BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Legalization of Marijuana

I do see where you are coming from. However, you have to realize that marijuana actually is bad for your body. According to Healthline's article "The Effects of Marijuana on the Body", marijuana is very similar to tobacco, in that it "is made up of a variety of toxic chemicals that can irritate your bronchial passages and lungs." Also, when it comes to younger people whose brains are not fully developed, "marijuana can have a lasting impact on thinking and memory skills." Teens, for example, are still in some of the heaviest stages of brain development. Those who smoke marijuana have impaired brain development. So when you say that doctors wouldn't be prescribing it if it was bad, you really have to look deeper into the issue. There are also many doctors out there who do not know what they're doing. While marijuana may have clear medicinal uses, that doesn't take away the fact that it still damages the body in other ways, as science has proven time and time again. I'm glad that you are also providing evidence to support your claim. However, the evidence you have provided classifies as a logical fallacy, or faulty thinking. The case which you have presented may in fact be true for you and your mom, but this one example is not near enough information to go against the countless scientific studies of marijuana on the body. Because of these dangers that are presented with the use of marijuana, I still firmly believe that it should remain illegal in order to protect our communities.
Legalization of Marijuana

I do not agree with you in the slightest. I get it, some people abuse this substance, but it isn't just a drug, it's a healer in a way. There is many people that consider caffeine a drug, yet lots of people do it each day and aren't judged for it, so why should something that can ease your pain not be legalized? Marijuana is not something that I would personally do, not because it's illegal, but because I just don't feel like it and I don't want to. There is some drug problems in the United States, and they aren't going away any time soon. Marijuana isn't bad for your body, as it is a medical substance. Doctors wouldn't prescribe something that they don't know will help or not, they prescribe it because they do know that it will help with your mind and also whatever condition you have. I've had marijuana in my life my whole life, a few times for personal use, and my mom. She did marijuana for her cancer, and now she is completely fine, mostly because marijuana made her not worried about it. For once she wasn't worried about dying from something that she thought would kill her. So yes, it should be legalized, not just in the United States, but the whole world in my opinion.
Democracy

I am getting sick and tired on people mixing a Republic and a Democracy. A Republic is a type of government where the people elect officials to govern the society. A Democracy is a type of government is where the people govern their own society. If you want to go in depth with me, A Indirect Democracy is technically a Republic, and a Direct Democracy is a Democracy. But if you say a Democracy, people (at least the people that know stuff), they automatically assume your talking about a DIRECT DEMOCRACY. You did not cite anything so I automatically (also) assume that your a crazy anarchist. Even though I believe you. But really, look at some old countries and places. Were they ever rightly governed? No. It is just a repeat of the past.
Democracy

Here is some websites, that even if they do or don't have cites and if their information is debatable, or untrue. It is up to the public to decide: http://www.thedailybeast.com... http://www.firstpost.com... What I can give is these stats from the fact book: "Talk Nerdy to Me." copyright 2013. It gives these stats about world GDP for one year. Measured in the U.S. dollar. USA: $15.1 trillion China: $7.3 trillion Japan: $5.9 trillion Germany: $3.6 trillion France: $2.8 trillion Brazil: $2.5 trillion The rest of the world: $33 trillion EU: $18.4 trillion And the US has a budget of $711 billion dollars in military spending. And after World war 1, Germany's inflation was so bad that in 1921. That German rate of exchange was 81 marks (their currency) to one US dollar. By September 1923 it was 100 million marks to 1 dollar. Do you want me to add? Or what?
Democracy

America is not doing good at all, they owe China almost 50 trillion dollars. America starts wars because without them they would probably experience total economic collapse. The economy is always better during war times and when we are fighting terrorist groups like Al Qaeda and Isis. Do you think that the people of America have any choice in this matter at all, most people just want to live their lives. Their Democracy government claims them to be the police of the world but in actuality America is just trying not to fall of the cliff they have placed themselves so precariously by. Thanks for the Debate. Merry Thanksgiving
Democracy

If you don't see how difficult it is to make a good government for the people? If it is a monarchy or dictatorship then it's all about the ruler. If our country is doing so bad how can we find the money to fight all of these wars and terrorist groups? In North Korea, 40% that's almost half of the population starves because not only does the country's land is almost infertile but the leader dammed up the river to get power (electricity) for his country and he still has his country in a shell. Not allowing any trade with other countries.
Abortion

