BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Pro-Life, The only way to ensure innocent lives are not lost.

Nikki, all of the facts you presented only helped to support my case. Lets make sure you know where I stand. If the doctor knows that having the baby will end up causing death for the mother, I accept abortion. But like you said over 95% of abortions are for birth control reasons. I knew you would bring up the issue of its the "mother's"[sic] body. Explain to me how a fertilized human egg is part of the woman's body when nine months later it comes out as a seperate human being fully alive? Exactly when does it become its own body and not the woman's? The baby has its own heart, brain, blood supply (sometimes diffrent from the mother's), and its father's chromosomes. All this while still INSIDE the woman. Does this woman now have four eyes, twenty toes and fingers, and two noses since the life inside of her is only an extension of HER body,right? The argument for pro-choice is very akin to those that supported slavery. In 1857, the Supreme Court, decided in the Dred Scott case that black people weren't legal persons and were the property of the owner. The slave owner could do whatever he wish with his slaves, even put them to death. Even though abolitionist objected that it is was discrimination against a human being based soley on the color of their skin. The slave owners contested that they didn't have to own slaves and not to push their morality on them. Jump forward almost a hundred years and you have the Roe vs Wade case in 1973. Once again you have the Supreme Court Ruling that unborn babies are not legal persons and are the sole property of the mother. She could do whatever she wanted with this baby, even put it to death. Ofcourse the pro-Life groups cried out that is was discrimination against age. Abortionist simply said,"Don't push your morality on us. We have every right to abort a devolping baby. No one said you had to abort unborn children". Little too close for comfort isn't it? You also claim that many women use abortion for health reasons. What is really disturbing is that many women don't know how dangerous an abortion really can be. Thanks to a 1986 ruling by the Supreme Court, women no longer have to be informed about the horrible side effect that can accompany abortion. Such as: Intense Bleeding, Placental, Uteral, or Cervical Infenction or Rupture, Reduced Fertility, Breast Cancer, Infertility, Cervical Laceration, Uncontrollable blood clotting, Severe hemorrhage, Seizures, Coma, Cancer,and in some cases Death. Then their are the psychological side effects. A survey was conducted of 1900 women who had had abortions. The survey asked "Were there any negative psychological effects... [caused] by your abortion?" 94% answered "Yes." 2% answered "No." Another study was conducted by Dr. Anne Speckhard at the University of Minnesota. She concluded, "After 5-10 years 54% of mothers choosing abortion had nightmares, 81% had preoccupation with their aborted child, 35% had perceived visitations with their child, and 96% felt they had taken a human life." http://www.abortioninfo.net... Guess that kind of puts a damper on the whole health excuse. -Brandon
Pro-Life, The only way to ensure innocent lives are not lost.

Fine you want facts well thats what youre going to get. fact- some mothers have abortion to save their own lives. literally. in some situations mothers need an abortion to save their own lives. or maybe they have terminal cancer and their baby is at risk of contracting it. so in order to save their child from having to suffer from cancer. honorable thing to do in my book. there are 45 million abortions a year performed in the united states. abortion done as birth controll is the worst kind but i still believe that it is the mothers choice. thats 95% of women. 1% is done because of rape or incest. know doesnt that victim deserve to be able to have an abortion. what if she were 13 it most certainly isnt her fault she got pregnant. some women do it because of health reasons. a logical reason if you ask me. its a really good way to save the already living mother or prevent the baby from getting a serious disease. 38% do it at seven to eight weeks into the pregnancy. that is a time when you cant tell that a woman is even pregnant. 16% are done at six weeks, the baby is barely visible at that stage. i will admit that some women have abortions for stupid reasons. like to keep their boyfriend from leaving. But no matter how stupid the reason it is the mothers choice. it is there body and they ultimatley deserve the choice. i would never have an abortion just because I could never ever kill a baby. i get what youre saying and you make a very good point. but the think is that it should be the mothers decision. california is only one state what about all the others? why dont you understand that it isnt the states and lawmakers decisions. it isnt their body and it isnt their choice was that enough facts for you? i've got more but i have to get of the computer talk to you later. -nikki
Pro-Life, The only way to ensure innocent lives are not lost.

