BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
if both healthy baby and endangerd mother can be saved... baby should not be allowed to be aborted

in cases where mother's life is at risk, but a later term healthy baby can be safely removed instead of aborted... and thus both mother and child saaved, this should be required. abortion should not be an option. after six months or so of pregnancy, abortion in the US is restricted to only cases involving health of the mother. (to be sure, this includes much abuse for 'mental health' etc) if even a healthy baby MUST be aborted to save the mother, msot including me would agree it's the right thing to do. to be sure, however.... healthy babies are too often aborted in the name of saving the mother, when labor could be induced or teh baby somehow otherwise simply removed, instead of abortion. the mother shouldn't have the option to abort a healthy baby when it can jsut be removed.
Resolved: Objective Morality, (or "moral truths") are non-existant

Considering this is a debate of faith, I find no further reason to continue. My opponent and I have supplied adequate arguments regarding this school of thought; the rest is up to the voters. There is really no way to prove the existence of a universal morality. With this said, there is no way to disprove it due to lack of evidence. I appreciate my opponent's efforts concerning their faith, for Objective Morality can exist regardless of whether or not a person believes in it; this, I am absolutely certain of.
Resolved: Objective Morality, (or "moral truths") are non-existant

I would also like to say that I accept my opponents definition of moral. Now, onto the arguments. ". .. my opponent accepts the fact that selfishness is an aspect of morality. Furthermore, my opponent is aware of the fact that selfishness is negative to the progression of humanity; If selfishness is an aspect of morality, it must be universal- therefore Universal Morality exists. .. " this sounds like a convincing argument, but if you peel away all of the sophisticated phrases and "big" words, it is just simply circular logic that my opponent is using. selfishness isn't a moral truth. A satanist will tell you that selfishness is meant to be praised. A Buddhist will tell you an exact opposite. Both of these, you cannot deny, using your definition, are morals. "My opponent claims that morals are created in order to establish peace" I never claimed this. Morals are just established to move a society in a certain direction. Most societies just want to move into a progressive state, but some do not, and implement systems like shariah law, for example. Morals taught by shariah are no less morals than those taught my western society, but they are FAR from similar. " If every person on the planet refused to believe that gravity existed; what happens to gravity, does it cease to exist? Of course not! In the same way, Universal Morality continues to live on, regardless of whether or not a society chooses to follow it. In this case, my opponent's previous argument is invalid, as it is based off of an opinion. " you cannot really equate gravity and morality, but let's go with this example. Gravity may still exist, but it wound need to be proven, because it is an invisible force, and we cannot know it's true nature, unless we question and test it. So far, my opponent has not given, at least in my eyes, a valid argument. As far as it being an opinion, I do not know how it could be, I have provided ample proof of my stance. "My opponent proposes that Objective Morality does not exist, by proposing this, Pro condones Moral Relativism. If this is absolutely the only truth regarding this matter, absolutes exist. If absolutes exist, this means that Moral Relativism cannot exist, because Moral Relativism is not absolute, it is relative (hence the name)" I never said that there were absolutely no 100 percents. for example, if I get onto a boat and sail to the middle of the ocean, and then jump out without any protective gear, then I will 100% of the time sink, because I cannot swim. However, this isn't a moral, rather, just a fact. in the same way, the fact that Objective Morality does not exist is just a fact, not a moral, and therefor CAN be a 100%. this is about it for me. I feel like I have responded adequately to my opponent's arguments, and I hope that the readers feel the same way. no matter your opinion on the issue, please, read this with an open mind. I thank you for your time, comments, and votes! (:
Resolved: Objective Morality, (or "moral truths") are non-existant

I will now move onto refute his argument: Rebuttal: My opponent is claiming that morals derive from one universal truth, but this just simply does not seem to be true. My opponent states: ". .. rebellious nature is not an indicator of a subjective morality, rather, an indicator that humans would rather act selfishly, regardless of whether or not it is detrimental to someone else. .. " Morals are defined as followed: "A person's standards of behavior or beliefs concerning what is and is not acceptable for them to do. " So, if someone finds it more beneficial to act selfishly, wouldn't you say that the morals of that person are selfish morals, not that they are rebelling against what is morally correct for all human beings? refuting the argument for certain "Universal Morals": A lot of Christians respond to my arguments with things like: "Name a society in which it would me morally acceptable to show cowardice on the battlefield, or A society in which taking another man's wife is acceptable. " Well, this is a good point, (and probably the strongest point I have heard on this argument. ) My response to that is because some morals are created by individuals, but some morals are created by society, and the society dictates what is acceptable, and what is unacceptable, depending on what benefits it as a whole. Stealing a mans wife, or cowardice on the battlefield is ultimately not beneficial to society, and so is usually a taboo in most societies. I will now give my opponent an opportunity to respond, and disprove my arguments. Thank you for your time. (:
Resolved: Objective Morality, (or "moral truths") are non-existant

