BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Abortion Should Be Illegal In the United States

You said: "Let us say that a fetus is in fact a living breathing person, and acting on abortion is committing murder. Now we have an entirely different issue. What happens in a situation where the mother could die from the pregnancy? If abortion is banned, the most obvious answer is that she will die." First of all, fetuses don't breathe air. Secondly, is it right to kill one innocent person to save another innocent person from the risk of death? That would be absurd; to kill any innocent person for any reason, is by definition, murder, punishable by law. Thirdly, pregnancy very rarely causes the risk of death. The death of the mother does not guarantee the death of the baby either. Premature babies can survive outside of the mother with medical attention, and it would be wrong not to try to save them both. So, in this case, if the mother wants to kill the baby, shouldn't we kill her instead? All efforts should be toward saving every innocent person. Just because there's risk of death, to give up on any innocent person is not granted. I've seen it argued that a baby which causes discomfort/risk for the mother is not innocent. I believe that this idea would best be challenged with an analogy. Suppose that there was a village near a mine field, in which one of the houses was so close, that the mines could damage it and it's occupants. If you were walking through that minefield, unknowing of it's existence, would an occupant of the hut, or a passerby on the street have the right to shoot you to protect the occupants? Innocence is defined as being without crime or offense. My arguments already covered the arguments you mentioned about rape. Most of those "rape" incidents, probably couldn't be proven. I know of no way to prove rape; even the presence of sperm wouldn't prove it. You'd have to go on accumulations of weak evidence. Rapists having visitation rights is not a problem of abortion. If this is harmful or unwanted, make it illegal for rapists to have visitation rights. A beating heart is first detectable at 22 days. (1) So how does the lack of development in a baby make it moral to kill the baby? You haven't even touched on the subject yet. You haven't yet responded, so I would like to request a response directly. Do you accept the common pro-choice definitions that "human" is the species, and "person" is a human with full legal rights? It is important that we can agree on definitions for this; if you refuse to accept mine, propose yours, and I will accept them. You made surprisingly fewer arguments than premises. I saw many premises which were irrelevant to the few conclusions. 1: http://www.amazingpregnancy.com...
Abortion Should Be Illegal In the United States

Resolution : Abortion should be illegal or banned within the United States. This is from a poll, and we agreed to the stipulations prior to this. My adversary is taking on the BOP as he is pro and supports this topic. R1/Me : Rules R2/adversary : He shall start his round promptly and give reasons as to why abortion should be banned or not legal in the United States R2/Me : I shall present my case as well. R2/Adversary : He shall offer rebuttals to my case, as well as reforming his contentions R3/Me : I shall offer rebuttals and reform my contentions R3/Adversary : He shall finalize his points and offer contentions once more. This is also his closing statements R4/Me : I shall offer contentions, crystallize my points, and offer closing statements. R4/Adversary : He shall simply type, no round as agreed upon.
Jesus is the Father incarnate

Is this mathematical equation right or wrong? 1x + 1x + 1x = 3x One Almighty (God the Father) + One Almighty (God the Son) + One Almighty (God the Holy Ghost) = 3 Almighties ( Trinitarians opposes) One God (God the Father) + One God (God the Son) + One God (God the Holy Ghost) = 3 Gods ( Trinitarians opposes) Can an eternal God die? If not, how did the eternal Son die? If yes, how can an eternal God die? If the humanity of God the Son died, does His divinity die as well? If not, where was (or what happened to) His divinity while He was dead? If yes, how can divinity die?
Why humans suck.

Well, I guess I'll continue my argument. Humans also do not suck as they are capable of creating useful new objects. For example, humans have created things such as the wheel, the telephone,the internal combustion engine, and the Internet. These are four inventions that only humans have created, and there are many more where those came from. Whilst it is true other animals have created their own inventions, some of which are very similar to human inventions, humans have advanced further (technology-wise) than all known creatures. As the biggest argument for humans "sucking" is their power of destruction, the fact that they can create as well rebuts that claim rather well (not to toot my own horn or anything...). Source: http://www.livescience.com...
Why humans suck.

