BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
where are the real republicans

To say the republican party is no more racist than the dems is unbelievable. the dems as i stated before are the primary ones always fighting for segregation and it pretty much still stands today among that party. Now you have made some understandable points that hold true to the republican party today but you understand and know that that is not what the republicans truly stand for. Who would dare try to say Pres George Bush is a republican! A true republican is a group of people who let the down trodden work out the problems with letting them think that government is there to help them out. They give a hand up not a hand out. They believe in getting up in the morning and busting but to accomplish a goal of success in life. Being economically smart not wating on the unemployment check. You cannot today tell the difference between dems and repubs because they both believe that government is the way out that is just dumb. How many times do you have to pass legislation to build a fence. You say basically we should have open boarders? may i remind you of how rome really fell? because they had let cheap and next to nothing labor come in and build and create everything while they sat on there rear and got fat. When it came time to defend what was theres they couldn't because they had basically forgotten how. I know that is not a great description but it holds basically true. You also say that immigration is not a federal issue! It I believe is and should be it involves this whole country no matter what boarder. I do argue that education is a federal issue and also that is what is wrong with it. Health care a federal issue? are you kidding? that is just ignorant You ask do I make the party platform? Do I control the republican politicians? I answer these questions with a big no but that in itself is the problem. We as the people should make the platform for what we believe in as republicans. Today one cannot do that because the party has run away drunk with power. And yes the tuff guy talk does run through the republican party. What has a dem done except willing to sell america to there enemies.
where are the real republicans

The Republican Party was started by a coalition of Whigs, Northern Democrats, and Free Soilers. Lincoln's previous Whig affiliation fit very well with the early Republican Party. The Republicans were very Clayite in the beginning and looked to implement the "American System" laid out by Henry Clay. The Republicans were by and large NOT abolitionists, but rather just wanted to keep slavery where it was already. This was not out of some love for the slaves, but rather because they would "take away white men's jobs" if they were allowed to move west. Lincoln, in particular, opposed slavery because he believed it increased the birth rates of those with African heritage and he wanted to see them wiped from American land. That is why he also supported things like deportation of all African-Americans back to Africa. Lincoln, however, supported a Constitutional Amendment, known as the Corwin Amendment, which would have forever barred any federal "interferences" on the institution of slavery in the South. He was not an abolitionist and did not care about the slaves. The Republican Party was and is no less racist than the Democrats. Immigration is not a federal issue because the federal government is not explicitly given the power to regulate immigration in the Constitution, and thus the 10th Amendment leaves it to the States and to the People. Just the existence of a federal bureaucracy like the INS does not mean it is a federal issue. The fact that it exists does not change the Constitution. Do you argue that education is a federal issue simply because the Department of Education exists? Should healthcare be a federal issue, considering that we have a Department of Health and Human Services? Things they don't truly stand for? According to who? You? Do you make the Republican Party platform? Do you control all the Republican politicians? Point to specifics. Tell me what the Republican Party apparently does not support that I said they did. Free trade is a different issue. If you want to debate on that, I suggest a new debate so as to not clog this one. All I was arguing was that despite what many Republicans claim, they - as a whole - support protectionism in trade. The debate on China and foreign policy in general also is a different issue. I am just stating what the Republican Party supports currently and how it is similar to the early Republican stances. As to what a "real Republican" would do in response to the "threats" we face, I agree with you. And I think that is what they are doing. Two nations have been invaded and we are gearing up for a third (Iran) while greasing the wheels for a fourth (Syria). The tough-guy rhetoric is common among modern day Republicans and that was my point about militarism. Lincoln and the early Republicans were militarists as well. Thus, the Republican Party has not "lost its way" but rather has followed the traditions of Lincoln and rejected the Robert Taft/Ron Paul types.
where are the real republicans

You have made a few good points in your debate but you forget one thing my friend all of the people you have mention where not and are not republicans. Lincoln was a wig not until he realized he could not be elected did he switch parties You speak of racist the dem party is the most racist party I know who can say there for the man of another color and see him achieving something only to try to take it all away because he or she became more successful than they where. You say immigration is not a federal issue? Why then do we have a federal institution (ins) (ice) to try to manage this issue? All your statements of what the republican is at this time is not what they truly stand for. You speak of free trade in the term that it is a thing america should strive for! you speak of china as it is a good nation!they are one of our biggest enemies they are trying to kill us every day or can you not see it. When we put up trade barriers we usually get our way . And as for Ron Paul he does have some great points but the more you want to sit and have a dialoag with you enemy the longer they have to establish the weapons and the bolder they get. You speak of war so what thats just part of life deal with it. We might not have all this bull going on if we had turned afganistan into a desert just plain flat sand we could have call it sand box of the east or something. A real repulican would not tolerate the bs that goes on nowadays he would kick butt and take names.
Auschwitz-Birkenau should be converted into an anti-fascist themed amusement park

