BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Kissing with eyes closed is better.

Your argument contradicted it's self, there for it is invalid.You said"Who gives half a poop about how you kiss duh you're all noobs and if you have your eyes open you can laugh at them because you'll be able to see their tongue in your mouth if you look down which is always something to laugh about."Here you say you laugh at, and think that people who kiss with eyes open are 'noobs',However,"plus if you have your eyes open you wont like stick your tongue in their eyes socket."Now it's good to?
Kissing with eyes closed is better.

Kissing with your eyes open or closed is personal preference. However me and my one girlfriend used to peek at eachother during kissing and it created memorable moments for us to think back on and laugh about. I agree the first time it happens and you see somebody has their eyes open it might be awkward but once you bring it up that might change. Just try it and you will get used to it, as to which type is better its personal preference. I prefer making memories so I like eyes open.
Abortion is right(pro) or wrong(con)

ArgumentThe claim that human life's value begins when consciousness is obtained and/ or the subject can feel pain is more than a fair statement. It's only logical to assume that human life's value is based on the actions and feelings of conscious beings that have acquired it, or beings that have developed the ability to feel pain. Abortions carried out in the first trimester have absolutely no moral implications once so ever. Firstly, this is due to the fact that a first trimester embryo is not conscious [1]. Also, a first trimester embryo can feel absolutely no pain once so ever because pain receptors are required for this. Pain receptors need a neotox which is not formed until the third trimester [2]. Over 88% of all abortions are actually done within the first trimester [3]. Some sources even claim that the number is more around 88-92% [3].Since first trimester embryos have no consciousness and cannot feel pain, and 88-92% of abortions are carried out in the first trimester, then the majority of abortions don't really imply any genuine negative moral implications (and therefore, should not be considered unethical). Second Trimester Abortions And Their Moral Implications "About 140,000 second trimester abortions are performed yearly. They represent 9% of the total" [4]. So if you take my statement regarding the neocortex and pain, which was "Pain receptors require a neotox which is not formed until the third trimester" and apply it to second trimester abortions, it's clear that these abortions involve no pain due to the neotox not being developed yet. Third Trimester abortions and their moral implications "Medical intervention to terminate pregnancies during the third trimester is quite rare. The Alan Guttmacher Institute estimates that 1% of all medical terminations of pregnancies are done at or after 21 weeks - (1994 data)" [5]. Pain receptors form early on in the third trimester, and this is why abortions done in this state are usually debated on. However, there is no evidence that they feel pain the way we would, because there is no evidence they have developed a consciousness yet at this point. None the less, it is a grey area, so I would say that the only abortions that should be avoided are third trimester abortions. ConclusionSomething that hasn't even developed the ability to feel pain is not something we should worry about terminating for the most part, when the choice of a woman who already has pain receptors and consciousness certainly seems more important. Sources[1] http://civilliberty.about.com...[2] http://civilliberty.about.com...[3] http://contraception.about.com...[4] http://www.abort73.com...[5] http://www.religioustolerance.org...
Abortion is right(pro) or wrong(con)

Thank you for your acceptance, I look forward to your argument.I will be presenting my argument one point at a time, so it will be easier to understand, and I am not writing novels each round.Ok so first I will start with some definitions. Fetus: 1. The unborn young of a viviparous vertebrate having a basic structural resemblance to the adult animal.2. In humans, the unborn young from the end of the eighth week after conception to the moment of birth, as distinguished from the earlier embryo. Young: 1. Being in an early period of life, development, or growth.2. Newly begun or formed; not advanced: The evening is still young.3. Of, belonging to, or suggestive of youth or early life: He is young for his age.4. Vigorous or fresh; youthful.5. Lacking experience; immature: a young hand at plowing.6. Being the junior of two people having the same name.7. Geology Being of an early stage in a geologic cycle. Used of bodies of water and land formations.n.1. Young persons considered as a group; youth: entertainment for the young.2. Offspring; brood: a lioness with her young.Idiom:Pregnant. Used of an animal.Considering the fact that the fetus is not an animal and will not develop into one, I will be using the 2nd definition of fetus and the first definition of young for my first point. Point 1: The fetus is a life.A fetus is defined as an unborn young 8 weeks after conception, young is defined as an early period of life, development, or growth. Therefore, a fetus is an unborn life.
Abortion is right(pro) or wrong(con)

