BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
In the Bible Angels and Demons are interchangeable

(That you have watched a Three Stooges movie shows some literary spark about you. Anyone who would watch a Three Stooges movie just cannot have a dull intellect. You must be trying to trick me into underrating you. That is not very nice.) In the Three Stooges episode, "I'll Never Heil Again" Moe Hailstone declares that the world belonged to him. The actor Moe Howard was making fun of the original Heil Hailstone who actually thought that the world belonged to him. What the original Heil Hailstone believed was that if he could kill off all of his enemies then the world would be his. I know that that is not very original but hey that is what the guy really believed. Now the original Heil Hailstone had to have gotten this idea from somewhere. So I am just guessing that since the original Heil Hailstone was a student of history and a Roman Catholic in upbringing that he was familiar with the story of the first Passover there in Exodus chapter 12. To give a little background to the first Passover we can discover the origin of Heil Hailstones big idea- In order to keep control of the Egyptian world the Pharaoh thought to kill off all the Israelites by first killing off all the first born Israelite male children. Now Con there is this author by the name of Jack London. (Funny that an American would have the name 'London' but maybe there is a connection.) Anyway Jack London coined the phrase 'the law of the club and fang'. This also is not really very original as it is a knock off of the law 'an eye for an eye'. If the law 'an eye for an eye' is applied to the Pharaoh of Egypt then that would bring us to the original Passover Where the first born of Egypt were slain just like the first born of Israel were slain. (Isn't Old Testament Law fun?)
In the Bible Angels and Demons are interchangeable

Have you ever watched the Three Stooges on TV? Moe, Larry and Curly. Moe, Larry and Shemp (Champ for all you non-Yiddish). Moe, Larry and Joe, (er, ah, didn't like the Joe episodes). In the Stooges you have 2/3 which would be Moe and Larry. Then you have the 1/3 which would be either Curly or Champ, (Shemp for all you non-English). The gest of the Stooges is that there is something wrong with the world and they, the Stooges are going to straighten it out. You get all the laughs from all the kookie things that the Angels, (Stooges for all you non-religious) do. As Pro in this debate we will be examining just how ignorant the Angels, (and the Demons) really are. The Bible is my source. Con is welcome to use any source. And as always, good luck Con. The First Passover: That is right. In the First Passover we find the Angel outside.
To be any part of LGBT means that person has a mental disorder.

I accept the rules and apologize for neglecting to establish them. At our basic human nature our primary purpose as animals is to survive and insure the survival of our species. If a person is a homosexual it is biologically impossible for that person to reproduce thus contradicting their basic human instincts it is because of this that I view homosexuality as a mental disorder as it is a clear "dysfunction in the... biological function". Now I do not believe homosexuality is morally wrong as I myself am bisexual, however I do feel it is a disorder much like a sociopath in the sense that there is nothing inherently wrong with being a sociopath it is only wrong when that sociopath commits a murder. To be a classified with any of the LGBT characteristics is a mental disorder and that is not a bad thing.
To be any part of LGBT means that person has a mental disorder.

Good luck to my opponent. As he failed to set up any rules to the debate, I'll put these in place. StructureRound 1 - AcceptanceRound 2 - Opening StatementsRound 3 - RebuttalsRound 4 - DefenseRules1) No kritiks2) No plagiarism3) No forfeitures4) No troll arguments5) BoP is on Pro
To be any part of LGBT means that person has a mental disorder.

I will be arguing that to be gay, bi, lesbian, transgendered, or any other form of the LGBT community means that person also has a mental disorder. For round one please state your position and any definitions you wish to establish. Definitions: Mental disorder: "A mental disorder is a syndrome characterized by clinically significant disturbance in an individual's cognition, emotion regulation, or behavior that reflects a dysfunction in the psychological, biological, or developmental processes underlying mental functioning."
Sex education in schools should be mandatory

In today's scenario, I feel Sex education is Must in Schools. Following are the reasons. 1) Due to the mass media and social networking sites, school going children are exposed and attracted to the stuffs which are ethically not accepted for them at this level. 2) Peer pressure forces the child to be the part of the activities which may be the reason for STD. 3) Unauthentic, incomplete and improper information may lead to serious problems. 4) The loss that includes physical, mental and social factors ultimately directs to the national Loss. In case the sex education is given to the same children, lot many problems will be taken care of - ultimately Prevention is better than Cure. There are some sections of the society where the parents are not that educated that they will guide their children in this regard. On the other hand some parents are well educated and so busy that they are unable to spare time for their children and that too on such topic. So sex education at school level is must.
Sex education in schools should be mandatory

