BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
This House would allow the consumption of dog meat

There will be four rounds in this debate. The first round is for acceptance. You just have to say "I accept". Please do not start your arguments until the second round. If you have any questions about the debate, say in the first round. I will answer through either the second round or the comments. The second round will only be for arguments. No rebuttals will be allowed until the third round. The third round is for rebuttals, and for extra explanations for your current arguments. No new arguments are allowed The forth round is for the conclusion. Rebuttals and extra explanations for current arguments are allowed. No new arguments are allowed. 1. No forfeits with no excuses. You should make sure that you have enough time to ensure a fun debate. Since you will have 72 hours from the time I post my arguments, please make sure you can keep that open window. 2. Maintain a civil and decorous atmosphere 3. No trolling 4. No K's of the topic 5. Violation of any of these rules or of any of the round set-ups merits a loss and the instigator has the power and authority to coerce the challenger to accepting so.
Slytherin is Better Than Gryffindor!

I don't really understand what the Elder Wand has to do with anything, so... Yes, the Weasley's were good, but Ginny was the heir of Slytherin. The one who opened the Chamber, remember? I don't know where to begin with explaining everything Dumbledore has wrong with him. -Treated Harry like a pawn. -Left him with abusive relatives. -Took complete control of Harry's life. -Used Legilimency on students. -Broke a lot of the Ministry rules. But you keep telling yourself that he's *cough* good! Oh, and it's spelt Neville, who actually wanted Hufflepuff...
Slytherin is Better Than Gryffindor!

Kieran, that was one person. And that one person was actually offered Slytherin. Draco was a Death Eater. And did you know, he lied to Voldemort once to keep Harry safe, when they were at Malfoy Manor. Not all Gryffindors are brave *cough Peter Pettigrew*. Slytherin had the most famous wizard of all time, Merlin! Gryffindorks (yes, that was deliberate) have a tendency to yell and shout a lot.
Increase in funding for Space Exploration

Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its exploration and/or development of space beyond the Earth's mesosphere.Rules:First round is for acceptance only. Clarifications and negotiations should be made in the comments before acceptance.Second and third rounds for debating.Fourth round should be limited to a 2000 character summary. No new arguments. Con may not reference Pro's summary in his own summary but must summarize rounds 2 and 3.BOP: Burden of proof is shared. Con must provide a case of his own in addition to refuting Pro's case.Voting period: 2 weeks. Voters must provide RFDs.
On balance Caucasians have a Higher IQ than African Americans

Resolved - On balance Caucasians have a higher IQ than African Americans Terms On Balance - In general, with all things considered. On the Norm Caucasians - White People, White Skinned possibly of European Origin. IQ - intelligence quotient African Americans - an American that is African and especially of black African descent. Black people, Of or possibly born in or descent from Africa. Typically dark skin This is a pretty clear debate. No trolling, no semantics, and no arguing this is a truism so it can not be debated. I am affirming the stance that white people tend to have a higher IQ than African Americans. BOP is on me to prove this is normatively true Apply in comments
The media is NOT being suppressed by law enforcement in Ferguson

Afternoon Immortal Everyone reading Media: The main means of mass communication (especially television, radio, newspapers, and the Internet) regarded collectively. Suppress: to prevent the dissemination of. or to forcibly put an end to. Law enforcement An organization or agency that collectively acts to uphold the laws and legislation of a given area. I accept PRO in that my claim is that the media is not being forcibly prevented by any law enforcement agency in their attempts to disseminate information via any form of medium. Hopefully this will be an objective and fair assessment of the heated situation in Ferguson, and may help shed some light on those who may not be up to speed on the situation as it evolves. The floor is CON's and happy reading.
Jewish is a religion AND a race.

To reiterate, the Jewish mother-to-child "law" was born from the religion, which makes it more of a passing of the religion, not any actual gene that is passed. In races, every one has advantages and disadvantages. For example people of Scotland have lighter skin, because half of their year is pitch black, so they have fair skin to absorb more Vitamin D from the sun. The native people of Australia have darker skin, to deflect UV rays, since Australia gets too much sun. This is passed down in genes that change, according to the environment. The Jewish religion does not have a particular environment, and the argument that it is passed down from mother to child is somewhat irrelevant. It may be passed down, but nothing substantial is passed down, the faith is passed down, no genes are changed. To conclude, the Jewish religion does not: 1.) Come from a geographical location on Earth. 2.) Have any genes passed that are distinct to Jews. 3.) It is not defined by any physical features, they can vary from Caucasian to African American to Asian to Alaskan. To bring up yet again the definition of race: Any of the traditional DIVISIONS of humankind, characterized by supposedly DISTINCTIVE and universal PHYSICAL characteristics. The closest thing to a race that can describe the Jewish religion is a culture, but definitely not a race.
Jewish is a religion AND a race.

