BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Homosexual Marriage

First off, what's your religion? Nextly, marriage originated as a religious institution, not so much any more, but that's how the idea came about. Native American culture, Jewish culture, doesn't matter, it was always religious or spiritual until recently which the homosexual movement who decided to just make it about perversion. Thirdly, yes, the Torah says that it is an abomination. Obcourse you won't pay much attention to this unless you believe the Torah, but that's your problem, anyway, I seen how this turns out most times: Con: but it's against the bible! I'm not going to prove anything because blind faith. Pro: I'm an atheist so I don't care what the bible or morality says! Con: But God says it's a sin, I'm still not going to prove it because blind faith! Pro: I don't believe in God because I'm an atheist, even though all the facts point toward there is a God, I don't believe in God because blind faith. Con: you're going to hell! Pro: no I'm not. You see? It's ridiculous! It's so repetitious that it gives me a headache just reading their nonsense! So, I'm going to take this debate a whole new route and develop a whole new argument, but first, we have established that the Torah bans homosexuality, therefore you have two options to prove it morally acceptable, A prove that the Torah does not mean it is a sin (good luck, abomination= it's a sin), or B prove the Torah inaccurate (good luck with that he he he). So, my goal here is to prove homosexuality immoral, without the Torah, here are my points: 1; Marriage: The oldest document defining marriage is the Torah, there for the Torah holds the claim to marriage, marriage is owned and patented by the Torah, if we were to apply this to US Law, it would be like if someone invented something, allowed people to use the patent under a terms of use, someone uses it not like permitted under the terms of use, the inventor sues him, the court decides that using this patent is a fundamental right, and denying someone use of it, even just denying a certain use of it as it violates the terms of use, is discrimination somehow. In real life, this would not happen, rather, the patent violated (homosexuals) would be sued and charged for patent violation, which in the U.S. is punished by 10 years in prison, how are the gay people different? 2; Perversion: Incest and bestiality are the two other things banned in Leviticus 18 where it bans homosexuality. Every way that liberals justify homosexuality can be just as easily applied to these sins, I could just as easily say that being attracted to animals or to close relatives is innate (even though there is no genetic link to it there for not innate) and it cannot be helped, incestuous people and bestiality practices were born that way. I could say that it occurs in nature sometimes, some animals mate with animals of b other species, some animals mate with relatives, there for bestiality and incest is natural and there for morally acceptable. If someone commits incest or bestiality, it doesn't affect you, there for it should be tolerated. So what if it's banned in the Torah, the Torah also bans eating shrimp. You see what I'm saying here?
Homosexual Marriage

Seeing as you have been against homosexuality, I would like to challenge you to a debate. Seeing as you think homosexuals should not be able to get married because marriage is a "religious ceremony". With this claim, not only should homosexuals still be able to get married, but atheists, agnostics, etc. should not have the right to get married. Marriage however is not a religious ceremony and should be a ceremony separated from religion. People like you however say things like this, so you don't have to debate. So ignoring that, let's talk about how this affects your religion without me having to know anything about the bible (and I do know a lot about the bible). Bring up "One shall not sleep with a man as one does with a woman. That is an abomination," for all I care. But my first question for you in this debate is: How does this affect you directly, or even just your religion? Please provide evidence with your claim.
The Death Penalty should be kept and enforced.

I see your argument completely. I understand the point you are trying to get across. That criminals should be sentence to the death penalty, if they in fact commit murder. That is, in my opinion, barbaric. I do not believe one death should result in another, one sadness in another, one eye for another. That is a way of the past that we should abolish. The death penalty doesn't always JUST kill criminals. Innocent people are tried for crimes and may be convicted even if they didn't commit said crime. Then they are put to death. Now, not all people who are sentenced the death penalty are innocent, many are guilty of said crimes, but what crimes here are appropriate? You want statistics, here are mine: 7 countries have the death penalty for being gay (Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, etc...) Countries have the death penalty for rape, robbery, drug possession or trafficking, adultery, treason, etc... How about some of the inhumane ways it is carried out: Hanging Firing Squad Beheading Public Stoning to death This is the barbaric truth about what the death punishment is. And the fact is it shouldn't be allowed. No human should be subject to this. Life is valuable and should not be left to the hands of the judicial system to decide. My final argument is that mistakes are made. Innocent people are killed, and was it really worth it? All of those lives ended because you couldn't just settle for locking them up for life? http://www.deathpenaltyworldwide.org... http://www.youtube.com...
The Death Penalty should be kept and enforced.