With many thanks to ogopie for accepting this challenge I should like to rebut his assertion that Auschwitz "is no place for children". Indeed it is, and even today the Auschwitz-Birkinau Memorial and Museum caters for school parties and even organises one and two-day residential study visits. [1] I believe that it is important that kids today are made aware of the atrocities that were committed against Jewish and Gypsy children in Auscwitz in the 1940's - indeed, I would argue that their appreciation of the fear that these poor children experienced could be enhanced in an amusement park setting with realistic historical re-enactments. For example, a busload of children on a study visit to Auschwitz could be dropped off at the "Arbeit Macht Frei" gate and once they were all through, dozens of hosts dressed in Nazi storm trooper uniforms could spring out and surround them, slam the gates shut behind them and march them into an empty building for ‘processing', all the time yelling: "Raus! Raus! Have you not heard? Ze var is back on. Schnell! Schnell!" Inside, the children will be made to stand in a row where ‘SS officers' would ‘interrogate' each one, asking questions such as: "Do you know how to operate an industrial sewing machine?" "Can you forge British banknotes?" and "Do you have any gold teeth?" After the ‘interrogation' the group of children would be split into two: the first group would be told they are going to "work to earn their freedom" and be led out of one door while the second group would be told they are going to "take a shower" and be led out of another door. Of course, once outside they would be reunited and told that the whole exercise was just an act and they are now allowed to go on the rides, but I believe this experience would give today's kids a much better appreciation of what children endured in Auschwitz during the war than any old photos ever could, and for that reason I reaffirm that Auschwitz-Birkenau should be converted into an anti-fascist themed amusement park. Thank you. [1] http://en.auschwitz.org.pl...
Auschwitz-Birkenau should be converted into an anti-fascist themed amusement park

Auschwitz-Birkenau Concentration Camp was a place of torture, death and emotional turmoil. There, 3 million Jews died of starvation, disease, and forced in to chambers filled with Hydrogen cyanide. It is no place for children, let alone any form of amusement, anti-fascist or not. Auschwitz should be a place of mourning, a place to learn, and look back on the past in hope to not repeat it. Auschwitz should be left the way it is, as a place for mourning and not amusement of any fashion. It sickens me that the very thought of such a politically, religiously, and ethnically depressing place would even attempt to reform itself as an amusement park
Gun Laws in the United States should be tightened

more guns =/= more safety but having more restrictions is pointless if it has no actual effect on homocides. However, this is completely contradictory because if more guns = more crime, less guns will = less crime. Furthermore, your statistic doesn't actually say "92" in it, yet states that criminals find it easy to acquire guns illegally, but does not give a number of how many actually acquired them illegally. It merely states that only 8% stole guns. Adding restrictions on guns takes away guns, leaving fewer guns in houses, which as I have already stated will lower crime. All of my arguments still stand as my opponent has made no clash.
Gun Laws in the United States should be tightened

Seeing as most of his points will be refuted in my constructive, I will present my arguments. C1: CORRELATIONS BETWEEN GUN OWNERSHIP AND GUN VIOLENCE The idea that increased gun ownership will result in decreasing crime rates is statistically unfounded. America has the highest gun ownership rates per capita in 2007 with 88.8 guns to 100 citizens, while Tunisia had the lowest per capita gun ownership rate of 0.1 guns to 100 citizens. [1] The United States had 14 748 intentional homicides, while Tunisia had 117. [2] Yemen had the second highest gun ownership rates, and had 990 plus homicides. In Spain, 10. 4 people have guns per 100 people, and Spain had 390 homicides. Clearly, there cannot be a correlation between gun ownership and crime, so the idea that more guns = more protection is false. C2: HAVING GUNS READILY AVAILABLE INCREASES CHANCES OF HOMOCIDES Having a gun in the house greatly increases the chances that the gun will be used to intentionally harm someone else, rather than to actually protect yourself. In a survey, only 1% of those surveyed claimed to have used their guns for self-defense, while it was found that 50% used their guns to escalate arguments and violence. [3] Banning guns would decrease this amount of violence. SOURCES: . http://en.wikipedia.org... . http://en.wikipedia.org... 3. . http://www.motherjones.com...
Public Nudity Should Be Legalized

