BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Solving the Gay Marriage Issue on a way that everyone can agree

I'm afraid your liberal is showing.... Gays have the same rights as whites. They also have the same rights as married people. Marriage is not a right. But none of this matters because I was clearer than day on all of this and it seems that you have simply responded with the things I would read on poster boards if I were to go to a pro-gay Marriage rally. You have already labeled my word "Garried" derogatory, when I was very clear that it was intended as a place holder; is there something wrong with calling a union between a man and a woman different from a union between two men or two women? Somehow by doing that I have been derogatory and have denied people happiness? Aren't gay people proud of their sexuality? When a gay man says he is married, does he always want to follow it up with "...with a man."? Conversely, when you ask someone you meet and you ask "are you married?", are you prepared to follow it up with "boy or girl?" The very question is necessary to understand the fabric of the person before you, yet requires an extra question about sexuality that I really don't care to ask. Gays have all of the rights that straights do. The typical arguments I hear about not being able to visit someone in the hospital is just made up; no one has ever been turned away from seeing a loved one at a hospital because they were gay. Besides assuming that the word I proposed as "derogatory", I see nothing in your argument that refutes anything I say. So, come up with another word and we will close this : "Joined, communed,..."
Solving the Gay Marriage Issue on a way that everyone can agree

I appreciate that my opponent has posted this debate, and I gladly accept. For starters, I am a Catholic, and I am a liberal. I think that gays should be given the same rights and privileges that are given to whites when it comes to marriage. My argument is based upon the "Separate but Equal" clause that was shot down in Brown v. the Board of Education, because the Supreme Court ruled that separate was inherently in-equal. It is the same case when it comes to gay marriage. They should be given the same rights under law that are given to strait people, and they should be called the same also. To me, the term "garriage" is a derogatory term based upon the sexuality of the people involved. Marriage is called marriage, not because of the sexuality of the people involved, but rather because it signifies a loving bond between two human beings. Homosexual people are more than capable than loving each other with the intensity and intimacy of strait people, because that is the way that their brain is wired. Gay people don't wake up one day and decide to be gay. It is a scientific fact. People should not be denied happiness over something that they have absolutely no control over, just because of religion, which has no place in the affairs of the state. http://www.cnn.com...
Solving the Gay Marriage Issue on a way that everyone can agree

I am a conservative; a hyper conservative on many levels, mostly economic. I am fairly libertarian when it comes to social issues. But I believe that my position on gay marriage is probably shared among many and a win-win for all when it comes to Gay "marriage" if they only thought about it. That which disturbs me, and likely for other heterosexual married couples is that to most, marriage is a sacrament, between and man and a woman, and blessing by God (stay with me). It is and has been recognized as a unique, challenging and rewarding experience to share, live and be intimate with a member of the opposite sex. (staaaay with me ). I want the world to know that when I say that I am "married", that I am a member of one of those unique relationships, I work hard at it, and I reap great rewards from my lovely wife. (alllmost there). I can't imagine, on so many levels, how one could hold a stable relationship with a member of the same sex. But let me be clear here. What I don't understand I have to respect. I can barely stand my male friends for more than a few hours; I don't know how the ladies do it, and I certainly don't know how men can hold stable and loving relationships with other men. (stay with me). Because of this, if I were in a same sex relationship and wanted it to be recognized, I would want the special bond and challenges that go with that relationship to not be confused with a heterosexual one. That is, the same reason I want the understanding of marriage be recognized as a blessing by God, a connection between man and woman, is the same reason I want gay marriage understood : for some same sex bonds should be recognized by society, understood or bond blessed by God, to others something else, and to each, well.. as is with heterosexual marriages, to each their own. Anyone today could go down and do the appropriate paper work with the county to have all of the privileges associated with being married bestowed upon any individual (wills, health decisions, etc). But this is a pain, I agree. So, as simple as it it sounds, let's just change the titles. I am married. I am married to a member of the opposite sex. My relationship is recognizable by individuals and society who are willing to support, appreciate or judge me if they choose to do so. Let's agree upon another recognizable title, I don't really care and I am not trying to be flippant, but for example : garried (from gay-married). This way, homosexual relationships, which possess an entirely separate an unique set of benefits, blessing and tribulations, can also be recognized, supported, appreciated and yes, judged. This "garriage" would have all of the "rights and benefits" of marriage. Does this make sense? I love my friends and family, gay or not. We have a more oppressive society to be worrying about right now. Let's get this done.
A Tournament System on debate.org should be implemented.