Addressing My Opponent's Concerns"Ok, I apologize in advance, as I am running a little short on time and may not respond to every one of your points, but I will respond to as many as I can."No worries "So what you are saying is that someone who is unconscious has less value than someone who is conscious?"No. What I am saying is someone who hasn't developed pain receptors and/ or developed consciousness doesn't have rights like we do. "Just because something does not feel pain doesn't mean we shouldn't worry about it. For example a tree does not feel pain when we cut it down (at least that is known of, or heard of), but that doesn't mean cutting down trees isn't something we shouldn't be careful about, especially if we are doing it in large quantities."I meant "worry" in a moral sense, not in a general sense. It isn't immoral to cut down a tree like it is to chop down a person who has the will to live and can feel pain. Therefore, the example here is irrelevant. "The choice of a woman was made when she had sex (that statement is discounting women who are raped). It may seem more important, but is it more important? Is one life more valuable then another? Is a choice more valuable then a life?"This life you are worried about hasn't even developed a will to live. Its not like its thinking "no! no!" while its being terminated. In the first and second trimester, the fetus cannot even feel pain, and is not conscious. It is like stepping on an ant; there doesn't seem to be anything immoral about it at all. Conclusion My opponent has offered no argument in favor of abortion being wrong. I argued that most abortions (in the first and second trimester) are not immoral, because the fetus:(i) Has no will to live (it doesn't even know what a "will" or "life" is)(ii) Has not developed the ability to feel any pain(iii) Has not developed any consciousness or self-awarenessWith these three facts in place, we can see that it is self-evident that a creature which all (i), (ii), and (iii) apply to shouldn't have rights like we do. Why? Because there is no harm done. You know you are not doing anything against someone's will, hurting them, and causing negative effects on their conscious awareness ect...If this type of creature is causing inconvenience in the life of someone who:(i) Has the will to live, and the will to get rid of this creature (ii) Has developed the ability to feel pain(iii) Has developed consciousness and self-awarenessThen it is clear that there is no harm done. The fetus isn't being psychologically damaged (there is no conscious mental activity), and their is no pain (no neocortex), and no will to live being smashed. Its hard to see how abortion (in the first and second trimester) are immoral. In the third trimester, the neocortex develops, and this is when abortion should be considered immoral (the subject may be able to feel pain). However, around 90% of abortions are in the first and second trimester!Overall, and in general, abortion is not immoral; some people just do it wrong (by getting it done in the third trimester). Cars aren't immoral just because some people do it wrong, so why abortion?
Abortion is right(pro) or wrong(con)

Ok, I apologize in advance, as I am running a little short on time and may not respond to every one of your points, but I will respond to as many as I can. "The claim that human life's value begins when consciousness is obtained and/ or the subject can feel pain is more than a fair statement." So what you are saying is that someone who is unconscious has less value than someone who is conscious? As again, I am running short on time, I am going to skip to the conclusion and respond to that, hopefully you summed up most of your points there, although I will go back and review this again for the 4th round to make sure I have not missed anything. Just because something does not feel pain doesn't mean we shouldn't worry about it. For example a tree does not feel pain when we cut it down (at least that is known of, or heard of), but that doesn't mean cutting down trees isn't something we shouldn't be careful about, especially if we are doing it in large quantities. The choice of a woman was made when she had sex (that statement is discounting women who are raped). It may seem more important, but is it more important? Is one life more valuable then another? Is a choice more valuable then a life? Apologies once again, I look forward to your next argument, some very interesting thoughts/points.
Horizon Zero Dawn, Best Adventure game ever!!!

Sources The first source my opponent presents says specifically "Horizon is the best PS4 game ever" This does not support my opponents claim that "Horizon is THE best game ever" The second source shows Horizon has a score of 89/100. [1] While GTA has a score of 96/100 which is a near perfect score. Therefore all the sources my opponent provides fall short of supporting his outlandish claim. Rebuttal My opponent agrees that there is no raping in GTA 5 and I thank him for being honest and conceding his invalid point. My opponent then argues that killing hookers is a bad thing in a video game. Yet in Horizon you mindlessly kill many male enemies, is he trying to say that killing men is okay, but killing women is not? It would appear my opponent is advocating sexism. "This is not the opinion of everyone but just a small group of boys that play the GTA games." GTA has a larger player base than Horizon, so the content within GTA is positively welcomed by a vast majority. [2] Consider that GTA 5 is the 4th best-selling game in the world. "Also by having a female as the lead it encourages girls to want to pick up the controller and play." GTA 5 gives players the ability to player either male or female roles. To suggest females only want to play female roles, is to stereo-type all females into one frame of mind. An argument could be made which considers that kind of stereo-typing is sexist. "Sales figures for these two games cannot compare as you are comparing a brand new IP to a GTA franchise" Clearly the profitability is the best game a game developer could make due to the immense amount of money that can be made. Therefore GTA is the best game ever, when you look at it from the developers point fo view. Conclusion I have contested every point my opponent has made and refuted his sources that do not prove "Horizon is the best game ever." My opponent has failed to meet his burden of proof. I have proved that GTA is better due to having an online community, a more active player base, having larger sales figures and having a near perfect score of 96/100 compared to HZD score of 89/100. [1] http://www.metacritic.com...[2] https://www.forbes.com...
Horizon Zero Dawn, Best Adventure game ever!!!

