BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
marry a cousin

Furthermore, just because a child has an abnormality, it doesn't mean that they don't have rights as human beings. They, too, should be given the love and respect they deserve as human beings. Having a syndrome doesn't make you less of a person. So if they really do love each other, then I think that they should go ahead and express it. In Japan, marrying one's cousin is allowed due to its dwindling population. Allowing such behavior contributes in increasing their population, which is good.
You suck

I have to jut say to everyone on DDO that I was personally 'challenged' to this. I accepted because the person corin directly sent it to me.THe first contention to raise is the matter of me possibly being gay. In which case I'd BLOW a penis... not suck it.The second is the matter of me using straw. While it's true i suck them, I equally breath out immediately after so this cancels that out.I do often suck things, yes. However I blow to cancel that out and have no deficit of 'suck' left over :)
YWYH exists and Venus does not, as stipulated by DoulosChistos, BrettNortje against.

" If you r texts say something, this is not justified, as, it is only a story." If we are talking about any given topic, would not the obvious source of information be on the primary texts about that topic? If I was talking about what Buddhists believe, would not their own actual writing be my best source for information? Again, my information on monotheism and Yahweh comes from the primary sources, which would obviously be Scripture. Simply declaring that Venus exists alongside Yahweh is not an argument. It has been proven that Yahweh and monotheism are inextricably tied. Once cannot change that by statements
YWYH exists and Venus does not, as stipulated by DoulosChistos, BrettNortje against.

"If one believes in Yaweh, then one cannot believe in other gods? Well, what about the devil? Isn't he 'a god?' Where does his power come from, or, where does he reside if not in heaven" Simply residing in heaven and being powerful wouldn't qualify any being to be a god, otherwise all the angels are gods, which we know is not the case, again, I am using Judeo-Christian texts regarding Yahweh, that is the obvious and most logical source of information on Him. The fact is Satan is a being created directly by God (Job 26:13) and does not have any qualities that qualify him to be a god. Satan is not omnipresent, omniscient, eternal as God is, and is not the Creator " Also, I believe the original way to classify 'Yaweh' is as a true god, not the true god, as this would be offensive to other gods, yes?" Would not a "true" God be THE true God? Otherwise what makes Him true? Again, I get my information of my God from Biblical texts. The Biblical texts and the Rabbinic texts are certainly clear that YHVH is the only God that exists. If He exists all other "gods" do not. Since you have conceded the existence of Yahweh you have essentially conceded that monotheism is correct
YWYH exists and Venus does not, as stipulated by DoulosChistos, BrettNortje against.

The planets affect the ways of our lives, as, when we are in the womb, the effects of the universe on us gear us, at different developmental stages, to become tuned differently. If one believes in Yaweh, then one cannot believe in other gods? Well, what about the devil? Isn't he 'a god?' Where does his power come from, or, where does he reside if not in heaven? Also, I believe the original way to classify 'Yaweh' is as a true god, not the true god, as this would be offensive to other gods, yes? Yes, Venus is a planet, and, is a manifestation of a consciousness. As she bears effects, and every bit of energy is never destroyed, it merely changes forms, either she is creating energy or she is reacting, as do we to physical phenomenon through our senses.
YWYH exists and Venus does not, as stipulated by DoulosChistos, BrettNortje against.

Thank you for the response, I guess when I read "Venus" I was thinking the goddess Aphrodite, I was not aware you were referring to the actual planet Venus. Yes, of course the planet Venus exists. I do not dispute there is a celestial body called Venus. "This means, as a planet with influence on tides, emotions due to birth date algorithms, where when you are conceived you begin to attune to the planetary energies that, for example, involve electromagnetism, and, bounce off the sun, striking us, she exists." Is there any scientific evidence that the position of Venus, or the date of one's birth has any true affect on the personality, and or destiny of human beings? If so can you provide some examples? And you refer to a planet as a she, isn't that a reification fallacy? "while i too believe that Yaweh is a god, a manifestation of a planet" So let me ask, if Yahweh exists, that logically excludes other gods from existing does it not? It is apparent throughout all Judeo-Christian documents on YHWH that He and He alone is the only God. That doesn't leave room for Venus. How do you reconcile this? Further, what exactly makes you connect gods with planets, I know the planets were named after the Greco/Roman gods, and perhaps there is some connection with modern astrology, but there is no reference to YHWH ever being connected to the planets or the Zodiac. Where exactly did you get this connection? Based upon the strict monotheism of those who follow Yahweh, and what He has said about Himself, I believe based upon your admission that He exists and is "a god" then my original point still stands, He is a God therefore the only God. ". The confusion comes in when Christians and Jews and Muslims link the universe with astral bodies " Can you elaborate more on this? I as a Christian link the astral bodies and the universe together as creations of Yahweh that are entirely separate from Him. Ultimately, if one believes in Yahweh then one cannot have other gods.
YWYH exists and Venus does not, as stipulated by DoulosChistos, BrettNortje against.