I would like to suggest that we leave religion out of this considering that the bible is a book that can be questioned but the Holocaust was a real event that no one can deny. But for argument's sake let's use the bible. One of the ten commandments is "thou shalt not kill"..... I'm sorry I must have missed the commandment where he says "oh wait unless someone is a murderer then it is ok" how about "thou shalt have no other gods" by allowing our government to make the decision to kill a "criminal" doesn't that give them a godly power as god himself can only chose between life and death and it is not a decision they should have the power to make. I agree that killing a person is an awful crime and the perpetrator should be punished to the fullest extent of the law, but the law should not extend to the point of killing. There's an old saying from the code of Hammurabi, "an eye for an eye' but there was also a wise man who said, "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind"-Gandhi Should we base our modern system of laws on a code written in 1728BCE . and if we do what other traditions should we embrace? The ancient Spartans left children to die on mountain sides if they cried for too long, most ancient societies were patriarchal, the appropriate way to decide feuds was to command an army and then annex the land you either won or lost, Jews are to blame for all the world's problems, slaves are an appropriate way to do work. Why have these ancient practices been declared wrong by most countries and people but the death penalty still resides? I would like to state that the death penalty is barbaric and simply a fear factor. It may seem like a good idea to use to "show humans their place" but all it does is incite fear in people and it doesn't even prevent homicide. It's barbaric in the ways that it is carried out in some places. Such as Saudi Arabia where they will stone you to death for being Gay. Yes, many countries will kill you because of your sexual orientation and that is by enforcing the death penalty. Some countries even promote the idea of infanticide. The killing of a new born. Countries like China do this for overpopulation reasons and countries like North Korea do this to preserve the Korean race if a child is not "pure" or has any visible physical disability. Is that right? You argue that the death penalty needs to be kept and enforced yet you deny that it kills innocents. You must be nice and cozy where ever you live because you're failing to see the consequences of it world wide. You may say it's appropriate for those who commit murder but what happens when it escalates out of control and truly innocent people are killed? Because it was enforced. The truth is the death penalty does nothing to stop homicide, just to give some one a sick sense of comfort knowing that one person's death resulted in another's. And this is what we call justice, I'd rather they rot in a cell than be ut to death and quite frankly It might be more effective. Check and Mate, your move.
The Death Penalty should be kept and enforced.

My second point on why the Death Penalty should be kept and enforced. The death penalty must be kept and enforced because people must learn their place as human beings and not gods to show them that they have no right to murder anyone no matter what.Sure,there's proof that in states where the death penalty is enforced the rate of homicide is higher and we must also realize that not all cases of homicide are intentional murder.However,it still does not mean the death penalty should be abolished.Despite mistakes made by the judicial systems and unintentional murder cases crimes are still crimes.It is not the death penalty that should be blamed for the killing of the innocent or supposedly innocent people but rather the people who have committed the crimes.I'm sure you would agree yourself that just because homicide rates are higher in states that enforce the death penalty than in those states that don't it doesn't mean that the death penalty has anything to do with it!In fact,I believe that it is good that the death penalty is put in those states with higher homicide rates because there is a very real possibility that homicide rates would increase rather than decrease if the states that enforced the death penalty removed it. What I am saying is that the death penalty shouldn't be abolished just because innocents are being sentenced wrongfully but it is the people who have made the mistakes in the judicial system and the criminals who should be blamed!Let's look at an example.Since you have used an example of the past,I shall use one of the past as well.If you read The Bible,you will know that in Exodus when God gave Moses the Ten Commandments,one of them stated that you should not work on The Sabbath Day also known now as Sunday.However,a man picked up sticks on Sunday and God told Moses to command the people to kill him.If you think that that judgement was too harsh for a minor thing,then why shouldn't we be punished with the death penalty for much bigger cases like homicide?!Wouldn't you yourself think that it is fair?Sure,the book of Exodus was written a very very long time ago but it still relates to the topic at hand as explained by me just now. I end my debate by saying this...Your move.
The Death Penalty should be kept and enforced.

Okay, so the death penalty is wrong. innocent people die from it. All judicial systems make mistakes and as long as the death penalty persist innocent people will die. Additionally, in some countries (who shall not be names) where governments are corrupt, innocent people are put to death in order to send a political message or to "silence" their justified peaceful protesting. Let's go back in time to the holocaust and the horrific death counts. Would that number be so high if the death penalty was banned then? Let's remind people that Nazi's were a government run group and Hitler was the leader of Germany. It was the STATE killing these people, but what if the state didn't have the right to kill them? What if someone spoke up and said that they can't do that. Well no one did because they(the state) were allowed to. After the Holocaust of course the state of Germany abolished the death penalty and it's been like that since. 98 countries in the world have abolished the death penalty completely for ALL crimes. Countries such as, Germany, the UK, Poland, Iceland, Spain, Norway, Ireland, Italy and many more. These countries are still safe and orderly without the death penalty. If anything they are safer than other countries because the people are protected from the state. Many have signed the Protocol No. 13 to the European Convention on Human Rights or look at Amnesty.com for more statistics. http://www.amnesty.org... These countries also have some of the lowest crime rates/ homicide rates in the world and they don't use the death penalty. The Death penalty is not an effective scare tactic either. Many countries who use the death penalty have high homicide rates. The death penalty is a fear factor. But does it incite citizens to stay in line or does it make them want to rebel against an abusive government. Countries such as North Korea have been known to use the death penalty to their advantage. Some may not take it as far as North Korea where watching Desperate Housewives is an act of treason punishable by death. So does the death penalty protect society or does it pose a threat? By the evidence, I'd say that it would pose more of a threat than it's so called "protection" by a fear factor is worth.
The Death Penalty should be kept and enforced.