My bad, I didn't deliver that last argument as clearly as I could have. I never once stated that Jewish is not a religion. Readdressing what I stated earlier, "more than half of all Jews in Israel call themselves 'secular,' and don't believe in God or any of the religious beliefs of Judaism. Half of all Jews in the United States don't belong to any synagogue. They may practice some of the rituals of Judaism and celebrate some of the holidays, but they don't think of these actions as religious activities." What I meant by this was, although people call themselves Jewish, which you are claiming is only a religion, half of the Jews in America do not practice Judaism religiously, but are still referred to as Jews because of their race. In simpler terms, if my mother was Jewish (making me Jewish), and I did not go to synagogue or practice the Jewish religion, I would still racially be classified as a Jew - but not religiously classified as Jewish. "According to Jewish law, a child born to a Jewish mother or an adult who has converted to Judaism is considered a Jew; one does not have to reaffirm their Jewishness or practice any of the laws of the Torah to be Jewish. According to Reform Judaism, a person is a Jew if they were born to either a Jewish mother or a Jewish father. Also, Reform Judaism stresses the importance of being raised Jewish; if a child is born to Jewish parents and was not raised Jewish then the child is not considered Jewish. According to the Orthodox movement, the father"s religion and whether the person practices is immaterial. No affirmation or upbringing is needed, as long as the mother was Jewish." http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org... This stresses my argument that Jewish is not only a religion, but also a race.
Jewish is a religion AND a race.

The supreme court may have ruled their religion to be a race, but 40 yeas back they also erased the legal definition of race because A.) It was discriminatory. and B.)It has no legal base, race is more social and geographical than anything. So legally there is no such thing as a race. "More than half of all Jews in Israel call themselves 'secular,' and don't believe in God or any of the religious beliefs of Judaism." So are you, by stating this, saying that Jewish people aren't Jewish? If you are instead saying that being Jewish is not a religion, then you are opposing yourself in saying that "Jewish" is both a religion and a race. "They may practice some of the rituals of Judaism and celebrate some of the holidays, but they don't think of these actions as religious activities." So, again, Jewish people in America aren't Jewish? To end the point on the one thing I have been driving, Jewish people do not come from a geographical location on Earth, I know the mother passes on "being Jewish" but that was originated in the religion. There is no such thing as the Jewish race, at best it is a culture, which also is not a race.
Jewish is a religion AND a race.

Clearly, there is a religion called Judaism, a set of ideas about the world and the way we should live our lives that is called "Judaism." It is studied in Religious Studies courses and taught to Jewish children in Hebrew schools. There is a lot of flexibility about certain aspects of those beliefs, and a lot of disagreement about specifics, but that flexibility is built into the organized system of belief that is Judaism. However, many people who call themselves Jews do not believe in that religion at all. More than half of all Jews in Israel call themselves "secular," and don't believe in God or any of the religious beliefs of Judaism. Half of all Jews in the United States don't belong to any synagogue. They may practice some of the rituals of Judaism and celebrate some of the holidays, but they don't think of these actions as religious activities. The most traditional Jews and the most liberal Jews and everyone in between would agree that these secular people are still Jews, regardless of their disbelief. Clearly, then, there is more to being *Jewish than just a religion. In the 1980s, the United States Supreme Court ruled that Jews are a race, at least for purposes of certain anti-discrimination laws. Their reasoning: at the time these laws were passed, people routinely spoke of the "Jewish race" or the "Italian race" as well as the "Negro race," so that is what the legislators intended to protect. But many Jews were deeply offended by that decision, offended by any hint that Jews could be considered a race. The idea of Jews as a race brings to mind nightmarish visions of Nazi Germany, where Jews were declared to be not just a race, but an inferior race that had to be rounded up into ghettos and exterminated like vermin. *Who is a Jew? A Jew is any person whose mother was a Jew or any person who has gone through the formal process of conversion to Judaism. Being a Jew has nothing to do with what you believe or what you do. A person born to non-Jewish parents who has not undergone the formal process of conversion but who believes everything that Orthodox Jews believe and observes every law and custom of Judaism is still a non-Jew, even in the eyes of the most liberal movements of Judaism, and a person born to a Jewish mother who is an atheist and never practices the Jewish religion is still a Jew, even in the eyes of the ultra-Orthodox. Traditional Judaism maintains that a person is a Jew if his mother is a Jew, regardless of who his father is. The liberal movements, on the other hand, allow Jewish status to pass through the mother or the father if the child identifies as Jewish.
Jewish is a religion AND a race.