Thank you for accepting my challenge. My beliefs are based on science - that the planet Venus is actually a collection of energy that affects the world as if she were truly part of the horoscope. This means, as a planet with influence on tides, emotions due to birth date algorithms, where when you are conceived you begin to attune to the planetary energies that, for example, involve electromagnetism, and, bounce off the sun, striking us, she exists. This is all tied to my uncovering of the link between Greek symbolism of gods and the astrophysics - indeed they both exist and work together. This is like saying that my opponents beliefs are better because they claim to be better, while i too believe that Yaweh is a god, a manifestation of a planet, and, sent his son Jesus to the earth to bring about hope, I prefer Venus as Goddess as she fills me with euphoria often - since I pray to her correctly, she fills me with joy and high feelings. With these definite effects, it is safe to say my Goddess exists, while Yaweh also exists. The confusion comes in when Christians and Jews and Muslims link the universe with astral bodies - the universe is the ultimate Father, the son is Jesus - a planet - and the holy spirit is the energy that Jesus uses.
Two does not, and never will, equal one, and debating it on this site is pointless

For starters, thanks for leaving this so far open for me to actually debate. Well lets evaluate the resolution here. "Two does not, and never will, equal one, and debating it on this site is pointless" Here is what I present. Equal - Citation: Dictionary.com 1.as great as; the same as (often fol. by to or with): The velocity of sound is not equal to that of light. 2.like or alike in quantity, degree, value, etc.; of the same rank, ability, merit, etc.: two students of equal brilliance. 3.evenly proportioned or balanced: an equal contest. 4.uniform in operation or effect: equal laws. 5.adequate or sufficient in quantity or degree: The supply is equal to the demand. 6.having adequate powers, ability, or means: He was equal to the task. 7.level, as a plain. 8.tranquil or undisturbed: to confront death with an equal mind. 9.impartial or equitable. –noun 10.a person or thing that is equal. –verb (used with object) 11.to be or become equal to; meet or match: So far the rate of production doesn't equal the demand. If A equals B and B equals C, then A equals C. 12.to make or do something equal to: No matter how he tries, he can't equal his brother's achievements. 13.Archaic. to make equal; equalize. 14.Obsolete. to recompense fully. Aight so.....using the 14 definitions of equal I presented I am going to tell you exactly whey two can at times equal one. For instance. TWO halves equal ONE whole. TWO debaters of minimal quality may equal ONE good debater. TWO apples in my analysis equal ONE orange. TWO essays equal ONE short story. TWO people equal ONE couple. Disprove these examples or face the loss, but I will go into greater detail. The age old question, "did the tree actually fall in the forest if no consciousness was there to witness it?" Are not our world experiences simply subjective to our minds? Can you disprove that the tree fell or did not? No and as such you can never prove to me that two will never equal one. In a subjective or potentially subjective universe there are no universal truths. You yourself lay the potential for a genius mathematician. Finally you tell me that debating it on this side is pointless. And through such a topic you are trying to tell me that you should win this debate. Well if you truly believe that then you will advocate losing this debate for a debate about whether a debate is pointless or not will be pointless in itself if the topic is proved pointless. Furthermore I contest your idea. I feel such debates only help to increase current world math knowledge and help others understand enjoyable flaws in our current math system.
Two does not, and never will, equal one, and debating it on this site is pointless

OK, so recently, I have been noticing a great deal of debates that are all centered on the same thing. "Two equals one." Now, I am going to be completely honest, I am not a math genius. I realize that I will probably never do a career in mathematics, but I'm pretty sure the first thing we learned in elementary school is that one plus one equals.....wait for it... TWO! So to say that one equals two would pretty much prove almost all mathematical theories, and while it is possible, I doubt that a revolutionary mathematician would probably not debate on this site. In addition, the theory has been disproved a number of times on this site, and it's getting obnoxious. So please, can we stop debating this?
Sports Gambling in the U.S. Should be Legal in all States