Now let's keep it simple.This is just for practice.For the first two rounds let's state our points and the third the rebuttals. I shall state my argument.The Death penalty should be kept and in fact enforced.Let me tell you why.As we all know every crime should face its punishments.People should pay for what they've done.Yes,even now with the death penalty being enforced in certain countries and states people are still committing crimes worthy of the death penalty.However,they who commit those crimes are obviously unaware of what it feels like to be sentenced to death or rather they are too emotionally affected that nothing matters during the crime.This is where the Death Penalty should come in,to remind the people of what would happen if they did such crimes deserving death.Without it,can you imagine how chaotic the world could become?People would never fear committing crimes ever again!Criminal activities will soar to an all time high and there would be nothing to stop it!Why?Well,the answer is simple.Even if you caught the criminal and proved him or her guilty,could you kill him or her?No!Why?Because you removed the death penalty.Crime rate will increase because no matter what you do to the criminal he or she would never be sentenced to death!More people will not think twice anymore about what they're about to do because they'll never be killed by the law!This is why I believe the Death Penalty should be enforced.
New World Order: Does the idea of a totalitarian one-world government exist.

While Conspiracy Theories will always be just that: Theories, it is not completely IMPOSSIBLE for something of this nature to be possible. It almost HAS to be "possible" hence the reason it's called a theory. Not only that, but you're asking if the "idea" of a one-world government exists, and if we want to get technical about it every idea "exists" but if we're talking about the physical manifestation of it, that would go back to it's dubbing as a theory. Th topi of a totalitarian government has been brought up before in several well-known novels. Take the book 1984 for example. While the book doesn't portray a "one-world" government it definitely depicts the possibility of a few large totalitarian governments. If you really think about it if the world were to fall into a situation like the one mentioned above, then a one-world government wouldn't be far off. All it would take is intricate scheming, one corrupt person, and the resources need and available to be able to overthrow the other existing governments. Mind you, we are not talking about probability just possibility. Just to give you a feel for how vividly accurate something such as a "totalitarian" government is, I'll briefly describe the world through 1984. The government is controlled by a small group of people. These people have a superior intellect and showcase a figure that the general public look up to. Not only do they come up with a figure for the public to love and adore, but also a figure for the people to hate. This gives the public two points of contact in which to unite with an almost unbreakable bond using humans' two strongest emotions: hate and love. On top of that, higher ups ensure that they keep the government in a good light through several discreet actions. The main one being the complete alteration of history that renders the government automatically right on any occasion upon study of past text. This combined with other factors leaning toward the same goal accomplish a sense of security throughout the people. In order to stop rebellion, the government then proceeds to completely wipe out anyone who seems to have fix on the system and has an intellect that could pose a threat to their plans. Not only do they exterminate the physical person but they wipe the person from existence through historical alteration. All of these factors work together to accomplish one thing. The government ensures complete domination through mind control. Through deep analysis one sees that all the mind control referenced in the book is done through media propaganda. Certain facts are withheld and history is rewritten to display "victor" in a positive light. Now, it's safe to say that media works on a global level and effects nearly everybody. Through propaganda, detailed planning, and reliable resources it is entirely possible for a totalitarian government to exist and given enough time a totalitarian "one-world" government.
New World Order: Does the idea of a totalitarian one-world government exist.

I look forward to debating anyone! I find this claim an interesting claim that keeps on coming up. And i want to debate it. I respect my opponenet and all he has to say. All ears are open. Please have fun! -Rules- There is no rules. If you do not know what the new world order is let me clearify for you... " totalitarian one-world government.[2][3][4][5][6] " conspiracy theories about a New World Order is that a secretive power elite with a globalist agenda is conspiring to eventually rule the world through an authoritarian world government"which replaces sovereign nation-states"and an all-encompassing propaganda that ideologizes its establishment as the culmination of history's progress. "Significant occurrences in politics and finance are speculated to be orchestrated by an unduly influential cabal operating through many front organizations. Numerous historical and current events are seen as steps in an on-going plot to achieve world domination through secret political gatherings and decision-making processes.[2][3][4][5][6] http://en.wikipedia.org...(conspiracy_theory) -:Lets go!!!
Truth_seeker vs. JasperFrancisShickadance song off