Thank you so much for replying. First of all, when i said that it was impossible, it was simply because you never told me how things would be implememnted. You kept saying that things will be implemented and you never told me how. It is a good idea i guess, but can it be implemented? that is the question you need to answer. It is like saying that the whole world should use the same currency...if you have this kind of proposition, you should then tell me how things gonna happen and why all countries would go for that. You cant tell me that people have the choice. because starting a new debate does not mean you gonna challenge me. and when you have hundred of people debating, how you gonna decide on sides. you need to explain that if you wanna win. If you believe that, you can say no if you wanna refuse a side, i dont see how that is going to be happen at the end of the day. You cant just say that people want this and we should then have it. I also believe that people should not decide based on what they feel, they should look at the arguments given. The problem with you is that you never give any strong argument to prove your proposal. Your arguments are based on assumptions and that is the problem. I asked you about the incentives and you said yes debate.org will create a poll of good judges and you know some of them. I dont know anybody out there. how efficient will those people be to sort out all the debate.. and you remember you said you gonna have a tournament for a month and new debaters will have to wait for that long. you said i wouldnt take arguments from other because you would like to have your own. I believe everyone is not like you and that is why you said that people are creating profiles just to vote. With that problem being there, i dont see how it is gonna help people at the end of the day. It seems that you have nothing as your own arguments. you talked about the webmaster and comments from people. You are proposing something and you should not say you dont know how many rounds you want? you dont know how things gonna happen and as a debater you can not say that debate.org gonna do everything. You also said you hope there will be less forfeiting without any proof on that i can also say i hope people wont be able to make it. You need to tell me why we gonna have less forfeiting. As Barack Obama, I want change.. That is good but Obama has told to the American people how he wanna have the change... he never said that democratic party will do everything. He should be doing the same thing i guess. How you gonna do things, and how you make things workable. Thank you
Serving God in your youthful age is better than serving God in your old age

http://www.youtube.com...Jesus loves the little childrenAll the children of the worldBlack and yellow, red and whiteThey're all precious in His sightJesus loves the little children of the worldWhether you're rich or whether you're poorIt matters not to HimHe remembers where you're goingNot where you've beenJesus loves the little childrenAll the children of the worldBlack and yellow, red and whiteThey're all precious in His sightJesus loves the little children of the worldIf your heart is troubledDon't worry, don't you fretHe knows that you have heard His callAnd he won't forgetJesus loves the little childrenAll the children of the worldBlack and yellow, red and whiteThey're all precious in His sightJesus loves the little children of the worldAll around the world tonightHis children rest assuredThat He will watch and He will keep usSafe and secureJesus loves the little childrenAll the children of the worldBlack and yellow, red and whiteThey're all precious in His sightJesus loves the little children of the world [1][1] http://www.kididdles.com...;
Should Unicorns be able to farm? Part 2

If you are reading this debate but haven't seen Part One, search "Should Unicorns be able to Farm? " It should be the first result. I would like to recap my arguments from the last debate. First, Firefish argued that the unicorns would poop all over the produce, causing all our food to be unsanitary. I argued that unicorns poop butterflies, and butterflies make people happy. Also, I now realized they contribute in pollinating and the spreading of seeds. Then, Firefish argued that their horns would poke holes in the soil, and therefore destroy the farm. I countered that these holes will be useful so that farmers (unicorns or humans) can plant seed in the earlier mentioned holes. I also have come to realize that this will reduce the use of tractors, and therefore reduce pollution. We all know that if there is too much pollution in the air, unicorns and other mythical beings cannot function well. This is why we need to recycle! Then, Firefish went on to argue that unicorns are not actually read, which offends me, because why would she even had accepted the debate? But, I explained to her that just because she hasn't seen a unicorn, doesn't mean its real. They could just be playing a big game of hide and seek. I believe that is all, and I look forward to see your response Firefish.
Should Unicorns be able to farm? Part 2