When I started this debate I stated this game is the best adventure game for everyone. I am not specifically referring to 14-30 year olds playing this game like GTA5. My opponent says there is no raping in the game, sorry not in GTA5, but in GTA3 you could. In GTA5, as my opponent states "you can kill hookers" yeah like that is much better then rape. My opponents opinion is based on a prepubescent boys point of view of like he says "Killing hookers, running trucks of drugs to and from lock-ups, shooting cops dead then beating their head with a hammer, sticking a bomb to an innocent family mans car and robbing banks while man-handling female captives." This is the type of swell game he is talking about. This is not the opinion of everyone but just a small group of boys that play the GTA games. Horizon Zero Dawn on the other hand is made for everyone. Also by having a female as the lead it encourages girls to want to pick up the controller and play. Also guns are not the prime weapon in the game unlike GTA5 that encourages gang behavior by running away from the police, drive by shooting, I almost feel like GTA5 is a recruitment game for new gang members because that is how it plays. Sales figures for these two games can not compare as you are comparing a brand new IP to a GTA franchise that has started in the late 90's as a 2D game and has evolved to 5 major games and also a lot of DLC's. GTA5 is riding the coat tail of all that earlier success, where HZD is a brand new game without any previous entries in the series.. That would be like me comparing the Star Wars movies to a brand new movie. I am not the only one who believes that HZD is the best adventure game ever, here are some other people who agree, documented proof from video game experts. A lot of reviewers gave it 100% for the rating and nobody can beat the graphics in this game. http://n4g.com... http://www.metacritic.com... https://www.kotaku.com.au...
Horizon Zero Dawn, Best Adventure game ever!!!

First of all this game is rated T for teenage and up, it states nothing about being autistic to play, this is just a slander remark without any merit towards people with autism. The main character is a young woman, nowhere doe it imply that she is a lesbian and even if she was what does it matter The opponent states that they used robots instead of real dinosaurs, as this game takes place in the future, dinosaurs have already been extinct for millions of years and this game is about civilization going back to ancient times versus future machines. The world is full of side missions, secret caves, bandit camps, hunting trials, corrupted zones and the landscape is huge and very diverse depending where you are, snowy mountains, desert canyons, forests and meadows, the graphics are stunning in all places. It's an open world game so you can choose which quests, side quest you want to do, or which challenges or areas to explore. There are even collectibles to collect but first you need to purchase the maps for them to find them all. My opponent states that he had some glitch in the game, well glitches can happen in any game, I personally have had no glitches at all and the game runs smoothly even with many enemies on the screen the frame rate does not drop. As for the female as the protagonist, I applaud the game makers in choosing a female as the role model, we have too many video games where the lead is always male. Girls will be able to relate more by having a female lead. My opponents hate of women and referring to all of them as lesbians shows his close mindedness for having a female main character. My opponent is just a chauvinistic pig who degrades women and has no appreciation for having someone different in a video game as opposed to some bulky macho hero man, to control in the game. I will admit GTA5 is a good game, but the story is recycled from all the other GTA's where the protagonists are basically criminals who run around an open city killing, raping and making money. This story is for 14 year old boys who think that it's cool. There is no mystery, suspense or strategy when it comes to GTA5, as opposed to Horizon Zero Dawn. In HZD you have to use strategy when it comes to fighting the machines, because you are always outmatched with a spear and a bow versus a Goliath mechanical beast who is faster stronger and has lasers for weapons. This makes it more challenging then just running around and killing innocent people for fun and trying to outrun the cops cone of view. Horizon Zero Dawn, is an original concept story with intrigue, excellent mysterious story, phenomenal graphics and the size of the game is massive, easily a 200 hour game if you choose to complete all side quests, hunting challenges and explore the whole world. My opponent has failed so far to prove how HZD is not the best adventure game ever, as he is simply stating his narrow chauvinistic views on a game.
Horizon Zero Dawn, Best Adventure game ever!!!