While I understand this is a heated debate that causes many tempers to flare, I ask that you use facts to back up your opinions. Contrary to popular belief, many scientific text books and scientist claim that life begins at conception. The baby is not created in the womb but develop. Did you know all major organ systems are created within the first 3 weeks? We know that a heartbeat can be heard within the first 21 days of conception. Does a heartbeat not signify a Life? Even after a baby leaves a womb it is still developing. Within the first 40 days measurable brain waves appear. In todays hospitals brain waves are used to determine if a person is still alive, not heartbeats. So if we were to use this method to determine Life in the womb, the majority of abortions would be done away with. (78% occur after brain waves appear) . http://www.cdc.gov... The declaration of Independence of the United States of America claims, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among those are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" The right to life is one of the most important principles of law within a free republic. Did you know that California Law prohibits the killing of fetus, unless the mother wishes to ofcourse. Legal Definition of Murder CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE SECTION 187-199 a. Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought. But ofcourse they have a plan for those mothers out there that wish to keep living the good life and not face the consequences of their actions. Definition of Murder - Exceptions CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE SECTION 187 This section shall not apply to any person who commits an act that results in the death of a fetus if any of the following apply: The act was solicited, aided, abetted, or consented to by the mother of the fetus. Seems like the law is a little hypocritical. In the law it say that the "mother" of the fetus is allowed to abort the baby. In order to be considered a mother of a fetus, doesn't the fetus have to be alive? How else can you be a mother of something that is not even a person? I hope that you will address the questions I have brought up. I have plenty more points that I wish to address. -Brandon
There is lots of problems with superman

As my opponent basically forfeits two rounds I would like to say that here I am closing the whole statement. I will share two more ideas of problems with Superman - Superman has too many versions of him and its true. Later on in the golden ages Superman was more weaker then the ones they have here in the silver ages. Now silver age Superman is basically a overrated character in the series showing that Superman was overrated many people are saying ' Superman can lift 8 planets out of the orbit' and they also said 'oh he ripped up a galaxy' they also love to say this the most ' He can kill Spawn'. Later on Superman Prime has came out and claim to be very overrated. Then later on comes super boy and super girl then wonder women. This what I mean by too many versions of Superman. And I end this debate and finalized and I think this is me at my worst but voters you decide if he doesn't forfit
There is lots of problems with superman

You broke a rule and I said no copy and paste and you rebutted in round 2 round 3 and 4 rebuttals. I cant put resources because I have a phone I told you in the first round. rule. My rebuttal Your wrong that he is not over powered. If he is not like I said if he is not how come he can survive kryptonite in certain situations. Explain that will you. He is because he is overated and has been stated in many articles that he is too over powered Great I know he wins to save but super fans say he is invincible and people also said he has special endurance. But for real like he never bleeds like every hero loses but try win in the end atleast they put you to suspense. But when they come put superman debates they be saying " who will win" like for real who do you think . He should win but not at the , point where he just punches them threw a dimension. When in my argument stated " hes too powerful that he needs to be weaker" I said hes powerful but watching him win is boring. Thats just that. You dont need to punch a person into into a dimension just to kill them or lift a planet like is that called for. For example spiderman didn't have same superior strength to punch a planet but he could save people. Like I said you broke a rule I said no copy and paste how to paste on a phone. If you can answer I will use it on further debates. Please note while voting pay attention to who did what. I gave specific reasons with clear examples as if you were talking about doomsday and you said I said he should be weaker then him. The motto in every super hero show or comic says good guys always win. They shouldn't make superman a freaken god when hes really not. If they made him weaker they would make doomsday weaker then superman.
There is lots of problems with superman

Super man also known as Kal-El is a wonderful figure that portrays bravery, honesty, loyalty, and power. He was sent to Earth by his parents to carry on the dying race of the Kryptonians. Super man is not only a hero, but he is a symbol, a symbol that tells the Earth what should and shouldn't be done. He is powerful yes, but for a good reason. To help the needy and weak. He may sound boring, but if I were those people who just got saved because of his super strength, I wouldn't be talking. He has a weakness, but if he didn't he'd be too "over-powered" based on your arguments. He wins to make sure he can fight for another day, he fights to make sure that the world is safe. What my opponent is trying to say is that Superman is too powerful and should be weaker so that he can't defeat villains like Doomsday and not be fast enough to rescue someone that might fall. To make things even more confusing, he didn't state a source for any of his claims. BTW my source is www.dccomics/superman.com
There is lots of problems with superman