I apologize for not mentioning this earlier. As I am a Christian, my foundation for morality derives strictly from the Bible alone; this is what my opponent wanted. Secondly, I would ask my opponent to support a trusted definition for which morality can be stated. Now, I will continue to rebuke my opponent's first contention.Immorality in the Middle East:However this may be true, one must ascertain the possibility that universal morality still exists. It is simply human nature to rebel, such is the choice of some of those in Middle Eastern countries. Let me remind my opponent, that rebellious nature is not an indicator of a subjective morality, rather, an indicator that humans would rather act selfishly, regardless of whether or not it is detrimental to someone else. Also, whether or not the government condones the practices of immorality is irrelevant (the government being, any form of authority over a group of people). The governments are run by human[s], therefore, the governments are subject to the same code of morals that their citizens must also follow; I will go into details later, if necessary. Nonetheless, some people still utilize the government's arrogance as an excuse to commit horrible, disgusting acts simply because they are allowed to. I'm eager to hear the rest of what my opponent has to offer. I will refrain from going into greater detail until Pro explains the rest of their argument.Onto Pro.
Resolved: Objective Morality, (or "moral truths") are non-existant

I maintain that moral truths are non existent, rather, morals are subjective. This is why in some cultures, particular taboos are in place that aren't taboos in other. An example is in the middle east. In most middle Easter countries, beating your wife is acceptable, but in America it is punishable by law. If these morals were universal, then we would ALL have the same morals, but we do not. There really isn't much for me to say, because my opponent has yet to make his point, but when he responds, I will have a lengthier argument. Thank you for your time. (:
Places where homosexual couples can marry must represent other forms of marriage.

Alright then. "These are pretty clear signs of consent; if they're not present, then you can generally agree that the animal has no real problem with it." Consent implies approval. Just because you don't have an opinion on something doesn't mean you approve of something. Shoot I'm out of time. I'll finish off my arguments next round since this debate is five rounds. Better to post something than nothing at all you know. :)
Places where homosexual couples can marry must represent other forms of marriage.

Though I don't particularly like any of these types of marriages, this proves to be an interesting topic. Since I'm con, I will prove that in places where homosexuality IS permitted, other types of marriage should NOT be permitted (besides man woman marriage of course. Don't try to pull a fast one and get semantical) Anyway, time for my arguments. Even though throughout history, homosexuality has been very.... "unrecommended," it doesn't necessarily hold any empirical negative effects besides ones from society. Now to talk about other types of marriages. You talk about animal relationships. The reason why this shouldn't be permitted is rather obvious: we are unable to obtain proper conscent from these animals. What if the animal doesn't want to be married? You wouldn't really know now would you? However homosexual marriage is perfectly consentual. :) Also, you talk about incestuous relationships..... Well, it's just the fact that when people who are immediately related have offspring, their offspring are VERY likely to have cognitive birth defects. We don't want our population to have too many people with cognitive birth defects... However when homosexuals marry logically it is impossible for them to have offspring, so they won't even come across this problem. :) I humbly await my opponents arguments
Places where homosexual couples can marry must represent other forms of marriage.

First, to explain (without giving away arguments, haha). What this resolution is asking is this: since the most common argument for allowing gay (homosexual) and same-sex marriage is "love is love" and that same-sex couples ought to at least have the opportunity, we should do the same for other types of marriage. For example, polygamists who want to marry more than one person at any given time. Also, any sort of marriage defined by states as the joining of two (or, if affirming, more) parties. This can also be, and not limited to, incestuous relationships or animal relationships. Now, since I'm going pro, it's my job to prove that yes, we should represent these other parties too. As con, it's your job to disprove this. It'd be in our best interest to retain the debate to United States specific. Also, to keep civility, refraining from anything that may be offensive is key, so let's keep that in mind too. Thank you for viewing this debate, and the best of luck to whoever accepts it. Use the comments to help decide things if necessary.
Evolution