For my closing argument I will give a summary of my main ideas about why abortions are a good thing and not murder. Firstly, I believe they are a good thing because they help to lower the number of unwanted children who are abused. This is because they can stop a pregnancy in someone who is not yet ready to have a child. Therefore the mother can continue with their lives without having their education or work disrupted too much (in a case where the child is an accident and unwanted). The argument is the same if a teenager becomes accidentally pregnant they will not be able to care for the child if they could they would not still be in education. This means that abortions are good because they prevent children being not properly cared for. Also if a women was raped abortions are a good thing because the pregnancy won't have to continue and cause a reminder to the women about what happened to her. Furthermore if a women was raped and they go through with the child they might take their anger out on the baby which would be unkind and the child may grow up feeling unloved. Many people argue that the mother should go through with the baby and then if she doesn't want it then it could be put in an orphanage. However this may make the child feel unwanted and confused as they don't know who their real parents are. In my opinion abortion is not murder, this is because it happens before a baby has fully developed. Therefore you are not killing a human but removing an organism. The fetes can't think it has no consciousness this means it doesn't know what life is. Thank you for reading my closing argument on why abortion is good and not murder.
Abortion

To start off, you mention that teenagers can have abortions so they are not bullied in school for getting pregnant. So that is a good argument, but why can't they just send it to an orphanage or a foster home. Then, you mention that the girl that is pregnant can have control over her own body so she can choose what happens to the fetus. If the girl can choose what her body can do then how come the fetus can't choose to live? Lastly, abortion is basically promoting the Eugenics movement. What is that? It is when people tried to get rid of those who are not perfect. If you are getting rid of a fetus that is in a teenage girl, then you are trying to make her like all the other girls. Thanks for reading.
Abortion

I will start by explaining why abortion is a good thing. Abortion is a good thing because it means if a teenager becomes accidentally pregnant they can stop the pregnancy and carry on almost normally. If they are made to go through with the baby it could be very damaging for their lives. This is because at their age they don't have the ability to take care of a baby and raise a child if they did they wouldn't still be in education. You may argue that they shouldn't have got themselves into that position but the fact remains that it is unfair to let them have that child knowing that it may not be properly taken care of. Furthermore every women has the right to control her own body and if she feels that she is not ready to take care of that baby then she should be entitled to an abortion. As it is her life and her decision. If it is a teenager who is in that position then they might be at the optimum point in their education and to have to take just short of nine months out of school will decrease grades considerably not to mention once the baby is born and the girl is having to take care of a baby at the same time as studying. This girl (if still in school) might have to then face up to bullying and people judging her for what happened which could lead to upset, depression and low self-esteem. Now I will argue why abortion is not murder(Please note this argument is not intended in a cruel way). Abortion is not murder because it happens before the fetus has developed into a baby this means you are not killing a baby but removing an organism. The fetus can't think it doesn't have a conscience so in my opinion it is not yet a human being. Thank you for reading my first argument.
Women and men are completely equal

Women and men should not be treated the same in all situations, some situations do need equal treatment but not many. My reasoning behind this is that women can not always fend for them selves. In a case of rape or assault the women is almost always favored because they are usually the ones targeted. Also, like you said, in athletic jobs or high risk jobs women should not be paid as much. This is because they can not perform up to the standards set by high testosterone men. Conversely, women should be paid more or even be the only gender hired in jobs like obstetricians or other jobs dealing with female patients. This is because men may take advantage of their jobs or not perform up to their full potential if they find their jobs grotesque .
Resolved: The Cosmological Argument Fails to Prove God

ResolutionThe Cosmological Argument Fails to Prove GodAs Pro, I will be affirming this resolution by showing that the Cosmological Argument (CA) does not present a compelling argument for the existence of GodBurden of ProofThe BoP rests with Pro (me). Therefore, it is to be assumed that the CA is sound until shown otherwise.DefinitionsAll terms requiring clarification once the debate has started will be defined using the merriam-webster online dictionary definition that best fits the context of this debate [1]. If there is a dispute on which definition best fits the context of this debate, the final arbitration is reserved for myself.Any specific stipulations Con wishes to make should be request in the comment section prior to accepting.Rules1. First round is for acceptance2. Users with Elo under 2800 need not apply3. Any questions on this debate should be asked in the comments section prior to acceptance4. No semantics/ trollingThe Argument: Whatever begins to exist has a cause. The Universe began to exist. (Therefore) the Universe had a cause. That cause is God* God, in this case, is the Abrahamic God. NOTE: I will not be using arguments such as "This argument fails to prove Moses split the red sea, therefore it doesn't argue for the Abrahamic God" as these arguments are clearly abusive and don't actually address the logic of the CA. I only specify the Abrahamic God to exclude atypical definitions of God. *The actual CA only goes up to point 3. Point 4 is the assumed point.This debate is impossible to accept at this time. If you're interested, apply in the comments section. This will not be a first-come first-serve method of acceptance. The higher your ELO ranking, the more likely you are to be accepted as the contender.
Homosexual, Bisexual, and Transgender tolerance should be briefly taught at schools.

