BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Prostitution should NOT be legalized!

Oh yes, that is exactly the job. But it is a job that walks hand in hand with rape. What I meant was there is a very fine line between doing the job and being raped or assaulted. Rape and assault is illegal, isn't it? Prostitution puts women at the man's mercy, probably one of the worse positions a woman could be in. I think you misunderstood; I stated that 45% of now overage prostitutes were forced into the trade as a child. Like I said before, I do believe wholeheartedly in freedom of choice, but not when someone's choice negatively affects others or our society in general. One could say that johns or prostitutes had it coming to them if they do get infected. Every choice has a consequence. However, what of when they sleep with someone else? Not another prostitute, but a wife or girlfriend? Now all of a sudden we see innocent people getting hurt. And I am not talking about something small; I am talking about a terminal illness with no known treatment. And what of the emotional damage? I believe I have already covered how emotionally damaging this trade is for a prostitute, but what of our society? Already, girls and woman are being sent terrible messages through the media, like that their worth is determined by the size of their waistline. What effect will society finally accepting prostitution have on young girls? It will send messages to girls that you don't have to get an education or be successful to make a living, you have to be physically attractive to men. We will lose potential doctors and writers and artists to the darkness of society. Which is where I shall restate my claim. Johns and traffickers benefit from the trade while compromising the emotional and physical wellbeing of each individual woman and damaging the status of women as a whole. They should be punished; and women most definitely should be sent to rehab. I know if I wasn't, I would not be in the place I am now. Prostitution is a very old trade, but how does that make it right? Whether you believe it should be illegal or not, we mustn't ignore the tremendous dangers and the countless stories from those who have escaped. Whether it be legalized or not, who's to say anything will change? There will still be rapes and assaults and homicides. There will still be abusive pimps and HIV will still be rampant. In the words of one anonymous survivor of prostitution, "Legalization will not end the abuse, it will make the abuse legal."
Prostitution should NOT be legalized!

You've going astray in to the matter of rape once again. As you said in the last paragraph of your argument, they're forced to abide by the man's desires, but isn't that the job? With being forced to partake in this area as a child, I did some research of my own and the percentage you've given is off. As of 2014, there are currently 312,000,000 individuals in America under the age of 18. You stated 45% is 100,000 when 1% of the actual statistics is 3,120,000. Sex trafficking for children is not lightly taken, but you also must consider how there are the authorities to go to. As you said about the risk of disease, it's what one would expect in the business of prostitution. No one would walk in there without any knowledge of risk, every choice must come with a consequence. Their freedom of choice should still be exercised and they have the right to take part in prostitution, and not be confined by the morals of the community. There would be no freedom if morals is what set that right away. As you said in the beginning, look at it from a non-moral standpoint when the morality of the business is what really makes people hate it, not the statistics. In conclusion, freedom is not hurting people, but doing good more than bad. If you partake in prostitution, you should expect the bad things. It would be if you went to a fine restaurant and ordered a steak, then when the waiter brings you the steak, you complain that it's not what you asked for. To go into prostitution and complain about its downfalls is hypocritical, and everyone should have the right to do as they please. Regardless of their consequences, it's the outcome of their choices and that's what we learn from.
Prostitution should NOT be legalized!

Well said. Yes, this country is all about freedom of choice, but what if someone's choices is hurting the people around them? Someone may choose to rob a bank,, however it harms other people, so this is illegal. If we look at prostitution from non-moral standpoint, it should remain illegal and be discouraged due to the fact that it will potentially bring harm to both individuals involved. One main point that those who believe in the legalization of prostitution is that it can be regulated by the government. In particular, require prostitutes to take weekly tests so as to ensure that have not been infected with any sexually transmitted disease. However, after about an hour of extensive research, I can prove that this is ineffective. For example, should someone be infected with HIV, they encounter a 'window period' which lasts often 3-6 months. During this period, all HIV tests will return negative due to the fact that the body has not begun to produce the antibodies necessary to identify the disease. Key point: Government regulations will of no help to put an end to the notorious terminal illness, AIDs, which should prostitution be legalized will be running rampant in the streets. Now I shall address the logical concepts of this issue. Around 45% of prostitutes were forced into the trade as a child and have yet to escape. The average age of a "woman" entering prostitution is 14 years old. Imagine that. A young girl, just beginning to explore possibilities of love and dating, is thrown into the sick world of sex trafficking. This soon will become all she knows; her idea of being loved is being forced to perform sexual acts on men old enough to be her father and being threatened and in many cases beaten and raped. Prostitution is an emotionally damaging trade, and if you remain true to the statistics, it is a rare few that go in by choice. That number diminishes even more when you look at how many women who have tasted prostitution feel content and wish to continue with it. With these facts in mind, you must take into consideration the enormous safety risks of the matter. A woman alone with a man, with no choice but to do his bidding, whatever that may be. Once she is on the job, there is no getting out; to do so would risk the wrath of her pimp or, perhaps even worse, the wrath of her john. I personally can testify that a perfectly polite and seemingly kind man can change in a heartbeat once he gets worked up (a.k.a. horny) and then denied. I do not by all means suggest that every man is like this, but I feel it is safe to assume that one who is willing to buy a woman to perform sick fantasies will most likely go along with this pattern. In summary, whether this be legal or illegal, prostitution subjects a woman to the high risk of rape, assault, and worst case scenario, death.
Prostitution should NOT be legalized!