Thanks for your time Con:Of course I disagree with you, as I have a lot of science and practical knowledge of reality on my side.Just a few tips I will add here.Evolution does not require overpopulation at all, though overpopulation does add pressure for a species to make changes.Such as depleting their normal source of nutrition and forces them to find other means of getting nutrition.A great example is that example in my opening statement, where the fish were overpopulated and their source of prey was being depleted, but more food was available in water too shallow for them to swim, which incouraged some brave and very intelligent fish to find a means to reach that food that other fish were desperate to get, but not brave enough to try.Thus they found that by using their fins like legs they could move around in the shallows and get the food they required.Thus they not only developed strength in their fins to even go further into much more shallow waters, they also developed intelligence and courage to try something different.Eventually their swim bladder adapted to the extra free air/oxygen in the shallower water where sometimes they were exposed to air and their swim bladders were able to absorb the oxygen from air as well as water and their fins became very strong and could move around on land, to eventually form legs.So they gradually evolved from fish to amphibians.There are other forms of evolution that do not require the added pressures of overpopulation, such as mutation, genetic drift and adaptation to new environments when the old one changes, such as humans moving from Africa to snow covered lands.Hopefully if you do decide to debate against Evolutionists again, this knowledge could be helpful.Though thanks again for the debate and since you evidently deeply believe in God.May your God bless you!Adieu M8 & Take Care!!
Evolution

Sagey I'll give you the debate. I have to end all my debates and close my account. This is why: Galatians 5:19-20;King James Version (KJV);19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these;Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,;20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, I forgot about that verse. I shouldn't be on here anyways. When it boils down to it, people will choose to disagree with me anyways. I have shown you things about evolution, if you disagree, that's your choice. God bless you man, take it easy.
Evolution

Basically, me and Sagey have been going back in forth in one of my debate's comment section about this. I am formally challenging Sagey now so that we can get feedback from other people on their perspective's of our arguments. This is the structure for the debate, if Sagey accepts: Round 1 is only for acceptance. Round 2 is only for opening statements. Round 3 is for refutals and additional arguments. Round 4 is for refutals, no more additional arguments will be counted. Round 5 is for concluding statements. I hope Sagey accepts this challenge, and may the LORD GOD bless you all.
Evolution

Though it was unfortunate for Con to take leave so early, I would like to keep this debate informative and interesting fpr those who wander onto it.Firstly I'll give you a little information on Abiogenesis or Life from No Life.Many think this is extremely difficult and extremely improbable.Yet over 70 amino acids (monomers, the building blocks of life) have been discovered in meteorites and it has been demonstrated experimentally that peptides (larger and more complex polymers) can be formed by the impact of these meteorites onto the Earth's surface.So the building blocks for life could have arrived from outer space.Of the 70 amino acids discovered on meteorites, only around 24 of those are necessary for life to form.The formation from life from chemicals is actually not as complex as first thought.All you need is lipids (fatty acids) and Monomers (like amino acids) movement and a heat source, the rest is just simple chemistry.Which is what Abiogenesis is: Chemistry.Where Evolution is Biology.They are essentially two different sciences, though once Abiogenesis takes place and forms the first self replicating or living cells, then Evolution takes over.Dr. Jack Szostak has with his research, simplified greatly the Origin Of Life on planet Earth from Non-Living material.http://www.youtube.com...Enjoy
Rap Battle - Come Hard With Your Bars VI

By the time I'm done with you you'll need an ambulance because you're constantly crapulous and my appetite is ravenous so go count these rhymes on your abacus you're smelly and constantly flatulent I'm flippin' the script with a spatula and throwing you a tarantula and I'm drawin' the line in the sand like Linear Algebra I'll take a flight to Africa and then Canada and come to your house and shatter your Scapula the show will be nothing short of spectacular when I attack with angular momentum it's seldom heard that a janitor likes his rectum purred so stopped acting royal like King Louis the Third I'll take your salamander and trap it in amber and come down on you like Thor's hammer how can you be a rapper when you stammer this is a master versus a raptor apparently it's quantity now your sub-par standards I'm slick like a spilled oil tanker I anchor myself and spit in my manor as a matter of fact you don't deserve valor you're the f-ggot wearing a pair of pampers
Rap Battle - Come Hard With Your Bars VI

Big words, yes, you had many rhymesit's a shame you said Charizard 3 timesI mean for christ sakes come up with something newyou'll get chewed up and your d-ck kicked in tooyou won't be talking much sh-t when I split you in twoyou're unoriginal and otherwise uneducatedthis was your chance to prove but you just baitedthe quality was so low I can't say you properly hatedit may be debatedbut I just statedstep up and get your jaw confiscatedjust because you use the same wordplay 8 or 9 times you got your ego inflatedby the looks of how you act this a$s-whooping is severely belatedI mean seriously, as low as a salamander?and you felt the need to use that line how many times?your little piddly raps will never beat mineI'm a mega mind with the Rap IQ of Einsteinthat's impossible to outshineso closing statements? let's just say thisI was late to the punch I had to take a real long p!ssbut then I see your comment about your 102 rhymes or somethingand then I read your whole thing and I see you're bluffin'all you're doing is stuffin' and puffin'up your numbers repeating yourself and I see you've accomplished nothing
Rap Battle - Come Hard With Your Bars VI