Alright then... po"lit"i"cal cor"rect"ness noun the avoidance, often considered as taken to extremes, of forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against How would I prove my argument without political correctness? I am, after all, trying to prove that all humans don't "suck." By being politically incorrect, can't it be assumed that I "suck" as well? Therefore, a politically correct answer is preferred for this type of argument. Furthermore, an argument with any kind of support is better than an argument with no support.
Why humans suck.

nice nīs/Submit adjective 1.pleasant; agreeable; satisfactory. 2.fine or subtle. Your argument appears to be that all humans suck, and this just isn't true. There are thousands of people throughout history who have done incredible things to help the earth, animals, and other people. Martin Luther King Jr.- MLK went out of his way to peacefully encourage civil rights, and eventually gave his life for this cause. As well as this, MLK was just the leader, and the people who helped him in his peaceful protests can also be considered great people. Animal Rescue Corps- Watch this group save 136 animals from a puppy mill, and you can see how much they care. These people don't "suck" either: Joan Baez- Joan Baez is not only a singer, but also an environmental activist, children's activist, civil rights Activist, women's rights activist, and an anti-war activist. http://www.biography.com... I'm running out of space, I'll continu
Earth's orbit around the Sun

I accept. The first question is, how much does the Earth weigh? The Earth weighs about 13,170,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 pounds (or 5,974,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 kilograms). The second question is, how much do satellites weigh? Satellites usually only weigh about 6 tons (12,000 pounds or 5,443.11 kilograms). My opponent makes the assertion that the Earth's weight will decrease as we launch satellites. While that may be true, it will not cause earth to fall into the sun. The planets (including earth) have an elliptical orbit. This means that the potential energy of the planets is larger than the kinetic energy at earth's aphelion, while the opposite is true for the perihelion. While the balance between earth's kinetic and potential energy is always changing, the total energy will ALWAYS be constant. For the planet to fall into the sun, we would need to take away all its potential and kinetic energy. Conclusion and Summary: While Con may be true in saying that satellites will reduce Earth's weight, it will not affect the orbit as the orbit has to do with the total amount of energy in the planet's orbit. I wish Con luck in Round 2! SOURCES: http://coolcosmos.ipac.caltech.edu...- http://transition.fcc.gov... https://answers.yahoo.com...
Colin Kaepernick Should Definitely Be Considered An American Hero

NO, The media is dishonest, And THEY KNOW that when people go and look up actual statistics that they will lose their base. They are NPC"S they brainwash people and veterans to taking their LEFTIST approach and un-American approach on subjects. CNN donated to Hillary's campaign. Just because you hear about mass shootings. They are less than 0. 50% of all crime. Then they do on a gun control crusade. Yes, 13% of blacks make up U. S population and HALF of violent crime thanks to the Democrats. One veteran stood for KRAPernick after he kneeled. He was brainwashed and it's a myth. Stand for the flag. I know so many veterans who ALL hate CRAPernick. Kneeling against people dying for CRAPERnick and this is how he responds. ON 9/11 AND VETERANS DAY! Why are you bringing in Trump to this. And your right. I won't go the army and neither would you and that's why I RESPECT my veterans who DIE for my freedom. Are you aware that Fidel Castro HATED freedom, Put gays and gypsies in concentration camps, Jailed journalists and let NO ONE enter the U. S First thank you for your service. Second, Veterans do see it has a problem. CRAPernick is kneeling and protesting America. When he could not get the opportunities he got ANYWHERE else. He is kneeling because of a myth. And plus it was mostly WHITE people who got OBAMA elected. It was white people who stopped slavery. It was white people who made America, Invented steam engine, Lightbulb, And so much more. Im not pointing my finger at ANYONE. CRAPernick is mad at a myth which I debunked. Stand for the flag.
Colin Kaepernick Should Definitely Be Considered An American Hero