Prostitution is a rather disgusting trademark of society that America has been carrying on for quite some time. However, it should be allowed into our system. The average American citizen has the right of freedom under the constitution, and us being in a capitalistic country, we have our own say. Prostitution is a choice made by the public, if they're on unemployment, then that's their option at times. Using the term "victim" isn't a good terminology for this subject. The prostitute chose to be in that kind of business, and was not forcibly dragged into any situation. Evaluating your comments on prostitution, you might be confusing it with rape. Your stating that they're forcibly enacting in unwanted sexual interaction with another being, however, prostitution is all about sex for money, the prostitute chose to have sex. On the other hand, there is no need for rehabilitation, as sad as it is, the uneducated proportion of America needs to make money to live, and this is a choice. I'm not saying everyone should become a prostitute or it is a good trade, I'm simply stating that everyone has the given right to do what they want to do, and that is what truly gives the country's name "Land of the Free".
Prostitution should NOT be legalized!

Or at least, not entirely. Most victims (yes, victims!), a.k.a. prostitutes, are dragged into a ring during their most vulnerable moments. Whether they be teenage runaways or a single mom trying to feed three children, this path is rarely chosen by choice and nearly impossible to escape. I believe any prostitute (whether that be male or female) should be admitted into a rehab or hope program rather than jail. This will supply them with an escape route, a chance for a better life. However, when it comes to pimps and johns, I believe the renting of another human being's body and forcing them to submit to sick fantasies and violent rapes is something society cannot allow. Any male or female involved in selling or renting a human should be punished, and punished with lengthy sentences as well, so as to send the message that the world will accept this sick trade no longer.
More fun

Contention 1: In which the resolution is analyzed. The resolution is phrased as a question, that is, "Will John McCain win the presidential election?" Pro is supposed to answer yes, Con is supposed to answer no. Both sides must defend their answer. Contention 2: In which the necessary assumptions for this debate are listed. Assumption 1: There is actually a presidential election. Assumption 2: John McCain is actually running in this election. Assumption 3: It is not impossible for McCain to win this election--that is, there is no inherent constraint on his ability to win, i.e., he is too young, he is not a US citizen, he has not been a US resident for at least 14 years, et cetera. Assumption 4: He isn't guaranteed to win--that is, there is no inherent constraint on his ability to lose, i.e., he is the only one running, he is the only eligible voter in the US, et cetera. Contention 3: In which the resolution is clarified. John McCain--the Arizona Senator running with Sarah Palin for the office of the President of the United States Win--get more electoral college votes Presidential election--the 2008 US Presidential election. Contention 4: In which the burden of proof for both sides is analyzed. As the resolution is a question, both sides have an equal burden of proof. Because both sides provide an answer to a question, both sides must prove the truth of their answer. Furthermore, predicting the future is impossible. That means that Pro must show that John McCain will most likely win the presidency, and Con must show that he will most likely lose. Contention 5: In which I defend my answer. If the election were held today, Barack Obama would win by 64 electoral votes (http://www.realclearpolitics.com...). In order to win, John McCain would have to get a few states. This is very possible. John McCain is on course to win Virginia (http://www.realclearpolitics.com...), North Carolina (http://www.realclearpolitics.com...), Minnesota (http://www.realclearpolitics.com...), and Wisconsin (http://www.realclearpolitics.com...). This would bring him up to 285 electoral votes, more than enough to win the election. Also this site has predicted a McCain win (http://nextbigfuture.com...). Furthermore, even a pro Obama site has predicted victory for McCain (http://onethingiknow.net...) Conclusion: The electoral trends show that McCain will most likely get more electoral college votes, and therefore win this election.
God doesn't exist

Uh, no. It's because I got tired of arguing pointlessly with someone who isn't going to change their opinion. But I will anyway, just to end this. You think that the hole in the ozone is not a problem? It's not an isolated event. If it happens over Antarctica, it can happen anywhere else. And God isn't exactly that helpful, because it seems that Satan is winning the battle here, let's be honest. So, you're saying that if a guy who kidnaps and tortures a child prays for forgiveness for awhile, he should get to go to heaven? What kind of system is that? At least Satan is making sure people are good... You seem to believe that a Tyrannosaurus Rex is basically a bunch of fish bones mixed together. Profound.
God doesn't exist