Recently, a Minnesota boy was murdered by a classmate for being homosexual. All across the nation and the world people are bullied, discriminated against and murdered for being homosexual. If there were brief assemblies teaching that homosexuality is not wrong, is natural and should not be discriminated against in any way, then these violent crimes would be significantly reduced and attitudes toward Lesbian, Bisexual, Gay and Transgendered (LGBT) would change. Currently, schools have a "Red Week" where there is an assembly about drugs and their harmful effects. Students are asked to wear red in support for drug safety and abstinence. This has proven very effective and has changed many attitudes about drugs. If LGBT tolerance would be given this same attention, arguably a more important issue than drugs, then less violent crimes and discrimination would occur.
public highschool students ought not be required to pass exit exams to graduate

now lets look at her attack on my case, she says what is the point in passing the students if they cant pass a simple exit exam. well as i have shown through my case (which my opponent has not attacked at all) these tests are bias against people. if these tests are bias then they will only be able to show the advantages of those preferred groups. this is by no means fair in that these tests prefer one group of something or someone over another. it also denies equal opportunity because we are failing those who are being biased against within the test. so lets look at why i have won the debate. - first my opponent has offered no way to weigh this round so i have won because of that -next my opponent only made one attack against my case which i have put down -next these tests are bias and prefer certain groups over others and that makes them unfair and denies equal opportunity for education -last we can extend every argument in my case because my opponent failed to attack them good luck to my opponent
Gay Marriage Should Be Legalized

1. My opponent has dropped all his prior arguments 2. My opponent has not touched any points I have made thus far That said, extend my prior arguments; and count my opponent's prior arguments as drops. now to my opponent's last statements. He claims that Same Sex Marriage being illegal defies the basic rights guaranteed by the Declaration of Independence. My opponent however does not provide a warrant to prove this. Neither does he provide any kind of analysis or evidence.
Gay Marriage Should Be Legalized

Now life, liberty, and the pursiut of happiness are our unalienable rights. Which therefore mens that they cannot be taken away for us. Gay marriage, being illegal in the united states, is in violation in those rights. The United States is supposed to be in sync with the Delaration of Independence, but they are contravening with these rights, so these laws that they have are not going by the Declaration of Independance. Back to con:3
Gay Marriage Should Be Legalized

I than my opponent for his response :3 Now here we have a few things to Consider, first of all we've come to an agreed conclusion that Homosexual Marriage is bad by standards of religious belief, or at least the abrahamic religions (Judaism, Muslim, Christianity religions that trace their origins back to Abraham) now this is only one of a few key points I have concerning this topic. With this in mind (knowing that Marriage is a religious communion between man and women) we should not even begin to consider referring to this term as "marriage" but instead if anything we need to look towards civil unions. Now in now way am I saying I agree with Homosexuality, so in any manner of the sense I would be against a same sex relationship, however as a Civil union, it takes faith out of the picture. Which, as my opponent conceded to in their prior argumentation, Homosexual marriage is something that would be deemed both offensive and undesirable in abrahamic Religions. And so now that I have shown you m main reason why Homosexual Marriage should not be legal, let;s move on to the con stance. in Con's first speech, they basically give only their opinion on why nothing is wrong with homosexuality, and then conclude with saying that having homosexual marriage illegal restricts freedom of speech. well I really only have two arguments regarding their first speech first, It's off topic, the debate is not about whether or not homosexuality is right or wrong, if it where then then that's what the topic should have been. But instead, this debate is over whether or not same sex marriage should be legal. my opponent has done nothing to prove same sex marriage here. second, my opponent's conclusion; that the current system limits free speech, is completely baseless. Just because it is illegal for two people of the same gender to get married in most states in the U.S. this in no manner limits their free speech. Now going on to my opponent's second speech, we've already conceded that marriage is a religious thing, and that Homosexual marriage can be seen as highly inappropriate to members to members of these abrahamic religions. so we cannot accept an argument on the grounds of fairness, as it wold be unfair to these people adhering to their religious doctrine. We must instead look to Civil Unions. Now using this idea as a scope to frame the debate, my opponent offers you no warrant to prove their claim. So in conclusion, thus far in today's debate, the vote must absolutely go to the Pro, as Con have given no solid warrant through out the course of today's debate to prove that Same sex marriage should indeed be legal. Back to Con!
Gay Marriage Should Be Legalized