At the first part of my agreement, I would like to ask if sports gambling legalized in all states of U.S.A, what people have the right to gamble? Adult, or teenagers? I assume Adult and teenagers, who above 16 , have the right to gamble. I am against the statement .From my point of view, the legality of the gambling could have a serious consequences for the future of the economies and the moral standard. It is a bad policy that it is a blow to the whole economic growth, and an even bigger blow to the banking system. Since consider the issue of bad debt, the compulsive gambler always have debts loaned from the bank or shark loan. .Because of their loan are huge and they are the compulsive gambler, their repaid ability is so low that cause the issue of uncollected debts. Compulsive gamblers is defined as a type of people can't control the impulse to gamble, even when they know their gambling is hurting themselves or their loved ones. Furthermore, most of the compulsive gambler will then turn to crime when he bankrupt. Embezzlement, theft, and involvement in organized crime is a common cases , we can see in the reality. Another basic argument of sports gambling legalized opposite site is that how sports gambling has affected the integrity of the game. Illegal sports gambling has already affect the justice of the game. If we legalize the sports gambling, it is predicted that the matters will deteriorate rapidly in the future. Past scandals at Boston College or Tulane illustrate this will surely affect the integrity of athletes and coaches. From my point of view, I really don't want to see "matching fixing" is in the headlines everyday. The social cost of gambling legalized like what Boydon Cole and Sidney Margolius said in their book, When You Gamble--You Risk More Than Your Money, conclude: "There is no doubt of the destructive effect of gambling on the family life. The corrosive effects of gambling attack both the white-collar and blue-collar families with equal vigor." All in all, it can be said that the cost of sports gambling legalized is so large for the society to bear.And why should we legalize the sports gambling in disregard of other people's opinion?
Evolution is only a theory and will not be fact. Creation is true.

Chromosome Two Fusion: No Proof for Evolution Published by JT812 July 4, 2009, Category: Biology The fusion of chromosome two has been said to be overwhelming evidence in favor of evolution and descent from apes. But is it really? Recently I heard a claim that worried me a little bit concerning the decent of apes to humans. Here it is: since apes have 24 sets of chromosomes and humans have 23 sets of chromosomes, then if humans have a fused chromosome it would be proof of common decent. Turns out humans do have a fused chromosome. It"s chromosome 2. This can be proven because of the structure of chromosomes. Chromosomes have centromeres and telomeres. Centromeres are in the center of the chromosome and telomeres are at the end of the chromosome. If a chromosome fusion occurred then there would be telomeres in the middle of the chromosome and two centromeres. Such is the case for chromosome 2. Being a believer in God and design as told in the Bible, this worried me a little bit. So I decided to do some research. Scientists claimed that this was overwhelming evidence for common descent, but its not. Either God made humans with what appears to be a fused chromosome, or a fusion happened somewhere in our past. If this fusion did happen it does not point to descent from apes. Even if we did share the same number of chromosomes as apes at one point we still could have been completely different from apes. Cats and pigs both have 19 pairs or 38 chromosomes. But do pigs and cats look like the same animal to you? Other than both having three letter names, they are completely different. So this evidence proves nothing in favor of evolution. The only thing it proves is that most likely in some point in our past humans have had a chromosome fusion. Before this chromosome fusion humans could have very easily still been very different from apes, so it is impossible to say this is evidence for evolution. Read more: http://scienceray.com... I also have to say/ask something to you to prove 1. evolutionists say that reptiles became birds uhh... that just weird for one and one major difference is their lungs the reptiles breath in and out like we do and birds do not anything in between there would be fatal. All the Evolutionists think about is the scales becoming feathers. So please explain how this proves evolution. And I know it may seem weird to think about a God who created this all by his hand but it seems harder to believe everything happened by chance I just don't see any logic in any of that. You can get a pile of bricks from a building but you cant suddenly get a building out of a pile of bricks it just doesn't work. Neither does chemicals and other things suddenly forming a very complicated thing and even more complicated things to have the other thing to survive. And why are people so eager to say we came from apes? I would take that as an insult to be honest.
1-Round debates should not be allowed.

I am advocating that the minimum number of rounds allowed to a debate be 2. One-round "debates" defeat the actual purpose of a debate, because all that is done is the establishment of both sides. Nobody has a real chance to refute each other (except the contender, but then his arguments cannot be refuted). One-round "debates" are not really debates, they are just rounds. As you can see, this "debate" is one round. So you may see the evils of a one-round "debate" (See above if you didn't catch them).
Religion should not have special immunity from criticism.