I want to debate anyone who does not think sex education should be mandatory in schools. Round 1: Acceptance Round 2: State your points and elaborate on them. Round 3: Make your final points and explain everything. 1. You must use proper spelling and grammar. 2. Arguments must be relevant and intelligent. 3. You must stay on topic (If you get off topic, it must only be a small portion of your explanation). 4. You must cite your sources. 5. Arguments must be at least 1700 characters. I look forward to debating this topic.
Buy Accutane 30 mg Online

If you forfeit the last round, You admit I'm right, And that this is a stupid way to post an ad online. You also admit that since I'm pro and you're con and you're endorsing, You didn't even look at the settings. Readers: DO NOT BUY ACCUTANE 30 mg ONLINE OR ELSEWHERE JUST USE FACE SCRUB CHEAP AND EASY WITH NO SIDE EFFECTS. I'M NOT EVEN GOING TO GIVE A BRAND HERE JUST BUY ANY ACNE FACE SCRUB
Buy Accutane 30 mg Online

So you're basically saying I should buy a medicine online from a shady website with a ton of side effects to MAKE MY SKIN CLEARER? 1. Why would I risk health issues and overdosing on medicine to get rid of something that is not causing physical harm to me? 2. I can cover up my acne with makeup, And just upkeep my hygiene for free. 3. This is an ad on a debating site. Why are you posting an ad on a debating site? 4. I can go buy some other, Cheaper medication, One that has no side effects, And that I know works/ how it works. 5. You are risking awful side effects and overdosing WITH NO GUARANTEE OF RESULTS. 6. Seriously? Like, Are we gonna do this?
Cybernations or Minecraft-which is better? (CyberNations is pro)

Rebuttals:'And sadly for you, Leo, according to your very own website, you may find that the number of players playing CN is under ten thousand. Right here:". You are mistaken my freind. CyberNations has 569,406 nations simulated to date- and with every ip adress only able to create 1 country it would serve to reason that 569,406 people play this game! http://www.cybernations.net... "And in CyberNations, can one even see the others?" Can I see their "virtual face?" I can. I can see where they are-form alliances with them-build our miltaries-and conquer. In minecraft can you create any autonomous soldiers? Can you wage wars with each other with 1000's of troops? No. You cannot. In minecraft you can only create things out of your imagination-there are no blueprints. There is no governent, no cities, no nations. You must build it all in your lonely world with a freind or two. But in CyberNations-you can do this with an active 569,000 people, all struggling for greatness...or to lose. What will you choose? Minecraft-A game where you stack blocks on one another, or Cybernations-a game where you can build empires with as many freinds as you want! It is much better then Minecraft, as I have shown. Many people say that because Minecraft is popular it is a great game. Some thing that are popular are not necessarily so great. Suicide is unfortunately popular-but does that mean it is better than Debate.org-which is less popular (more people commit suicide than use debate.org)? No. Just Because Minecraft is popular, does it mean CyberNations is worse? No, so do not appeal to poularity, for popular things are nit always the best. I rest my case. Thanks NRGLITE for the debate!!! (we should do another in the future) http://www.cybernations.net... www.debate.org :)
Cybernations or Minecraft-which is better? (CyberNations is pro)

Some rebuts: I admit my mistake. It has not come under my knowledge that CyberNations has a live chat system. However, by 'face' I mean the virtual faces of the players. In Minecraft, one can most certainly interact with them by finding friends, detecting enemies, and killing creepers. And in CyberNations, can one even see the others? Unfortunately, you stated something unfounded when you declared that CyberNations was much more fun than Minecraft. In CyberNations you can build a nation, yes, but in Minecraft: You can build a world! A world with its own physics, its own rules, not limited like CyberNations are with the same rules applied to each nation. In this aspect, Minecraft has the superior ground. Also, another mistaken argument you placed out was that Minecraft most likely has very less players. In this you err greatly. In this website: http://www.gamespot.com... you may find that Minecraft has already surpassed 100,000,000 players!! And sadly for you, Leo, according to your very own website, you may find that the number of players playing CN is under ten thousand. Right here: http://www.cybernations.net... So ends this rebuttal.
Cybernations or Minecraft-which is better? (CyberNations is pro)

Rebuttals: "In CyberNations-can one see another's face?" No. In minecraft you cant see anyone's face either. But in CyberNations you CAN chat in real time. You can chat with your alliance, your senate, your enemies, and your trade partners. "And uncountable are its (minecraft) combinations!" This is also incorrect. In minecraft you can only place so many blocks and do so many things. This is also true for CyberNations-however in CyberNations the things you can do are much more fun than building blocks with your freinds. In CyberNations-you can build an empire! Also minecraft is not as popular as many people think it is. Sure it is more popular than CyberNations because more kids play video games on the computer than adults-but minecraft is not as popular as you say. 1.2 billion people play computer games-and only a few million of those 1.2 billion play minecraft. Thanks for the debate! Venturebeat.com CyberNations website.
Cybernations or Minecraft-which is better? (CyberNations is pro)