I accept! The jazz song I will present to you is quite famous, as Dizzy Gillespie is also, but that is not the only factor that led me to choosing this unique, fun, and acclaimed bebop piece. I love how the trumpet contributes to almost all jazz standards and because I respect and admire Dizzy, I decided he would fit for this category in Round 1. I hope you all enjoy. http://www.youtube.com...
Truth_seeker vs. JasperFrancisShickadance song off

We're going to have a song off and show songs that we like and you decide which side you like more. It's based as follows: Round 1 post a jazz song Round 2 post a rock song Round 3 post a modern R&B song Round 4 post a country or bluegrass song Round 5 a song of our choice That being said, although this might not be jazz, this is "Shades of Cool" by Lana Del Rey http://www.youtube.com...
Truth_seeker vs. JasperFrancisShickadance song off

For this last round, i'ma risk it lol. I made this ratchet song with a friend in the background not too long ago. It's basically a remix of Chief Keef's "I don't like", but with Christian lyrics, auto-tune, and booming speakers ahaha. It was all in one go and sorry if it's a bit hard to understand ahaha. http://iamtpain.smule.com... Lyrics: " A sick murda, thas dat sin i don't like! drinkin liqa, thas dat sin i don't like! an evil nurture, thas dat sin i don't like! Hatin God, thats dat dat sin i don't like! Dont like! (2x) gangbangin dats dat sin i don"t like! Cursin God dats dat sin i don"t like! Don"t like don"t like judgin man, thas dat sin i don't like! God's wrath on me n bout to strike, thru christs blood, im made right!, in tha lambs book a life, my name he gone write! the adversary's a snitch n he gon bite, but i get eternal life, its ma birthright! an unforgivin nature, thas dat sin i don't like! a proud stature, thas dat sin i don't like! i'm a peacemaka, i don't fight! da evil in me, thas wat i"ma fight! i ain't gon fight, Christ in me gon fight! high off da holy spirit, all day, all night! sellin souls, dats dat sin i don't like! fake works dats dat sin i don't like! bloody murks, dats dat sin i don't like! demons, we n the lord gon fight! fear i rebuke in da name a christ! forget gangbangin, i remember tha lords might! if i died tonight, i'd be in heaven, under tha lambs light! cheatin on ma friends, dats dat sin i don't like! a hand dat offends, dats dat sin i don't like! praisin god, dats wat the devil don't like! i used to wear black, now i wear white! A sick murda, thas dat sin i don't like! drinkin liqa, thas dat sin i don't like! an evil nurture, thas dat sin i don't blasphemin against tha spirit, thats dat sin i don't like! i'm in christ like Noah arks, 40 days, 40 nights! cuz, worldliness, dats dat sin i don't like! when i get out, i can see a new light! evil against god, dats dat SIN GOD"LL SMITE! when i die, to my heaven, my soul take flight! cuz for all my life, a sinnas ways i never like!"A279;
Truth_seeker vs. JasperFrancisShickadance song off

One of my favorite rock songs, by the well-known Foo Fighters, is called Everlong. For one thing it's pretty, for another it's fun to - literally - rock out to. It's almost like a love song, where somebody is waiting for someone else for what seems for ever. The lyrics seem to talk about everything that's forever or everything somebody wishes were forever, and that's what makes it beautiful. The chorus of course is remarkable and hard to get out of your head. Although, I really don't understand the music video here!
Rap Battle.

Because noobs don't freakin' give up. They always think they have good stuff to say. But it comes out as neeeeeeigh. Carppy lyrics leave you as prey. My teeth are swords, my claws are spears. I have not existed for many years. But i have discovered overall. Thatmost people are just a giant goofball. I strike like Darth Maul. I hit so hard your head will might never fall. Someone to you tried to make a call. It was Birdman, he wants his shi* lyrics back. http://www.azlyrics.com... Well you said it best, you can only terrify towns. My heartlessness limits my facial expressions to frowns. Occasionally i laugh, i do. But it is at idio** like you. Go wither little, feminist poo. I leave myself completely open. My offense is my defense. And it is darn dense. When you block a shot, two come in it's place. But all you do girl is move your da** face. You don't have any pace. My force is like a mace. Then when i finally bring ultimatum i am takin' you to my place. Puttin' you in lace. Fudge grace. The rest is self explanitory. I am pro now. I destroy, you see how. When do i not flow? My life isn't empty, using girls like you fills that. And laughing on hoe i got you into my van with just a cat. I have a peircing weapon. Your tough skin doesn't stop sh**. And we do always win, before the cops get here it is done. We've had our fun. Little girl or weak woman all fear my gun. But your next hon'.