We all know that superman is a super hero that has saved people from cities and is able to lift heavy weights and is able to travel faster then the speed of light. But of course there are many problems with Superman which causes his fans to hate him reasons in my argument " He is too powerful Before you Superman fans go against me I would like to say he is too strong and you all know it. He is too strong and if really makes no sense to give a superhero incredible speed and incredible strength and incredible senses. It just makes the charater boring and really puts a down fall on the hero too. Like you can give him powers but not powers that he will just be as strong as a god like atleast green lantern have powers but he does not act like a guy who keeps winning and never stops. Superman has too man powers so hes too overated like who in there minds will go and make someone to go through dimmensions and lift up 40 tons. it really makes barely any sense. " His weakness First of all his weakness is kyrptonite. Before you all shout you dont like me because I bet you afther I post this everyone will say ," thats not true" well it is and its true. Many peope have told me he can survive kyrptonite. And they also said you need kyrptonite as big as your suitcase to affect him. It is true cause most people I met have said that so you cant try to put something against me to stop that because its true and you know it. If his born weakness is kryptonite how come he could survive a 1 pound of kryptonite ?makes no sense Another he gets his powers from the yellow Sun. Now what if he was away from it does that mean he losses them? No!! This really makes no sense if his powers were from the yellow sun he must lose it when hes away from it. Now there is lots of things wrong with it. " he makes people think he is incincible Just to go for all his fans all I just said he is power. Powerful and Invincible is not the same. Reasons why he is not 1. He got beaten by batman really a human vs superman and superman failed 2. Got beaten by Lex and same thing hes a human and superman fails 3. He has weaknesses 4. He got his but wooped by doomsday and call him invincible 5. Super nova yeah right these lies he was unconscious while in super nova He is not invincible There are many more reasons but they will be shared later on. Just a note I will not compete with Superman fanboys and how they disagreed. I can hear you guys looking saying that " he needs to read more commics" and " no you suck" or "so" well I wont compete with mean comments just to put that out
LSD should be legalized for recreational use.

Alright, round two. I fail to see how LSD being a semi-synthetic compound makes it's legality questionable. You have given no examples to why semi-synthetic compounds are inferior or dangerous as compared to fully synthesized ones. Yes, LSD distorts judgment. And yes, it can be dangerous However, more deaths have occurred from alcohol related incidents than LSD related incidents. Even though LSD may not be as readily available, the ratio of deaths to uses is far less. Not to mention, I can assure you, if you take LSD, driving is going to be the last thing on your mind. Your third point is baseless conjecture. I challenge my opponent to find one case of LSD being used as a date rape drug. While you may say that bread can cure cluster headaches, there is no research proving this. I challenge my opponent to find an alternate cure to cluster headaches, because there are certainly some people who would love to know what it is. And, further research shows that LSD can allow the color blind to see color. http://www.erowid.org... "Though my opponent is correct that users do not die from overdosing on LSD, LSD users do in fact die. They die from the hallucinogenic powers of the drug. Death can also be preempted due to the side effects of the drug such as: raised body temperature, chills, profuse perspiration etc. Death from LSD can however result from, panic reactions, hallucinations and the paranoia experienced while on LSD." Find me a case where ANYONE has died from hypothermia, loss of bodily fluids, or seeing hallucinations while on LSD. Finally, your other arguments illustrate the risks of LSD. However, I don't know if you can wrap your mind around the possibility that some people WANT to take risks. Who are you to prevent people from such an innocent joy? Yes, they may harm people if they use it incorrectly. But our legal drugs have killed so much more, not to mention, they are addictive and have no medical use. And if we tax LSD, ultimately, our government could make some money off of this. And one more thing. LSD wasn't outlawed because it was dangerous. LSD was outlawed because Nixon hoped it would stop the anti-war riots over Vietnam. http://www.youtube.com...
LSD should be legalized for recreational use.

LSD refers to Lysergic acid diethylamide, a psychedelic drug illegal in the United States of America. If you challenge me, you are in support of keeping LSD illegal, and/or increasing penalties for possessing or selling it. LSD should be legalized for the reasons listed below. A) LSD use is a victimless crime. If someone ingests LSD, no one is being victimized in any way, shape, or form. B) LSD is less addictive than many legal drugs in America. (1) (2) C) Only one person has ever died of LSD overdose. However, this man died of because of his own ignorance. He was under the impression that the LSD was speed, ergo, he ingested 320 G of LSD, which is much higher than the recommended dosage. However, more than one person has died of alcohol poisoning. (3) D) LSD has medical uses, where as alcohol and tobacco, do not. If nothing else, this should make LSD a class B drug instead of a class A one. (4) (1) http://farm4.static.flickr.com... (2) http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:kWTSkNKaCgYJ:www.antiproibizionisti.it/public/docs/thelancet_20070323.pdf+development+of+a+rational+scale+to+assess+the+harm+of+drugs+of+potential+misuse.&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a (3) http://www.erowid.org... (4) http://www.mindhacks.com...
Nuclear power is beneficial for society

I am rather surprised that my opponent has forfeited this round whether on purpose or by accident. My third point to support nuclear power is that nuclear power can be used the provide power everywhere. Hydro only works for places that are near water and most alternative energies often require the country to be resource rich. However, in the world, many places are not resource rich and so must spend money on fossil fuels that are burned releasing C02 into the atmosphere. Nuclear power only requires the purchase of uranium which is rather cheap and the money needed to build a plant. After the plant has been made, power can be generated from the plant at a very low cost. Developing nations need this type of energy to support their growing economies and higher population while trying very hard not to release too much CO2 into the environment. Nuclear is the answer. I hope my opponent posts a third and fourth round, or this debate would feel like a real waste. The reason being that I am very comfortable with this topic and wanted a really good debate. But alas, this seems not to be so.
Nuclear power is beneficial for society