Rebuttals: You stated that " Minecraft is a horrible multiplayer." This is incorrect. Minecraft, as I have said before, has a chat system where you can find out where others are and even see them! In CyberNations can one see the other player's face? In CyberNations can one chat directly live time to the other player? You also stated that in Minecraft we just build with building blocks. Perhaps, if you at it like that, and we are all built of atoms, so we may be boring. However, as real interactions of atoms are, the building blocks of Minecraft are profuse, ranging from water to earth to lava to diamond! And uncountable are its combinations! How is Minecraft a one-track game? As I have stated before, whole private universes and domains are created at the behest of their owners, whereas in CyberNations all nations are open to the public, without privacy. So it's not just building blocks. Not just atoms. It's a whole new world constantly evolving and adapting--unlike the static rules of CyberNations. Much more players are playing with this innovative game than CyberNations. One of the reasons for that is that not only does Minecraft HAVE LITTLE OR NO LAG, but its price has been slashed to 24! I say it has very less lag as its pixellated blocks have more a Lego feel than a real-world feel. So 'nuff said. This the the Craft of Mining.
Cybernations or Minecraft-which is better? (CyberNations is pro)

Rebuttals:"Unlike the separate nations of Cybernations, Minecraft is an interconnected world, providing more socializing" Cybernations-the nations are not separate. It is a multiplayer online game. Whereas Minecraft is singleplayer and has a horrible multiplayer. Only Local (LAN) worlds. others can be played on servers-but that is costly. CyberNations is free and has great connection and multiplayer. "Whereas while in cybernations each person is allowed to post various weird or downright bizarre nations, Minecraft has the same set of rules everywhere." In CyberNations there actually is a blueprint for your nation. You must follow certain rules. It is not just a free-for all. CyberNations is a popular Internet game-and better than Minecraft. I. In minecraft you just create things. In minecraft you pretty much build stuff made out of blocks. In CyberNations, you can build military, Infrastructure, buy land, research for nukes, play your part on the political global conflicts, control and deploy your soldiers, wage war, loot nations, join alliances, its up to you! You can be a peaceful nation, or a war lord. You can focus on economy, or military, or both! Buy buildings, improve your nation. It is your choice. Minecraft is a one track game-while cybernations is a much more complicated and fun game. As they say in CyberNations "Cyber Nations is a free browser-based nation simulation game. Create a nation and decide how you will rule your people by choosing a government type, a national religion, tax rate and more. Build your nation according to your choosing by purchasing infrastructure to support your citizens, land to expand your borders, technology to increase your effectiveness, and military to defend your national interests. Develop improvements for your nation such as harbors to enhance your ability to trade with other nations, build clinics and hospitals to increase your total population, and invest in schools and universities to increase your people's literacy rate. Finance national wonders like great temples and monuments or expand beyond the confines of this world by building colonies on the Moon and Mars." Did you see that? This amazing game is 0$! Its free! Minecraft is 26.95$, and all you do is play in a world made of tiny blocks. Cybernations is a much more engaging game-with conflict, building, strength, and toil. But the glory is yours to take. Will you conquer the planet? Build an economic superpower? Amass a giant army? Or will you give up? The choice is yours. Now-on to the problems with minecraft. I. the "lag". Minecraft can cause an extreme amount of work from the average computer. The screen will freeze, Minecraft will not move etc. in cybernations this never happens. CyberNations is a place of unlimited progress-but in minecraft if you build to much then your computer freezes up. this poses a major dilemma. What's the point of minecraft if it will not work!?! CyberNations does not have this lag... Well that's all I can write for now. Good luck! Sources: http://www.cybernations.net... https://minecraft.net...
Cybernations or Minecraft-which is better? (CyberNations is pro)

Minecraft. It is a very popular game loved by millions. This intuitive world filled with interactive, 3D blocks is easy to understand, fun to play with, and easy to be registered on any screen. The building blocks of fire, earth, water, and more combine into unlimited possibilities. Unlike the separate nations of Cybernations, Minecraft is an interconnected world, providing more socializing. More evidence of this interactive play lies in the chat system. Whereas while in cybernations each person is allowed to post various weird or downright bizarre nations, Minecraft has the same set of rules everywhere. Although it is allowed to have private worlds, they are private and not displayed to the public, meaning that however strange it is, it it not openly publicized. This simple game is loved my many, for a reason.
Universal