You said that "real gun crime stats not what you see in the news. " Dude, The news syndicates get their stats from government sites. Did you not know that? This is why the stats have No credibility in the first place, Which goes back your 13% of blacks commit the most crime. . . Looks like you shot yourself in the foot. You said that the Iraq war stabilized the region. . . I don't even have to respond to nonsense like that. You keep saying that Kaepernick disrespected the country by taking a knee when it was a US veteran who told him to take a knee. . . You're acting like you're so "patriotic, " but I'm 100 percent sure you won't head down to your local recruiter's office and enlist in the military will you? Cuba & Venezuela? Do you know what sanctions are? Are you aware of what sanctions will do to a country? Obviously you don't. Rewind back to the Haitian Revolution. Haitian slaves/natives beat three European armies. So, What did the US do? This country barred other countries from trading with Haiti, Which caused an economic collapse. Any country that wanted to trade with Haiti, The US wouldn't do business with them just because those people won their freedom. . . Now, You see how foolish you actually sound when speaking about Castro. . . Didn't Trump dodge the military draft multiple times? Hmmm. . . Is that patriotic? Now, I'll get back to the topic since you've been deflecting it. The majority of veterans didn't see it as a problem so that destroys your (my father was a veteran) nonsense. You said that "I couldn't grasp what veterans have sacrificed? " Actually I can since I've served nine years in the USAF. Let's be real for a moment. You whites just don't like when someone displays your dirty laundry. This is why I prefer to debate people of other races because you people have pathological issues. Do you know how stupid & twisted it is for whites to point the finger at everyone else when it's white people who have done the most dirt on planet earth. That's a guaranteed fact because your history perfectly proves it. . . Peace!
Colin Kaepernick Should Definitely Be Considered An American Hero

Your comment of "cops shooting blacks was out-shadowed by the fact that whites are shot more despite blacks making a more violent crime" is 100 percent illogical. As I stated before, It's impossible for 14 percent of a population to commit more crime than 60 percent of a population. The last time I checked, Whites are shooting up schools, Shooting up bars/clubs, Shooting up the job site after getting fired, Purposely killing women who aren't interested in them, Committing more spousal abuse than any other males & etc. You said that "Castro was a communist. " Now, Think about all of America's dictating presidents who have sent our soldiers to war over absolutely nothing. Castro's a communist? Maybe so, But many American presidents have bought, Owned & sold slaves for personal gain. . . Didn't they? Wasn't it G. Bush who stated in a press conference that Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction? So. . . After the investigation & after the war. . . How come there weren't any WMDs ever found? In the mean time. . . Thousands of American soldiers died over a lie. You say that "kneeling is disrespectful, " but are you aware that it was retired US veterans who told Kaepernick to kneel? Yes, So your disrespectful comment doesn't hold an weight what-so-ever. Let's be clear, He's making millions from possessing talent, And he's protesting police brutality. If police brutality was happening to you & your people, Then I'm sure you'd be singing a new tune. No, Cops aren't protecting them when they're protesting. Cops are there to keep things from getting out of hand. I don't even have to get into how crooked law enforcement is because reality & history speaks volumes. . . Are you going to bring anything factual and logical to this one-sided debate because you're wasting my time.
Colin Kaepernick Should Definitely Be Considered An American Hero