I would like to first point out that my opponent only gives one point for why nuclear power is good for society, thus I only need respond to that argument. So first, in refutation of my opponent's argument, I would like to point out that even if solar and wind energy doesn't have enough power to power a nation, hydro power certainly has that potential. Even more, hydropower combined with solar and wind power would definitely be enough to power a country such as the United States. Hydro power has been shown to work through the Hoover Dam, which has been constantly been giving power to the west coast since it was built. . http://www.enviro-news.com... Secondly, my plan to use hydro, solar and wind energy allows for the minimal changing of the environment and also uses energy that is MOST naturally found in nature today. Also, there is no chance that these types of energy could in any way have the potential of hurting citizens. Even though my opponent says that there is no radiation risk, it can be seen that there is a chance that there could be a radiation leak because of how much we still have to research about nuclear energy. Even a slight radiation leak could cause catastrophic casualties to citizens. Thus, with the use of hydro, solar and wind energy, there is minimal change to the environment, no chance of hurting citizens and these energies are the easiest to use, which leads me to my third argument. Thirdly, since hydro, solar and wind energy are the easiest to "capture" and transform into usable energy, meaning that most countries, instead of nuclear capable countries, would be able to use this energy for the wellbeing of their citizens. Lastly, my opponent does not give any reasons why such nuclear technology could not be stolen and turned into a potential nuclear weapon. This might seem like a stretch but the same technology used to generate power could also be used to make weapons of destruction. This technology could either by stolen by countries or terrorists; or could be potentially given into enemies who use the technology to destroy each other. This is just an extrapolation of nuclear energy use, but is very viable when we look to Iran or North Korea. I now stand ready for further refutation.
Nuclear power is beneficial for society

It is in my strong belief that nuclear power is beneficial to society. I will present to you four points are why nuclear power is good for society. First, nuclear power has basically no carbon dioxide emissions that are released into the atmosphere. Global warming has been proven to be a huge problem and the world is struggling to come up with a clearn alternativie energy. Solar and wind just don't have that kind of capacity to produce enough energy for a nation to use. Nuclear does. Take France for example more than 78% of its total energy is produced by nuclear and the country's carbon dioxide levels have lowered over the last 30 years, something very few countries can say. Nuclear is just one very clean source of energy. Radiation levels near nuclear power plants are about as much as someone sitting in their house for a year contrary to popular belief. I will now proceed to allow my opponent to attempt to point out flaws in nuclear energy.
Xbox is better than Playstation

I haven't herd anything about Xbox graphics being better and I've owned both and the PS has better graphics and while the hacking thing is true that doesn't mean PS sucks. another thing just because Sony Doesn't focus on just Computers and the PlayStation doesn't mean that it sucks either in fact it makes it a better because Sony can do TVs and stuff while making a grand Gaming system makes it all the better plus they've had more time to wok on the PlayStation and the new Xbox is the PS 2 of Xbox.
Xbox is better than Playstation

No, i know way more people that own both an xbox and playstation that say xbox has the better graphics. Also, xbox is better because puts everything into its own group and focuses on the console itself. Playstation wastes its time on different products, and puts the blu-ray into the console. Who needs that when i can just watch a movie and play a game AT THE SAME TIME. Playstation has to wait to play one or the other. Plus, xbox doesn't crash as much as Playstation networks do. We have better security. Our network is harder to hack so our console's are safer and better protected from viruses or a hacker.
Domestic Violence Awareness should be increased.

Spreading awareness of Domestic violence might even help solve other important issues as well. As the article Raising Awareness for Domestic Abuse stated, "It is estimated that 25-50% of perpetrators are under the influence of alcohol. Drug and alcohol use are known to impair judgment, reduce inhibition, and increase aggression." With raising awareness for domestic violence, it will help spread awareness for alcohol and drug addicts. Due to lack of drug and alcohol use it will help lower the occurrence of domestic abuse. People won't go into relationship so trusting because they claim they are in love or that their partner is not capable of ever hurting them. This is what a woman stated her experience to be, "My husband would throw me out at night when he was drunk. I slept in a cupboard behind the local freezer shop. My husband broke my ribs, tore my hair out, perforated my eardrum and head butted me." There's no way of knowing if your partner is truly who they say they are or what they are willing to do and how far they"ll take it. Some people are blinded by the sweet talks and getting treated like royalty early in the relationships that keeps them from noticing that those are possible signs of an abuser. The idea of "crazy love" can easily lead someone to become or continue being a victim.