I can't give you solid proof about God existing. You know that. I'm trying to show you that He most likely doeexist Now, about the ozone: IT IS NOT A PROBLEM! There has been a "hole" ever since the world began and the fluctuation down in Antarctica is natural! The only reason anyone is upset about it is because many environmentalists blew the matter WAY out o proportion. Also, because of this, the U.S. has banned CFCs which are incredible chemicals! They are used in firefighters' equipment. Banning these to save the ozone layer is actually killing more people because firefighters have to use less effective equipment. Also, why ban CFCs over the U.S. if the hole is over Antarctica? CFCs are also used in sterilizing doctor's equipment. It works faster and better than other chemicals. CFCs are used in refrigerants. It makes food last much, much longer. I repeat, environmentalists have blow this way out of proportion. About people suffering on earth, my belief is that is an evil on earth. Satan to be exact. He wl do anything he can to ruin people's lives and make them suffer. God gives people a chance to believe into Him before they die. If they do, He takes care of them. About fossils, there are literally two "missing links." These were found in areas surrounded by other types of animals and the bones may have been mixes of other animals. OR, the "missing links" were animals of their own that have gone extinct. Also, if you're angry about the holocaust, you should cool down. I'm a Jew ad know exactly how you might feel. btw, if you're wondering, I'm a Christian.
God doesn't exist

One hole in the ozone means that it is possible... you think it can't happen again? You think that this is an isolated incident? Oh, and by the way, I'd look up the definition of "specs" if I were you. And yes, the creation of the universe would have been an EXTREME co-incidence, but who knows how long it took for that to happen. The chance of the watch forming perfectly gets a little higher every time you lift the table. Okay, don't ask questions that you can't answer either. What proof do you have that God exists? Scientists didn't rationalise the existence of everything that exists today based on some out-there theory of the big bang... they looked at the world and put made everything fit. But I'll give you a small answer to the question you asked: what about fossils? And erosion? What about cave paintings? God just put them there because he wants to screw with us? Your fourth argument is the one that makes me the angriest. Do you think they made that decision? Do you think they wanted to die? Who are you to say that? Who are you to say that 1.5 million children tortured to death in the holocaust is a positive thing? Lucky them. I think, to be honest, that they would want to stay here on planet earth for a while before dying, don't you? And what if you're wrong? What if this is all we have? Why aren't you kicking back in heaven if it is so much better than here? So great. Those children didn't care if he was real or not... I think they just wanted a future.
God doesn't exist

Yes, there is a "hole" in the ozone layer. Right over antarctica. Very few people live there because of the cold. Those that do have to be bundled up with many layers of clothing AND the sun doesn't shine on antarcitca for nearly as long as any other place. A creator made all of this possible. He planned everything! What in the world are you talking about? Specs with life??! Okay, first, where did all the specs come from anyway? And, when I gave the example of the watch, that is easy compared to what scientists try to suggest! The watch would LITERALLY be thousands of times more likely to happen!!! Do we have proof that the world is billions and billions of years old? Nope. Scientists assume it so that their theory works. God's people do suffer, but at least they do not suffer through an afterlife of endless pain and suffering.... We both know that you can't meet God, but if you ask Him, out of a humble heart, I think He might show you that he is real in a very obvious way. You can't be challenging Him though, or He may not pay you any attention.
God doesn't exist

Yes, that's true. The big bang theory is very difficult to argue about, without some serious education in high level physics. But from what I know, one little speck in the whole vast universe that happens to have life on it. I know there are other planets capable of supporting life, but still, what do you think the ratio for lifeless planets to planets with life? People and things evolve the way we do because our environment says our designation is either "kill or be killed". Oh and, the ozone thing? Just thought I should point out that we actually have a pretty large hole in the ozone... http://en.wikipedia.org... And when you have incomprehensibly large number of watch pieces, and you lifted the table repeatedly for an incomprehensibly long amount of time, it's likely that at least ONCE you will see a watch on the floor. I look outside, and you're right! Someone did create all of this! But that was humans. Humans created this. If there is a God, I'd like to meet him. Ask him where he's been while women were getting tortured and gang-raped... Ask him about his strange refusal to save those innocent children that were massacred. Ask about all the pollution, 9/11, the 2004 Boxing Day tsunami, the Sendai tsunami, and an endless amount of deadly hurricanes. I'd like to ask him where he's been, while people who believed in him were suffering.
God doesn't exist