Judaism is a religion in that it is a belief system with ritual and practice, and an underlying philosophy aimed at a connection to the divine and an adherence to divine command. Judaism is also a race in that membership in the system (even without belief) is passed through a genetic connection through the mother. You cannot choose not to be Jewish if you are born in. However, because Judaism recognizes conversion, the religion cannot be purely racial as you cannot convert to another race. Therefore, it is easiest to say that it is a religion with racial/genetic components. When defining anti semitic: anti semitic Web definitions relating to or characterized by anti-Semitism; hating Jews. wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn Then, defining Jewish: Adjective S: (adj) Jewish, Judaic (of or relating to Jews or their culture or religion) "He is Jewish"; "a Jewish wedding" But what's a Jew? Jews Web definitions (Jew) a person belonging to the worldwide group claiming descent from Jacob (or converted to it) and connected by cultural or religious ties) wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn Defining Christianity: chris"ti"an"i"ty /ˌkrisCHēˈanitē/ Noun The religion based on the person and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, or its beliefs and practices. Jewish referred to denoting or associating with Jews or Judaism. Christianity, however, was described as a religion. Christianity is not a race - it's a religion. But Jew is a race as well as a religion.
Jewish is a religion AND a race.

No religion can be actually be considered a race because no religion comes from one specific part of the world. Putting the Jewish faith into a race would imply that it has become a seperate ethnicity. Anybody anywhere can be Jewsish, just like they can be Christian, or Aethiest, or any other religion on the face of the planet. The definition of race is as follows: Any of the traditional divisions of humankind, characterized by supposedly distinctive and universal physical characteristics. In a simpler form of this, a race is a people that have come from a particular place in the world. Whereas, on risk of sounding like a broken record player, I repeat theat no religion can actually be a race.
Jewish is a religion AND a race.

There has been debate on the question of whether or not Jewish is a religion or a race. I am not Jewish by religion or race, but I definitely believe that it should be labeled as both. There is the Jewish religion, made up predominantly by Jewish people. Jewish people are a race as well as a religion. ex. Einstein was Jewish in race, but pantheist or deist in religion. Also, you cannot be born into a religoin, but you inherit your Jewish race from your mother and cannot 'quit' that. You can, however, convert to the Judaism religion.
Schools should teach a Post-Graduation Class instead of Latin

Hey, I want to let you know that first of all, Latin is not a required course to take. After all, we are allowed to choose any language we want as long as the school provides a course for that language, and usually there's more than one option. It's also unnecessary to have a post-graduation class because we learn most of the things we'd learn in the post-graduation class in other required classes. For example, we learn how to petition and vote in civics and social studies classes, we learn how to do taxes in personal finance class, and you can discuss how to get a job with your counselor, especially since you need a form from him or her if you want to apply for a job before you're sixteen. There are obviously more useful tools you'll learn in these classes, but in the interest of time I've made it concise. Overall, it's not necessary to have a post-graduation class, and we can choose to learn a language other than Latin. This is my opinion on the subject matter!
Schools should teach a Post-Graduation Class instead of Latin

I believe, instead of teaching latin in high-schools that teachers should be teaching a class about what happens after you graduate high school. This class would include how to calculate taxes, how to apply for jobs, how to vote etc. I believe that school misses out on teaching students about what happens in everyday life after high-school whether you choose to go down the university route or not. I think that it is wrong that schools should prioritise subjects such as latin, which is a dead language, over learning how to cope in an independent lifestyle after you leave home. I am not anti-latin, however I am using it as an example of some of the more pointless subjects being taught in the national curriculum.
.999999999999 (repeating) is equal to 1

You have failed to show mathematical proof for said claim. I will tell you that .9 repeating is just another way of saying 1 again. If you have one soda in your hand, you do have .99999999... at the same time. It's a slightly more complicated way of saying it, but it is true. If I could see some proof for your math I could have had a better rebuttal.
make a boring story

I did nothing. I really, really, really did nothing. Today, I did nothing. A whole lot of nothing. Nothing I did today was worth something. Nothing is a word. I really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really did nothing. The more you say a word, it sounds weird. Really? This is the story of how I really did nothing. Nothing really matters if I really did nothing.
make a boring story

