts for the wealthy?No, taxes are fine right now.9) Do you think that liberals should stop shredding our Constitution and honor the framework of our country?No10) Do you support the War on Terror, which includes actions such as the Iraqi "War", "War" in Afghanistan, and the "Patriot" Act? (quotation marks voluntarily added)Yes
MIG'S TOURNY: Contradiction Debate

I accept, and now present my questions:1) Do you support President Obama on the jobs situation? If not, why not?2) Do you support the death penalty, because it justifiably executes those who are severe criminals? (at least most of the time!)3) Should we have universal health care?4) Osama bin Laden was responsible for 9/11. True or False (if false, say who was responsible). 5) Do you support small government?6) Should unions be able to influence elections?7) Do you support the Patriot Act?8) Do you want more tax cuts for the wealthy?9) Do you think that liberals should stop shredding our Constitution and honor the framework of our country?10) Do you support the War on Terror, which includes actions such as the Iraqi "War", "War" in Afghanistan, and the "Patriot" Act? (quotation marks voluntarily added)I anxiously await your responses!
MIG'S TOURNY: Contradiction Debate

This is for round 4 of Man-is-good's tournament. The rules:1) In Rounds 1-3, CON will ask PRO 10 Yes/No questions.2) In Rounds 2-4, PRO will answer all of CON's questions with Yes, No, or an explanation as to why neither answer would be completely correct.3) In Rounds 2-4, CON can point out any contradictions that he or she believes to be present in PRO's answers, citing all questions and answers involved in the contradiction. No new contradictions may be pointed out in Round 5.4) When CON points out a contradiction, PRO may use all of the following rounds to defend the accused contradiction until either CON drops the accusation or PRO admits defeat, or when the debate is over.5) If PRO is never found to have contradicted himself in this debate, PRO wins.6) If PRO is ever found to have contradicted himself in this debate, PRO loses.7) It is still important that debaters back up their arguments with sources when appropriate.8) A contradiction may only be pointed out if both parts of the contradiction are brought up in this debate.9) For any questions involved in a contradiction, the first definition of the word from the online Merriam Webster dictionary will be taken.10) If PRO ever fails to abide by any rule, PRO automatically loses.11) If CON ever fails to abide by any rule, CON automatically loses.A contradiction is basically when a person says one thing then later states his position later in a varying way (basically what we think Contradiction is).
What game is better, Mkwii, (Yes) or mario kart 8 (No)

I think that mkwii is better. Mario kart wii has one of the most expansive communities, and as such tons of custom content. Mario Kart 8's Dlc pails in comparison to the Mario kart Wii community. over 200 actually good, custom tracks are playable, bringing that measly 32 tracks to way over 200, and it doesn't stop there. Every retro track from every Mario kart game has been ported to Mario Kart Wii, and even a few newer tracks from Mario Kart 7 and 8. Countdown mode was introduced, leading to a whole new way to play. More information can be found by googling ctgp revolution, honestly check it out, it is the most fun you will ever have in any Mario kart game now and ever. And the community is very much active, 12 player servers are more frequent than Mario kart 8's, and the custom servers are on par with Nintendo's. Furthermore, Mario Kart 8's track design are gimmicky, and even worse, they take away from higher level play. Mario kart Wii has crazy shortcuts that can take years to truly perfect, whereas the anti-gravity section is a gimmick that takes away from shortcut opportunities, new shortcuts are found in Mario kart Wii, whereas simple grass cuts are easily discovered. Mario kart Wii has more room to grow, a way higher skill cap, something that Mario kart 8 unintentionally tried to aid with fire-hopping, but still falls short. The best kind of replayability is progression, and even after tens or even hundreds of hours, you are not as good as you could be, something you can not claim for Mario Kart 8. Oh, and if anyone says custom content for Mario kart Wii is "hard to setup" grow up, really you can't copy files to an SD card? I find that hard to believe, quit being pathetic.A279;
Gay Marriage should be illegal

Gays should be allowed to marry partners of their choice just as heterosexual couples do. It is ignorant in today's world to deny such a basic right to an individual because of something that is innate. Yes, sexuality is not a choice, it is innate. Civil union is not a reasonable compromise for a legal marriage. Most civil unions don't have the same rights as a legal marriage has. Even if we made all civil unions exactly equal to legal marriage but called it something else, it wouldn't be enough. The concept of "separate but equal" has already failed. Segregation is not a solution when it comes to rights. History has proven this. Secondly, where is the benefit of oppressing gays from marrying? Religion isn't an answer. Religion is the excuse. In the case of Christianity, the bible states to do unto others what you would like done onto you. How would a heterosexual couple like it if it were them in the position of such oppression?
Implementing Universal Health Care is a Bad Idea

I didn't say we would need a perfect world, and that every single government in the world would have to put their differences aside, and do the right thing, this could be done without every single government in the world, also, funding could come from other places, charities collect millions each year, what is to say this couldn't, sure it may not work in EVERY SINGLE COUNTRY, but it could be done on a scale large enough, that it would be accessible by anyone determined enough to get free health care.