If you were to take a watch and take apart every single piece, and set it on a table and then you lifted one end of the table and all the pieces slid off, what are the chances all the pieces would fall together into place and land as the complete watch on the ground? Crazy, right? Well, the big bang theory suggests that something hundreds of times more complex just happened and came together and turned into the universe". Seriously? Also, if this did manage to happen, what about all the other coincidences? Why are humans able to think? Why is the atmosphere perfectly made so that we don"t breathe the deadly ozone layer, but it protects us from the sun"s harmful rays? How do babies know how to pick up languages just by being around them? Obviously, it all suggests a very smart creator! Who could really think this was ALL chance??! About evolution: People try to tell you that we humans came from tiny little alien-like lizard things or something". Come on. There is no proof for macro evolution. Evolution is an over-hyped, under-supported lie. There are only shreds of evidence and if you look closely, the shreds don"t even fit together. (before you come back with an argument about evolution, I ask that you learn some about it if you don"t already know about it.) There is so much reason for you to think that there is a God! Look around you!!! Chance? Really? No! Someone created all this!
God doesn't exist

#1. A T-Rex is not considered a "missing link." #2. You may not like it, but I believe if someone has done terrible stuff and is truly sorry and feels dis what they did and is truly asking for forgiveness AND takes care of getting forgiveness from all parties involved, then yes. He could go to heave if he also asked the Lord to save him. #3. Study up on ozone. It is extremely isolated. #4. This is particular to my belief, but about Satan: Satan was an angel that started getting high that he should be in God's place. as cast down onto earth before it was completed. He then took rule of earth. Earth is Satan's kingdom. God has power enough to do things like protect His people, but overall, until you leave earth you're in the realm of Satan. That may make it look like he is winning the battle, but God is working behind the scenes. Now, sorry if I angered you. I didn't mean to. I sincerely hope what I have said helped you some. Good debating with you. :)
Abolish the State!

Anarchist or Devil's Advocate? Hello, I will be your opponent. I wish an interesting debate awaits us. I will list my points here; 1; Governments are necessary 2; Private organisations would have only negative consequences 3; Where is this coming from? 1; Governments are a necessary thing in today's society. You forget all the very useful thins that we rely on governments for; electricity, healthcare, defence, education etc. You might argue that these would carry on without governments, but on what system? Capitalism. Any who could not provide a service to the new world would perish. The sick, the disabled, the poor, these people would all die in your ideal world. Crime would rise as the civil sector (ie; police) are unemployed. 2; What do you mean by private organisations? I can assure you any group that would try to take power would be a company, a selfish one at that. Their morals would be even worse than the current government. They would have no qualifications and no notion of how the world would work. 3; We aren't that bad off. There are a lot of people in dire need, but anarchism would hardly help that. In fact, if governments were to cut off aid, many countries would experience even more death. Coercion laws haven't been introduced in most countries since the 1880s. If you're referring solely to the US, what about the nukes? Won't that leave the US open to attack from say... North Korea (they may be useless, but a disarmed US would stand no chance), Russia, China wanting their money back or any group that sees a large body of defenceless people. Not trying to be a pro American here, but where I live in Europe, the government's been doing well. In conclusion, any new groups will be unregulated and cruel compare to the current government. Many reliant on aid and healthcare would die and we would return to a dark age without electricity. Have fun Mr. Durden. Duncan.
Disney will ruin Star Wars

First, Star Wars has already been ruined. By making the prequels, George Lucas churned out unapologetic fanboy garbage – tensionless lightsaber battles, poor storytelling, de-emphasis on the force as a spiritual field, flat characters, annoying sidekicks, painfully awkward romances…I could go on. The prequels play out like a frenetic video game for children, lacking all the realism and emotion that made the original trilogy so powerful. But, Star Wars might have been okay had George Lucas not sought to contradict and destroy canon from the original trilogy. Case and point, Yoda, a being who sought to find strength through his spiritual energy becomes a stupid video game character twirling and spinning in light saber battles, always egging for a fight, directly contradicting his once wise motto: “war does not make one great.” Instead, we have Obi Wan Kenobi telling Anakin that the lightsaber “is your life.” Over the course of the prequels, George Lucas systematically reduces the force to basically playing with lightsabers and a few party tricks, forgetting that he once tried to teach that the force transcends petty rivalries and physical existence. http://redlettermedia.com... Second, even if you don’t buy that argument, J.J. Abrams is a great storyteller, much better than George Lucas. Consider Super 8 and the first Star Trek movies: he knows how to construct interesting characters with clear motivations and show those qualities through the action, something Lucas failed to do with the prequels. The post-episode IV canon in the novels and comics has too many contradictions, too many individual writers competing for attention and money. We have to collapse this into a non-contradictory canon that makes sense. And maybe, JJ Abrams will end up creating a more exciting story than the original canon, so you can’t say that conclusively Disney will ruin Star Wars. While I sympathize with the cancellation of the cartoon, it had to end sometime. It’s been on the air for quite a while and no show lasts forever. It was a great show, but its loss does not “ruin” Star Wars.