Thanks for accepting, Yay842. Good luck. It was Saturday. Today was the main day for college football. I turned on the TV, checking to see which football games were on. Skiping through the channels, I saw a game between the University of Alabama and the Univerity of Texas. Both were very good teams, so I decided to watch. The game was a good one. Alabama had the lead, Texas had the lead. Alabama had the lead. Texas had the lead. The game was in the 4th quarter with Alabama having the ball. Only 1 minute left. The quarterback complete a pass deep to the Texas 1, which set up a chance to win. Later in the drive, there was 3rd and goal. Texas lead 31-28. The crowd was making a lot of noise. The quarterback overthrew the reciever this time, setting up a 4th and goal. Alabama had their whole seson on just one play. Should they kick the field goal to send the game in to overtime, or go for the touchdown to win the game? Alabama lined up for a field goal. An 18 yard field goal. The kick was up, no good. Off the post. But there was a penalty flag on the field. Offsides on the defense. Alabama still had a chance. The same distance, but with no time left on the clock. If they made the field goal, they would send the game into overtime, if they missed, Texas would qin the game. Alabama lined up. The ball was snapped, the kick was up, and good. The game would go to overtime.
FREEDOM OF SPEECH MASTERS. censors they are.

I guess this is rhyming poetry so here we go haha Watching the screen wondering why the boisterous voices are so mean, filled with hate, trying to propagate, an idea of violence and segregation like its some government mandate, Filing through the mess, elevates the stress like a damsel, under an incredible amount of duress, But at the end of the tunnel most assuredly like a funnel, is the light of truth which permeates like the radiance of youth, And when its all over, when its all said and done the truth will reign like the morning sun!
World War 2 Code Debate

While Pro did show that cracking the British and Japanese codes significantly helped the Allies, he failed to show that the Axis would have won the war had the Allies not cracked the codes. I will start out by talking about the Pacific Theater. Pro has shown that had the Americans not cracked the Japanese code giving them the information about the Japanese plan to attack the Midway Islands, they would have lost those islands as well as Hawaii. Would Japan have won WWII if they won at Midway? Probably not. America had: Nearly twice the population of Japan. Seventeen time's Japan's national income. Five times more steel production. Seven times more coal production. Eighty times the automobile production. Throughout WWII, Japan produced 17 aircraft carriers. [1] The US on the other hand produced 141 aircraft carriers. [1] Even if Japan defeated the US at Midway, they would have lost the war. Japan was already losing in China. Britain, China, and the United States would have eventually crushed Japan one way or another. It would simply be a matter of time. Now I will talk about the European Theater. My opponent points out that the German submarines were very dangerous to ships sailing to British ports. But Pro fails to prove that had the British not cracked the codes, the British would have been forced to surrender. Also, my opponent seems to forget that the Soviet Union was also fighting the Axis in Europe. The Soviet Union produced 105,251 tanks and self propelled guns during WWII. Germany on the other hand produced only 67,429 tanks and self propelled guns. [2] Due to the fact that the USSR alone outproduced and outnumbered Germany, Germany would most likely have lost the war. Sources: [1] http://www.combinedfleet.com... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org...
World War 2 Code Debate

Before the Enigma was cracked, Britain had trouble: A. Fighting off the Germans in the Atlantic B. knowing where Germany planned to strike. As Britain was weak and needed desperate supplies, they had to rely on radar, as they had yet to crack enigma. But radar was almost inefficient: the German U-Boats were lurking in every shadow of the Atlantic, so to reach North America and return would've been amazing. Either way, had Enigma not been broken, the British would not have stopped German attacks on the surface at night and lost many a convoy. As for the Battle of Midway, the Americans would not have sent as many aircraft carriers to Midway had they not known there was a major Japanese attack pending. Midway must've meant a lot to Japan, as they would've then taken Pearl Harbor. My point is, code was vital, no matter which part of the globe you were on. After the cracking of Enigma, Britain's supply line finally started running smoothly, and the Japanese defeat meant the Allies knew Japan could be defeated. Prior to the defeat at Midway, Allied morale had dropped to its lowest during the war. http://www.navy.mil.... http://www.uboataces.com...
World War 2 Code Debate

Code was a vital part of World War 2: Nazis used the Enigma, mostly for the Atlantic War, whereas Japan used it for the entire Pacific Theater. I as Pro will be arguing that had the British not cracked Enigma, and had the American's not cracked the Japanese code, the war would've been won by the Axis forces: Britain could've (note the use of the word could've, not would've) been starved to defeat and the Japanese could've taken Midway, Pearl Harbor and then the (bit of an overstatement, but still) the entire North American continent. Con will argue code was not significant.