Going over what my opponent kroshka has said, I have a few things of my own to contribute to this debate:Unicorns as I have said previously are a myth and no one has ever seen them, but as my opponent has stated, "{Unicorns} could be playing a game of hide and seek." What I have to argue against this statement is, you don't know if they are playing hide and seek, and secondly, what does that have to do with farming anyways. Kroshka is swaying away from the topic as she has no argument to counter my statement in the previous debate.Sure unicorns could be on a farm, but does that really mean they should help out on a farm? From what we know about unicorns, they are very similar to horses, except with supernatural capabalities. Horses get spooked by the smallest thing, including the tractors that are needed to run a successful farm easily. If any farmer brings a tractor out when he has unicorns on his farm, the unicorn will get spooked and run away into the forest, probably never to be seen again. And yes kroshka might argue that I'm backing my evidence up with common horse behaviors, but us humans, know little about unicorns and don't even know if they exist or not.Kroshka then argued that unicorns poop butterflies and that butterflies help pollinate and spread seeds. But according to a unicorn expert in my period 1/2 english class, they poop sparkles. Most people tend to forget that unicorns are still animals so they don't care where they poop, so the sparkles will end up anywhere and be swept by the wind. With these sparkles everywhere, they could blind the farmers and animals, and cause deformation in the soil.That is all and I look forward to see your argument Kroshka.
You lick me, And I will lick you

You lick me, Then I will lick you. We will help each other along. We read in the Bible how we are kindred souls adopted into the family. And we have a power bigger than all of this world together - When we lick each other's cheek. Enemy that we face is too big for just one, We can't stand all alone. Let us join our hearts and lick our cheeks, And march for the Lord, Until the battle is won. Jesus sent a gardna to pray for you and me, And lick each other according to the word of a father above.
The government should pick winners and losers

Everyone has to pay tax so I'm not sure what you mean. If the government declares war, that means that nobody wins, because by your statement, it means that both parties get to choose who wins or lose, so both parties could be winners. The real role of a government is supposed to ensure the rights and equality of everyone, not trigger tax codes to benefit certain companies like how the British government picked the East India company to win. This is not exactly being equal to each company's rights. So to answer your challenge, most governments have been picking winners and losers but that doesn't mean that its right. Governments picking losers and winners actually cause corruption. Therefore, governments SHOULD NOT be interfering and leave business to the marketplace to handle and not to the politicians. Leaving it to the politicians would distort the market and produce unfairness which in then leads to many other economic, social and political problems.
The government should pick winners and losers

I would like to argue that governments should pick winners and losers. The very fact that there is a government is what picks winners and losers. Government by definition picks winners and losers. Governments pick who gets what business grants and who doesn't. Who gets taxed and who does not. The government declares wars (again picking winners and losers). Call government what you want. A king, Empire, Democracy, there is not one government that does not pick winners and losers. I challenge my opponent to name one government that doesn't pick winners and losers.
The government should pick winners and losers

"Everyone has to pay tax so I'm not sure what you mean." When the government decides to tax who and at what rate its picking winners and losers. Who will win at keeping the most of their money and who will lose at keeping most of their money. "The real role of a government is supposed to ensure the rights and equality of everyone" This is again, picking winners and losers. "If the government declares war, that means that nobody wins, because by your statement, it means that both parties get to choose who wins or lose, so both parties could be winners." When war is fought one side always comes out victorious by submitting the other into defeat. This is another example of government picking winners (It's own citizens) and sending it its army after another group of citizens to defeat them in battle and declaring them losers. I challenge my opponent to name one specific government that doesn't pick winners and losers.
Co-operative creative writing.