My opponent likes to run circles once he has been pointed out,... I stayed within the bounds of this debate. I also find his attempt at sarcasm pretty funny as well,... I was simply laying the outline of our debate so that it is understandable of all our positions,... I appreciate the grammar lesson as well,... I hope it leads you to a girlfriend and out of your parents basement someday before you turn 40. As for the debate at hand,... My opponent claims I have pulled "destructive criticism" out of thin air,... I want to provide some evidence to my madness,...www.wikipedia.org Surely you have heard of constructive criticism,... well, as you can let your mind guess,... destructive is the opposite,... If we do not allow for some kind of "special" immunity to those people that are being harshly criticised simply because of there religion,... than how does a society govern morality when it comes to how fairly we treat jews, blacks, muslims, homosexuals, etc, etc.... Just in case,.. Puck,.. you are still having troubles understanding this,.. lets try an example,.. Lets say this is a few years down the road and you have been promoted to McDonalds assistant manager,... You are in charge of hiring a new nugget operations tech,... You have 2 applicants,... Charlie the non denominational no faith libertarian,... and Susan the muslim. Your criticism of Susan,... she is a muslim, muslims are the cause of all the terrorsim in the world. You hire Charlie, because you dont like Susan because she is a muslim,... Susan does not have a job,... you have violated her rights to be muslim and to work through criticisms of her religion that led to oppression,... History shows us that religion, race, and sex MUST have some kind of SPECIAL immunity when it comes to criticism such as destructive criticism in particular, because it does and has led to oppression. One does NOT have to the right to oppress someones rights to have that religion, once someone criticized someone with motives based soley on religion, that becomes oppression based on religion,... Without special immunity against religion based criticism,... we walk a dangerous path that this country has been down before,...
Religion should not have special immunity from criticism.

"Definition - Special: distinctive; unique." - assuming this is my opponents definition of special?... "Religion should not have special immunity from criticism." - This is the topic of the debate and stance my opponent must defend. Legal definition of IMMUNITY; Exemption from criminal prosecution or legal liability or punishment on certain conditions. -WWW.dictionary.COM With "special" immunity, one must claim "special" criticism,.. I claim DESTRUCTIVE criticism. Destructive Criticism: Destructive criticism is intended to harm someone, derogate and destroy someone's creation, prestige, reputation and self-esteem on whatever level it might be. This may be done intentionally or out of sheer ignorance and foolishness. Hence the word destructive is used. In practical life destructive criticism may be disguised as constructive to be more painful while harming. Valid examination of intention of critic is when asked to prove, to help or to be somewhat useful at all. Often destructive criticism comes from persons who are envious, cruel and those who judges in fields which are not their own. My platform,... Religion SHOULD have "special" and protected immunity from prosecution, persecution, and infringements of rights to those religions being destructively criticized in such ways such as open protests in front of religious land marks on holy days, physical abuse, property damage, harassment, and mocking or demeaning ones beliefs or religion that would otherwise degrade, or devalue, and infringe on the rights of others based soaly on the religious views of said victim. It is ones right to practice and have religion,... it is not your or anyone elses right to infringe or degrade that right belonging to another,... Thus "special" immunity and protection should be given to religion protecting it from destructive and cruel criticism.
Is sid meirs civilization 6 overpriced

Civilization 6 is definitely not worth 60$. The gameplay itself once you understand it is fun but is definitely not worth 60 dollars. I am of the opinion that a videogame should be priced based on the quality/complexity of its gameplay. Civilization 6 has a unreasonabley high price (at the moment) and i'm glad its being changed to 12 dollars. Although honestly i would've been happy if the price dropped to half price (30 dollars) and not all the way down to 12.
Some UFO's ARE from another planet.

Sorry, but all that evidence tells me is that UFOs definitely exist. That was never in debate: the question was, are some of these UFOs alien spaceships from other planets? There is nothing in any of those videos that suggests extraterrestrial involvement. Neither is such involvement a reasonable conclusion to reach: just because an explanation leaps to mind first does not make it good science. Sherlock Holmes famously said, "Once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains - however improbable - must be the truth. " If you've ever studied deductive logic, you'll know that the above statement is complete nonsense. Just because we can't immediately see how something happened does not give us license to fly off on fanciful tangeants, and then claim they must be true because no one else can think of a better explanation. In conclusion, although my opponent has advanced interesting speculations on the nature of extraterrestrial contact, and has shown me some pretty pictures of unexplainable phenomena, he has failed to satisfactorily link the two.
Some UFO's ARE from another planet.

Back to Space Raptors for a moment though. If Raptors did indeed escape the destruction of Earth, then they also most likely have been living on another planet(Mars perhaps) and building new spaceships on that planet. So any Space Raptor spaceship would still be from a different planet, even though the race isn't. But on with the debate! Evidence time! Actual footage of the phoenix lights- http://youtube.com... Flares? Very unlikely. Notice the clearly visibile trail of smoke on flares: http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk... Former Arizona Gov. admits he saw the lights: http://www.prescottdailycourier.com... Here is evidence relating to one of the Missile Silo incidents: http://www.ufoevidence.org... What natural phenemenon targets missiles and deactivates them? There were no invasions or attacks during all these missile silo's being deactivated either. The Russian, French, British and Mexican governments have all made other evidence available to the public as well. Released by Mexican Military - http://youtube.com... That should be more than enough proof.