I refer to mass, but mass is also of numerous factors. To reduce everything to a single, is to exclude it's total; in the universe, the spread of mass is of significance when regarding it's existence. However, yes you are correct this is about what I refer to. A human is an effect of mass but can be reduced to mass; any deviation from this is loss of control. An apple is not without it's taste, and mass not without it's form. The form of mass can only be understood by the form - humans can understand form, and mass can be extracted. A proper interpretation of mass is of our direct relationship - the improper interpretation, as a single. It is more than a tree, but it is also a tree; similar to flora we have fauna. The fluctuation is as important scientifically as its cause, fluctuation is above its cause, because cause supports fluctuation. However, there is a duality of the matter. The cause of some fluctuation is below, but in physical agreement; In this way, mass supports life. Consider the self and universe; with only the two, you can advance the senses; your mind may open ways to different dimensions for more comprehensive thought; feelings would be more harmonious, one's creativity would become greater. We are fluent, and fluency is developed with experience and knowledge of this experience. A mind of today is capable of such things! Theoretically, yes, we would 'exist within the universe', but we would recognize both in terms of their relationship.
Universal

Now I would like some things clarified in this debate. Are you referring to what some people call, "the mass or the collective consciousness of species and living things within the open system of the universe. " Because, if so, then what kind of communication are living things and in-animate objects doing with the universe? I would assume its like a tree. The universe (the tree) has limbs (the vacuum of space) that hold all of the matter within the universe, living or non living (the leaves). In this setup is our communication simply us existing within the universe? Is it us just feeding of the energy in the universe until it becomes completely en-tropic? (IE: according to the example this would be akin to the tree burning down and becoming heat energy) Am I right? or is this debate something completely different? Please correct me if I am wrong and make your arguments or extend them in the next round. I am very excited for this- Thank you! ! !
Universal

The universe and humanity are equal, their only difference is age. The human mind can comprehend the universe, as humans are a universal species. To think, we need a heartbeat; to survive, we need numerous things. Humanity is an entirety of numerous things, and the universe is an entirety of numerous things. The cohesive human communicates with the entirety of the universe. Communication is between the cohesive human and the cohesive universe. All factors that sum up to the cohesive human communicate. The heart communicates to the universe, the mind communicates to the universe, and the human communicates to the universe.(all other factors included). Communication is of the numerous factors that sum up to the cohesive human, who communicates as the product of these numerous factors.
Legal Age Of Consent For Sex.

Statistically speaking people live what they learn . So if that is true minors will learn that they can say yes to sex at 12 or older. Education has nothing to do with this debate, consent does. If you are so into education look up the laws in your state .We are not debating education we are debating the Legal Age of Consent to sex and other things. Although you may not understand what I am trying to reiterate is that anyone under 18 cannot legally consent to sex. on the issue of decency I am just trying to say that the right thing to do is wait until the minor is at least 18 years old and can legally consent to having sex. On the issue of familial relations, Parents should educate teenagers and minors in the household about sex and that they should listen to them, because the parents are more mature and wiser than the minors. It is a statistical fact that studies show that many teens find themselves in precarious situations that ruin their lives. Due to that fact we should keep teens and minors out of situations where they feel that they have to say yes to sex at such a young age. This is not something that a 12 or 13 year old can do at that time. I find that it is the responsibility of the parents to keep their young people out of harms way. I think that the responsibility shouldstem from the parents and caregivers not the minor children. In response to your statement about rebellion , children tend to do so to get adults attention.
Legal Age Of Consent For Sex.

I am only stating that teenagers under 18 cannot consent legally to having sex . Not being irresponsible that is a statistical fact. Also I am saying that anyone 18 or over having sex with a person under 18 should be charged with a misdemeanor. Although you might disagree with what I am saying look up the law , it will tell you that people 17 and under cannot consent to sex with people that are adults. Adults make this decision not minors. Minors cannot by rights make grown up choices. I also find that the decent thing to do when it comes to minors 17 or younger is to wait until they are of a mature and legal age to consent to sex. Statutory Rape is when a minor cannot consent to having sex with someone over 18. In most states that is true. But if you do not believe me look up the law in your local Law Library. There you will find 6 or more volumes of laws on this subject. Here is an example of what I am trying to explain. A teacher who is supposed to be trusted approaches a student and has a sexual relationship with that student. That student being 15 should report the teacher to someone who can make an adult decision. Here is another example a 15 year old girl goes to a friend of her mothers for dinner , she later in the night goes to the front of the house where she is approached by the host who is much older than she is he than takes her to see the pool and there tries to take what is not his. This is just why I find that minors cannot make those kind of choices.In context I find that unless you are 18 or over you are not at the legal age to consent to sex.