"I stated earlier to provide logical dialogue, Not idiotic nonsense. " }I did provide logical dialogue. I stated that cops shooting up innocent blacks was out-shadowed by the fact that whites are shot more despite blacks making a more violent crime. Fidel Castro was a communist who lead Cuba like a dictatorship and did not allow anyone to enter the U. S for a very long time. He leads to a major crisis that almost started WWIII. I am currently in a time crunch so I will elaborate more in round 3. "How is kneeling disrespectful? " }Kneeling is disrespectful when you are in front of many military veterans, On 9/11, Veterans day, And against the flag and people who again DIE so Kaepernick can do this. Did you even read my first argument? " Why are you mentioning Kaepernick's money? " }Im mentioning his money because he is making millions of dollars off an AMERICAN thing, The exact thing he's protesting. Police Brutality and BLM are both ridiculous. BLM shouts thongs like "What do we want. Dead Cops" When cops are literally protecting them as they protest. Police Brutality includes ALL races and we should be tackling this not a race problem as shown by the example above. I'm going to make this point again: Blacks make up 13% of the population, HALF of all violent crime, And 24% of police shootings. These numbers just don't add up. You want to talk about unarmed stats: Blacks and Whites are shot at the SAME rate unarmed. The Media and Kolin CRAPernick is lying to you and making it in a very disrespectful way to all veterans. The Media talks about all the time but when CRAPernick does it, Everybody gets mad, Because it's DISRESPECTFUL. Police Brutality is an issue, But NOT A RACE ISSUE.
Colin Kaepernick Should Definitely Be Considered An American Hero

I stated earlier to provide logical dialogue, Not idiotic nonsense. . . What's so bad about F. Castrol? How is kneeling disrespectful? Why are you mentioning Kaepernick's money? When did he disrespect people who died? As you can see, You're not making any sense. You absolutely have no argument because there is documented recordings, Aka video footage, Of race warriors killing people who were (unarmed) and who were following orders. What you're saying is that a cop's word holds more weight than actual video footage that shows blatant murder. If cops shoot more whites, Then why don't they ever pull the trigger when whites commit crime? So, You're one of those guys who actually think that 14 percent of the population is committing more crime than 60 percent of the population? Yeah. . . Sure, Especially when white people make the crime headlines of every newspaper and news channel in the US. So. . . People getting killed is a myth? That's like saying the opioid revolution is a bad thing.
Colin Kaepernick Should Definitely Be Considered An American Hero

Colin Kaepernick praised Fidel Castro. "was respectful the entire time No, Colin Krapernick gets paid millions of dollars and complains about a myth. There are about a million other ways to get your point across instead of being disrespectful for people who DIE just so he can do that very disrespectful act. "content with race warriors going around killing innocent people? " Cops shoot up more whites despite African Americans committing more violent crime due to Democrats taking over and ruining their communities.
Colin Kaepernick Should Definitely Be Considered An American Hero

Colin Kaepernick honestly did an admirable thing by supporting a great cause because he hasn't offended anyone, And hasn't physically hurt anyone. The backlash against this man is utter ridiculous. I think that he deserves his very own holiday because he protested peacefully, Believed in fair treatment for everyone and was respectful the entire time. How can anyone be mad at him for kneeling, But are content with race warriors going around killing innocent people? Exactly. . . It makes no sense. I don't think that anyone can come up with a logical rebuttal on this topic without looking ignorant in the process.
Resolved: Congress should renew the Federal Assault Weapons Ban

I wanted to debate the current Public Forum resolution because I'm new to PF and need to gather ideas for writing my cases, and would absolutely love for someone to debate me on this topic while also helping me understand the topic better overall. I have two debates currently running on this resolution. One of which I am Pro, and one where I am Con. If I ever accidentally claim myself to be Pro in a Con round, or vice-versa, I apologize in advance. Rules: CON will begin this debate when he/she accepts it, I will argue second. In round 5 CON will only post: ". .. " because it would make for an unfair debate if he/she were able to argue one more time than I do. Trolling will result in an immediate loss for the troll.
A government should value the civil rights of its citizens over the welfare of the community.