Introduciton.This is just another game that is the product of feminists and their anti-male campaign. An overhyped game which turned out to be rather bland and repetitive, with a nasty agenda The main character is a ginger-lesbian that looks like a dude. This is due to the feminist movement that is currently happening where video game chicks "need to look more realistic" They didn't make an appealing good looking main character. -Pro's- [1] Good graphics[2] Perfect for kids with autism[3] Perfect for poor people who can't afford a P.C -Con's- [1] Far too ambitious for the developers. They have dinosaur robots, give me a break. They probably chose dinosaur robots over actual dinosaurs, because it made it easier to develop. The world is empty aside from collectables and robots. [2] The game treats you like you're 12. It attempts to force positive morality down your throat as if you're unable to make your own decisions. [3] I played this game round my mates house. We had one side quest that we'd invested about 40 minutes into and when we turned up to try and free the character he was wandering around without a care in the world, leaving that quest stuck as I couldn't advance because I still had to free said character. To conclude.This game advocates ginger lesbianism. The game is broken and buggy. I would like to remind anyone reading that the burden of proof is on FanBoy to prove "Horizon Zero Dawn, Best Adventure game ever!!!" GTA 5 is a better adventure game it even has a black man as a main character unlike this ginger-fetish pleaser that McTroll calls a game..
Horizon Zero Dawn, Best Adventure game ever!!!

Horizon Zero Dawn is the best adventure game ever. The reason I say that is because I have played thousands of adventure games from the 80's until now and no game compares to it. It has an RPG style leveling system, resources have to be collected to create weapons and ammo, it's not unlimited ammo like a lot of games, the story is phenomenal, the world is huge and the graphics are amazing especially in 4K like I'm playing right now. There is no better adventure game out there, only Skyrim comes close but the story is not as good as Horizon Zero Dawn and the graphics are not as good. If you don't agree that Horizon Zero Dawn is the best adventure game (I don't care about fighting games or Mario Cart or lame Indy 2 hour games) ever, then let me know what is better and I will debate it.
Homosexual Marriage

I will take this round as an opportunity to clarify my argument further. I do not believe that G-d hates Homosexuals, he does not, and any christian pastor that tries to teach other wise, or that G-d has "disowned" the homosexuals is lying to you. They are full of deceit and they are teaching things completely foreign to the Torah. The same goes too with anyone who hates homosexuals, Ibid 19:17 says very clearly: "Do NOT hate your brother in your heart." We also see a verse that disproves "G-d disowning homosexuals" in Ezekiel 18:4: "For everyone belongs to me, the parent as well as the child"both alike belong to me." If you skip ahead to Ezekiel 18:21-23, as I have cited in round 3, it says: "But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not die. 22 None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23 Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live?" There is only 2 things recorded in the Torah that G-d hates, neither is a homosexual, a false whiteness, and someone who stirs up conflict in a community, as far as I am concerned, these pastors can be classified as such. The only feeling G-d has toward the homosexuals right now is not hate, only disappointment, and he would really rather them just clean up their lifestyle. I want to clarify this to the general public, so they know very well G-d's stance on the issue, and they know that what these pastors are teaching is false. With that being said, Gehenom as punishment does not mean G-d hates the homosexuals, in fact according to Proverbs 13:24: "Whoever spares the rod hates their children, but the one who loves their children is careful to discipline them." Seeing as though discipline is evident, I would recommend that they turn from their current lifestyle to avoid this, but it has nothing to do with hate.
Homosexual Marriage

Again, Gehenna would still require god to hate homosexuals, which he doesn't. People just have selective hearing and reading when it comes to religion. As for us violating terms and use, definitions change, and overall,, everything changes. The actual, modern, definition is: "the legally or formally recognized union of a man and a woman (or, in some jurisdictions, two people of the same sex) as partners in a relationship." No I don't see how your bestiality claim works. You never addressed how the animals have no way of communicating, and find it very hard to fight back, making it immoral. I agree totally with you on the incest one. Passing the law wouldn't undermine the universal right to the freedom of idea, because not passing the law prevents homosexuals having "ligament" weddings. If for some reason you have the right to it, we should too. So why exactly shouldn't the government acknowledge our relationships, but freely acknowledge yours. That's saying you are superior to us, but god says all his children were equal. Ones not more superior than the other. I don't see why homosexuals would have to go to Gehenna for such an idiotic thing. They loved a human, in which they had full right to, and then they have to be punished? Adultery and cheating are different than homosexuality and heterosexuality. Both of those condone the usage of finding a mate, and then finding someone else off to he side. The Nazis simply had a choice. Hating someone is a choice, you aren't born hating someone. You learn something about them, and then you base what to do off of that. If this was a "choice", when did you choose to be heterosexual? Your debates have nothing to do with anything close to homosexuality. Yours is about having more than one person you are in love with, or killing people or forcing animals to have sex. It's not like we're pushing our homosexuality onto you in any way, so why do you find it such a big offense for someone to be different to you, to have an attraction towards someone else? And at the end of the day, this debate relies strictly on the genitalia that me, and the person I like have. You know that feeling when you have an attraction towards a girl? That's literally what homosexuals fell, but for the same sex. And don't try to pull anymore of your bestiality bull. That's not what this debate is about.