Opening: Nudity is more open to the world, any child with a computer access could go on adult websites. How ever you must be 18 to go in. Rape and other sexual harassment and actions will increase through the years, legalising nudity is like legalising crack or cocaine it might be good for a while with out crime but more and more people will start to abuse it. They have nudist colonies they should stay at nudist colonies. I'm sure debaters on here have children and I'm sure they wont want their kids seeing a full grown man naked or full grown woman naked. Children will also become part of this culture as it increases in every day life child molestation and abuse will rise such as child rape and other sexual harassment actions in children.Sexual harassment in woman: 38.8% woman get sexually harassed and that is just at work alone, if the law decided to add nudity into the the mix we should expect to see the numbers rise to 58% since nudity will become so new and interesting seeing sex walking around is something guys will want to to take advantage of. Sexual harassment in children and teens: Most reports are from girls at school getting sexually harassed the numbers and actions include: sexual comments, looks, jokes, or gestures (92% of females/83% males experienced) being touched, grabbed, or pinched in a sexual nature (83% females/65% males) purposely being brushed up against in a sexual manner (75% females/55% males). being flashed or mooned (58% males and females, equally) having sexual rumors spread about them (50% males/54% females) having clothes pulled at in a sexual way (46% males / 50% females) • having their way blocked or being cornered in a sexual way (25% males / 51% females)As you can see the numbers are higher then the male in the male to female ratio with the exception of mooning and flashing of course. If the government added nudity into the mix then we could see the numbers rise 10% more of children and teens getting sexually harassed. Closing: If the government did decide to add legal nudity the numbers will increase and more rape and sexual harassment will happen. I would also like to thank pro for opening this argument.Work cited: http://www.education.com...
all institutions of higher should adopt technical and vocational training

Continuing from my last post: Hart discovered that 86% of their respondents indicated critical thinking as needed for success at their shops, versus only 56% citing knowledge of science or tech. In 2006, The Washington Post noted that the FBI had only 33 Arabic-speaking analysts crucial to its antiterrorist efforts. Language specialists usually get first training in a humanities department: http://www.washingtonpost.com...
all institutions of higher should adopt technical and vocational training

Not all colleges and universities are prepared to open vocationally-oriented departments and programs they don't already have. If a new program would duplicate existing programs in the community, it could even be counterproductive. Yet, penalizing schools for failing to open such programs could impact the job market too. Some jobs require special knowledge, but many don't. Hart Research Associates has done a survey of 300 employers showing they agree: https://www.aacu.org... Regard
Is there a God

Ok, I apologize if I do not respond to the Con's answer in the right way.... I'm only in Jh. so...... Yea I am a firm believer in the Christian faith. I am just finishing up my confirmation classes at my church and have taken communion about three times since the first communion on Monday Thursday. God is real. Yes, he allows bad things to happen and good things can come of them. A lot of people don't like God because bad things happen. But bad things happen because God a major plan for us. "For I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord, plans for welfare and not for evil, to give you a future and hope." Jeremiah 29:11. When God allows these bad things to happen he has a better outcome for us then we imagine. Sorry, I don't have time for a full response right now. I pass this onto the Con.
Is there a God

Argument From Lack Of DefinitionNo two "God" concepts are the same, thus this resolution is impossible to sustain until a more complete definition of "God" is given within this debate. Some concepts of God are extremely personal & interactive - such as a Christian notion of God. Other notions are amoral and play virtually no role within the universe - such as a deistic God.Hence it is impossible to prove of disprove God without an adequate definition of what the label "God" entails. Until then - I pass this debate back to Pro.
Bestiality Should be Legalized

The only arguments you have are to take sentences out of my debate and comment on them. You have yet to prove your point on why it should be legalized. What benefits? How it could help society etc. etc. The topic of bestiality is subjective. In our society it is subjectively looked down upon. If the majority of society looks down upon it it should not be legalized. There are no benefits, morality, or positive impacts from legalizing bestiality.
Bestiality Should be Legalized