I negate the claim that individual rights supersede community welfare, on the grounds that for a functional society, both the individual and community deserve to be respected. That is the first sentence of my opponent's argument. I have been ambushed. He is arguing that his own debate topic is inferior to his own other debate topic. He is an experienced debater and should know better. In debating, once you define a position, you are not allowed to change it. He must not be permitted to bait and switch. If he can then I can. This is a terrible topic anyway. How in the world can I argue the position that it is not the case that "for a functional society, both the individual and community deserve to be respected?" That position is indefensible. My opponent has replaced a very good debate topic with a very bad one. There are a number of problems adapting debating tournament rules to online debating. No results found for "distance technology in debating class". My opponent has spent the entire round attacking his own debate topic. It was a good debate topic to begin with. I have better things to do than debate an opponent who keeps attacking himself. He is debating what he said he is debating and he is not going to change it.
A government should value the civil rights of its citizens over the welfare of the community.

The rules: 1. Each debate involves two debaters, one of whom argues the affirmative side, the other the negative. The affirmative speaker must present a position agreeing with the resolution. The negative debater must disagree with the resolution's statement. (1) In circumstances where a resolution presents two alternatives, (e.g., "the sanctity of life should be valued above the quality of life') a negative side most commonly should argue the alternative to which the affirmative side has given second priority (i.e., 'the quality of life should be should be valued above the sanctity of life'). (2) A negative may choose a third option and argue both alternatives provided by the resolution. (3) A negative debater can also argue a "critique" against a resolution in its entirety. Unless of course he is the one who proposed it. Because productive conflict, or 'clash,' is key to a Lincoln-Douglas debate, each debater should be able to make a positive case for their position and values, as opposed to a purely negative attack on those of their opponent. 2. Lincoln-Douglas is a fundamentally value-oriented (as opposed to policy-focused) debate. Judges must remember that debaters are not required to propose 'plans' for dealing with given situations. The role of debaters is to argue a moral position, and to use logic and ethical reasoning to do so. My opponent would have you believe that "My burden is not to prove that community welfare is preferable." It certainly is and we are not proceeding until this is straightened out. If my opponent got his "big box full of awards" with sleazy tactics like this he should return them. Also he claims that "he never supports the claim that civil rights are more important than societal welfare," although that is exactly what I did, and that "that the one must necessarily be balanced with the other, to prevent a shift towards anarchic individualism or authoritarian collectivism." We are not debating whether "one must necessarily be balanced with the other, to prevent a shift towards anarchic individualism or authoritarian collectivism." This may or may not be true and I am not going to address that subject because that is not what we are debating. We are debating, to remind my opponent, whether A government should value the civil rights of its citizens over the welfare of the community. My opponent is debating the con to that and that is what he is debating and that is what he is going to debate and nothing else and I am not wasting any more time stating this or supporting it or debating it. If my opponent believes otherwise then we do not have a debate. If we do then my opponent is of course free to start another debate or even challenge me to one but I have wasted enough time on this one.
A government should value the civil rights of its citizens over the welfare of the community.

Let me start this out by saying that the PRO has essentially dropped everything which I posted last, and he has resorted to attacking my method of debating this topic. Let me also clear up a misconception; my opponent is claiming that I pulled a bait-and-switch, when I clearly have not. My burden is not to prove that community welfare is preferable, but to prove that civil rights should not be the main focus of government; and considering that my opponent has dropped every argument against his position, the round has to go CON. I am not, as he claims, attacking the topic; By providing the position that civil rights ought to be balanced with community welfare, I am merely trying to provide the best of both worlds; however, respecting civil rights is not the same as focusing solely on those rights, and so, I have again proven that the topic deserves negation; to put it simply, I did not offer another topic; I merely offered my thoughts as to why a state ought not focus on the maximization of civil rights. So, to sum things up, this topic comes down to two things: One, you accept that the PRO has dropped every single argument in this debate, and give CON the vote; or two, you can vote based on my opponent's personal attacks, which honestly should carry no weight in the round. In conclusion, allow me to restate our topic one last time: "A government should value the civil rights of its citizens over the welfare of the community." While PRO never directly answers the topic (in that he never supports the claim that civil rights are more important than societal welfare), CON easily proves that the one must necessarily be balanced with the other, to prevent a shift towards anarchic individualism or authoritarian collectivism. I ask you, please give this round to the CON.