I'm Calling you out fanboy mcbitchcome and get the crownyour rhymes are to be buried and never foundin 20 minutes time I astoundwhile I pound a p-ssyyour Masterful stalking is wussyand frowned upon you're pushyaccept this challenge and like Glennyour brains are mushylook I don't agree with those creeps eitherbut you're being weirder than PeeWee jackin' it in the theaterseriously hop off and stop riding his peterand stop trying to battle the Brotherhood believersyou spit the cringeyou're screwed like a door hingeso go back to shooting heroinwith a 2 liter syringe, this battle is over already and you haven't even acceptedand [sic] you look like your sister is the girl you have sex withCome Hard With Your Bars Part VI!Proudly Presenting Part VI in The Ever-Expanding Series!Rules:1. ABSOLUTELY NO STEALING ACCEPTABLE, BREAKING THIS RULE MEANS INSTANT DISQUALIFICATION2. Should be judged on wordplay and rhyme schemes/word choice3. Be as savage as you can/want, no holds barred4. Use as much of the word limit as you want\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\The Wordsmiths are still recruiting!I will accept anyone, but there are terms for entry1: A qualification rap battle with either me or a trusted recruiter (Rap Battles with me in the past do count as qualification)2: Must be active, I will have a relatively weak quota of at least one battle per monthMore information can be attained by commenting or PMing me about our goals and ambitions as a group!Start your bars in your round 1 argument, and remember. Come Hard With Your Bars\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\This is a Fanboy McTatertots call out, but anyone can accept the challenge [sic] was making fun of Ricegums sorry excuse for a bar in his Idubbbz diss track
Rap BAtttlllleee

I posted links because I knew you were young and dumb. Still watching Spongebob, Still sucking your thumb. How do you not know 2 Live Crew and Uncle Luke??? Damn kid, they're from the same city as YOU! You're the type to not even know about Biscayne Bay. Cuz you stay scared in your house when it's 3 miles away. Rapping for you is a bad habit, I'll admit. Everytime you open your mouth, you're spitting nothing but sh*t. I don't have to makes jokes about your weight. Because you ARE a joke, and carry NO weight. Stop dreaming, this aint Lebron vs. Kobe. It's an Olsen Twin vs. Me, Shinobi. Hit you with a lyrical katana and split you in literal half. You'll wake up manana and still be nothing but fat. Just 16 bars this round, what did you think you'd do? Three rounds later, but I beat you at bar #2. Thanks to my opponent Fatboyfresh for creating this "debate." It was fun. I hope he gives me some credit when he's using my lines at school tomorrow to get a laugh.
Rap BAtttlllleee

Looks like I'm dealing with a goon Who needs to post links for people understand his tune You take pride in calling a kid out in a fight But all you got against me is that I'm fat and white Take some time to think of something else to spit At least i got a di*k you got a tight as* clit But who who gives a sh*t right Well just see the one standing under the lime light All the curse words coming out of my mouth are spilling And this is Call of Duty your the one that im killing Dont ever compare me to a man like B Rabbit Just cause rappin and spitten is my bad habit No matter what you do im better My rhymes get reported like channel 7 reports the weather Ill leave you here Sta sta sta stuttering And all you can do is just keep muttering its time to drop the childish games and start making words that rhyme and if you need some help, try god, l'chaim Your maken fun when you don't even know me This is the ultimate match up call it Lebron vs. Kobe To bad know one knows of 2 Live Crew And snoop hasn't had a hit since two thousand and two You just heard from FatBoy and im taking a bow Lets just see what the crowd has to say about this right here, right now
Rap BAtttlllleee

You're d@mn right I'm Bob Barker, you're Happy Gilmore. Dropped kicked in the grill Rd.1, you don't want no more. Coulda had your mom for a dollar, but your dad wanted four. Not that she was worth it, just knew she'd be useless and sore. "Fatboyfresh"? what is this? 1982? You probably ate the competition coming down the fallopian tube. That's why you're a cannibal, well, that... and you eat nut soup. I'm Dawg face punk cuz I'm a product of 2 Live Crew and Snoop. If you're a bad @$$ rapper, you're right, I can't tell. You'd get no hits on Youtube because pedo's don't get net in jail. You can't talk about winning, you aint Obama and this aint the Nobel. Just some whack @$$ kid, scared, to come out of his white @$$ shell. You better become a lawyer, raps not your forte. You'd get shook in county and hang yourself before your court date. Screaming out at night, "Why wont Jorge go away!?!" It's cuz you're an @$$ clown.... Pret a porter... (1) Wanna be B. Rabbit, probably cry at night when the lights go off. Wont leave your house at night, scared a black guy might cough. Few more years your nuts will match your boobs and drop. your first and last debate now make like little people and Roloff....(2) (1)http://en.wikipedia.org... (2)http://tlc.howstuffworks.com...