Well from a religious standpoint God forbid having intercourse with animals so if you have any sort of religious spin on this debate it's over right there. There is a reason humans run society and not animals. We are separated from them. We have evolved to a higher class than animals. Now then, to your argument it seems your argument is basically "we kill them why not sleep wit them?" So you're saying since we do something that some consider cruel to animals why not do more cruelty to them? I'll tell you why animals cannot talk nor "consent" to having sex with a human. Sure I know what you are thinking, Well they cannot consent to you killing them! nope they cannot which is why we are above them on the food chain. We are all living beings in this world and humans are the only ones that have a somewhat "moral code". Killing animals for food allows us to live another day. Having sex with them? That gives us nothing except "pleasure" but that's to only the few extremely erm "different" people shall we say. Saying for lack of a better phrase "Let's have sex with animals" instead of killing them is like saying instead of killing inmates why don't we keep them in an empty cell till they die. Bestiality is basically animal rape because they cannot consent nor can they do anything about it other than attack whomever tries such an act. Would you take advantage of a mentally challenged person? That is basically what it is like to do that to an animal. While i agree slaughtering animals can be considered cruel it provides us with food while sex with animals provides nothing.
Bestiality Should be Legalized

OK number 1: WTF dude. and 2: What the actual f***dude. So it's okay to have sex with animals but not eat them for food? Have the world become vegans?! What are you nuts?! Your arguments are ridiculous and so is this topic. There is no way in hell that if i walked downstairs tomorrow and saw my brother banging my dog that I'd be like eh that's okay. I don't know how to argue this other than say that it's just plain wrong and will never be legal ever, ever, ever, ever, ever.
Marijuana should be legalized and should be taken seriously as a medicine.

Not surprisingly, marijuana intoxication can cause distorted perceptions, impaired coordination, difficulty in thinking and problem solving, and problems with learning and memory. Clearly my opponent has the symptoms. We can only speculate as to the cause. My opponent should read his own source. I can argue his position but it is not fair to let him argue mine since he is such a poor debater. I have tried to do both his job and mine. I have tried to suggest ways for him to spend his debating time more productively: The AMA says there is no medical use for MJ. It's illegal everywhere on Earth except at the bottom of the ocean and in orbit so how can it be good? There's not much corruption caused by MJ prohibition since MJ laws are fairly enforced and corruption is a good thing anyway. It provides jobs and that is important. Drug testing is big business. It's done by probably the same people that run private prisons so that cuts out the middle man. The private prisons have much better opportunities for escape since they want you to come back and bring all your friends because that is big profits. Some jail time is good anyway because you can meet lots of new contacts and growers there and lots of other drugs too. If those loadies would learn their lesson but they will just go back and smoke it again. They are no good for the Army and they can't hold a job so that difference does it make that they now have a felony record? In fact that makes it easier to score. Families get tired of one another and it is a good thing for some of them to go to jail once in a while. These prisons, especially private prisons, are just making the problem worse and so that is why we must build more of them. They don't cost very much anyway and are a real good investment in a time of economic crisis since they reduce the unemployment rate. But he still won't do his job and I am not going to do it for him. Do not let him get away with this. Learn about the subject. Become more informed than my opponent. The CIA is importing drugs that really do make you want to kill into the inner cities. http://www.copvcia.com... This bud's for you.
Marijuana should be legalized and should be taken seriously as a medicine.

So far during this debate my opponent has not been able to disprove or argue my resolution in any way. The resolution should win on these three ideas. 1. Over 15 million Americans have used marijuana in the last month. This is a conservative estimate in itself. Over 70 percent of America has tried marijuana at one time. . http://www.nida.nih.gov... 2. Marijuana is a medicine. Many states have adopted medical marijuana laws due to the public outcry of citizens. Marijuana is proven to treat glaucoma, lack of appetite(which greatly benefits aids patients and those who are severely ill), anxiety, depression, nausea, chronic headaches, and back pains. 3. The fact that the economy could greatly benefit from a new sector called the marijuana economy. This will supply tax revenue and new opportunities for young entrepreneurs.
Marijuana should be legalized and should be taken seriously as a medicine.

Bringing Marijuana into a school is an ignorant and pathetic act and you condoning it and using it as an argument is quite sad. Not everyone who gets caught with marijuana commits suicide, this is an ignorant generalization. As for the deportation if they were not legal citizens it is more than just to deport them. Marijuana is still a drug and bringing it around minors is irresponsible in the first place. In order for marijuana legalization to work the people must start to take full responsibility for there actions. One major reason why marijuana is not legal yet is the dumb stoner stereotypes. See drug testing can still be done even if marijuana's legal. An employer should be able to test for whatever they want. Now lets stick to the topic of marijuana. Could you imagine the amount of jobs the marijuana industry could create? Coffee shops that supply and employ those 18 and older. A significant tax revenue from each of those coffee shops could help save many economically struggling cities. Look what the medical marijuana industry has done to California. Its capitalism at its best although i know you don't like money but most do. http://www.time.com... I will now allow my opponent another round of his babbling.