I believe you are right, on how gay marriage is besically a disgrace to all religions, but what about the ones who do not believe in god? It wouldnt matter to them, but gay marriage being illegal is wrong because it is not fair to all those people, because they are not allowed to get married, or have to go halfway across the country to be. People fall in love and they get married, only heterosexuals, but gays fall in love and they cant get married due to the illegalment of it. I believe all people should be treated equally and as for gay marriage, thats one of the factors of being equal. People are talking about legalizing marajuana, but they havent thought much on legalizing gay marriage. I disagree with all respect to my opponent. Now back to my opponent :)
Gay Marriage Should Be Legalized

so as my oponent has done, I will simply use this speech to lay out the basic ideas that I plan to expand upon through-ou this debate; and we can wait until a later round to actually start the clash. (it's only fair that we both have an understanding of each other's stance before we begin to clash. ) So first of all, I do agree with my opponent; Homosexuals have existed for a very very very long time. And whether or not you think it's right or wrong is really irrelevant in the scope of this debate. The simple fact is; Homosexual Marriage should not be legal. the prime reasoning for this, is that marriage was originally instituted as a religious sanction; many of these religions who adhered to the system of marriage (not all mind you) where theistic or abrahamic in nature. Well the impact this has, is that these abrahamic religion's doctrines taught against Homosexuality. So allowing Homosexuals to have this title of being (married) is completely dis-respectful to the religious beliefs of billions of people all across the world. When we begin to offend the people who adhere to the theistic and abrahamic religions to such a great degree by taking a part of their own religious doctrrine and just using it as we wish; we thereby interefere with these people's basic rights to Religion. I have other reasons that require clash with my opponent; but as I said I will wait until a later speech to express these thoughts Back to you Pro. :3
Gay Marriage Should Be Legalized

This debate is a popular one eh? People have been gay, bi-sexual, and lesbian for centuries. There is nothing wrong with it, nor do people have a right to say anything bad about it because there is nothing bad to say about it, but its freedom of speech and everybody is entitled to their opinion. I believe that people that are gay, bi-sexual, or lesbian, just have different minds and like different things, people are unique in their own way, and everybody is different. You have a right to disgree with me, but it should be legalized, talking bad about gays, bi-sexualls, and lesbians is just like racism, but of peoples sexualty.
Belief in the Old Testement precudes belief in the New Testement or Koran

Spiderman, Spiderman, Does whatever a spider can Spins a web, any size, Catches thieves just like flies Look Out! Here comes the Spiderman. Is he strong? Listen bud, He's got radioactive blood. Can he swing from a thread Take a look overhead Hey, there There goes the Spiderman. In the chill of night At the scene of a crime Like a streak of light He arrives just in time. Spiderman, Spiderman Friendly neighborhood Spiderman Wealth and fame He's ingnored Action is his reward. To him, life is a great big bang up Whenever there's a hang up You'll find the Spider man. http://www.youtube.com...
Belief in the Old Testement precudes belief in the New Testement or Koran

My premise is simple; if you believe in the Old Testement's divinty, ala traditional Christianity or Islam, and that what it says is true, (at least) superficially understandable, and flawless (in the sense a perfect God wrote it) then any subsequent additions that change the message of the text, like the New Testament and the Koran, are inconpatible with the Old Testament, and because they aknoledge the veracity of it, invalidate themselves. I have two basic proofs: 1) When God introduced the system of comandments in Exodus, he spoke to the entire Jewish nation of 1.2 million people. This presumebly was so no one could call Moses or any other prophet God chose a liar. Either way, it certainly had that effect and, more importantly, set up a standard for divine revalation. If God spoke to you or your grandfather, then a new prophet contradicting what God said, no matter how impressive, is regarded with suspicion. If God changed His mind, why wouldn't He tell you like last time? 2) The Old Testament predicts the coming of Jesus, Mohammed, and the like. In fact, it says that great people rise, perform miracles and wonders, and give signs to prove they are messengers of God. It says they will amass great followings. And then it says that if they change or defy any of the commandments, you should stone them. In fact, one of the best examples, Deut. 13:1-4 specifically says that they will be able to do all these things because God wants to test your faith. So, for an omnipotant being who knows the future, God pretty much painted Himself into a corner, by telling everyone not to believe the people He was going to send. He ensured that people like Jesus or Mohommed would be rejected by anyone educated in His work, as indeed happened. This is not the nature of any caring or just God. I eagerly await my opponents response.
Birth Control Should Be Mandatory For Women Who Do Not Want Children

9th Amendment: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." Con has to justify how this applies at all considering the history of the Amendment (https://www.law.cornell.edu...) relating to basic rights that cannot be infringed upon. Mind you that "Right to Bodily Integrity" is not one of these rights. 1st Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." I'm not even going to guess. (https://www.law.cornell.edu...)