Side Note; I have been really busy these last few days, so I wasn't able to write as much as normal. However, I did cover as much ground as I intended to for this section. Where we go from here is up to you. This is the setup for the climax and resolution, whatever they may be. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The closer I get to the General Store, the faster I run. My encounter with Lewis has me bewildered. Now, Lewis claimed that he was looking for Colin because he didn't come home yesterday. But that doesn't make any sense. I know it, because I walked home with him yesterday. I had a quick sandwich, and went on home. Nobody else knew, because we always beat the Adults home from work. Sure, I lied to Lewis, but he lied to me. I just don't understand it. I am turning it over and over in my head, and I lose track of where I'm going. That's when things get even stranger. THUD I trip on an uneven section of pavement, and crash into a man wearing a suit. I quickly pick myself up from off the ground, and am horrified to find myself looking directly into the face of someone I recognize. It is Jonathan Raid, the Chief Doctor from the Hospital up on the hill. People are always talking about him around town. Although he is one of the youngest doctors at the Hospital, he is their best and brightest. Apparently he is able to improve the Surgery every year, and is in charge over all functions surrounding it's administration. A mere 3 days before my birthday, it is definitely scary to run into him in a place like this. Usually, the Doctors live at the Hospital, and never come out unless there is some pressing matter that requires their attention. I begin to apologize, but he stops me. "Your name is... Rose, correct? Yes, you are due for Surgery in three days. Have you seen the second son of Dale and Jane Fletcher? I have heard that the two of you are close. He is due for his Surgery tomorrow, and it is important that we Adults find him immediately." "N-no" I respond, "I haven't seen him since school today. I don't really know where he is." "Well," he says, exasperated, "We really do need to find him. It is for everyone's safety." Just then, when I am ready to go and tell Colin that something is wrong, he runs out of the alleyway towards me. "Hey! Rosetta! I was wondering why you were late! Now I see. Perfect! I wanted to take you with me to find one of the Doctors from the Hospital, but you already did!" Jonathan Raid glares, first at me, then at Colin. "Come with me." He commands. "Right now."
Co-operative creative writing.

Before I begin, a few notes- this is a kind of a fantasy, with the setting based off of a combination of other interesting ideas I have been exposed to in the past. I want to write a short story in this kind of universe, which I feel have a lot of potential. All character developments, however, are original. If you'd like, you may take the friend as your character to name and do what you wish with. (I don't know what is happening next, no did I try to plan anything) Otherwise, I expect our characters to meet in round 2 and will do my best to make it happen. My character's name is Rose. Good luck. - - I live in a nice city. Here, all adults get along. They never fight, and everyone does their day-to-day work with a smile on their face. Even if they are doing something they hate, they still do it happily, as any mature adult would. By comparison, the kids here who are my age are much worse. The meaner ones often make fun of the others, but my best friend always protects me from them. He is always around, so hey never have a chance to give me trouble. We are both eleven, so we aren't adults yet, but his birthday is tomorrow and mine is in three days. You see, when one of us kids turns twelve here, our parents take us up to the big hospital on top of the hill. Then, the doctors give you the operation. Mom and Dad told me that it gets rid of all the nasty kid inside of your head, and makes you a nice, big, responsible adult like them. To be honest, sometimes I wonder what would happen to kids before we invented the operation. But I have always been too scared to ask. Earlier today, my best friend pulled me aside on the way out of school. He whispered into my ear that he needed to meet me today in our usual spot, right behind the general store on main street. I asked him why and he said I was important, and he seemed scared. I am on my way there now. And I am worried.
Co-operative creative writing.

This is a co-operative creative writing challenge. I propose that I and the Con devise a short story of anything and of any genre. But here is how we write it. This story will be written In first person perspective only. So the story will be told from the perspective of our character. This means that we can write in any form, past or present tense as long as we keep both our characters in the same world. These characters of course have to meet at one point during the story.Rules1)Written from a first-person perspective 2)Both characters have to be in the same world.3)One character cannot kill the other unless in the last round.4)Con can begin in the first round anyway Con wishes. Perhaps a description of a place.Voters can decide who told the story better.This is my first time doing this and I got inspired by kyudisease to do this.
Johnny Cash was a better artist than Elvis Pressly

1. Prove that someone can be a better artist (That is how can a human be better than another human ?). 2. Prove that art can be measured (not the same thing as in nr.1) 3. Prove that you're measuring art correctly. 4. Prove that when measured Johny Cash and not Elvis is the better artist. 5. Prove that alternative ways of approaching the whole thing is likely to be erroneous. 1. Not addressed properly. I expected my opponent to go into what art and what an artist is ; instead he said why he thinks Johnny Cash is better. He had to show how can someone be better but instead said why ; there's a difference. 2." Would you Rather pay a million dollars for a drawing by a four year old or a painting by a very famous artist" If the four year old was my child who aspired to be an artist, I would choose the four year old ; I wouldn't even be thinking about the other artist and hes painting. 3. He dealt with this one in the previous point, erroneously. 4. "you never stated a specific way of doing so" Your burden , your problem. 5. What ? That was irrelevant The rest is a summary of Johnny Cash career oh and this wasn't even mentioned: "Elvis is a legend and when it comes to legends there's no good or bad, only personal preference." "You've to fulfill your burdens or lose like an irresponsible Genghis Khan." Indeed Thank you, M .