BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Halloween is a day of Satan and should not be practised.

The Bible and observation can tell us that Halloween is a satanic day and not of God. Halloween is essentially a day to focus on death and evil things. 1 Corinthians 10:21 says "You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons." You cannot follow both God and practice a satanic holiday. Things which are commonly associated with Halloween are witches, wizards, demons, spirits/ghosts, and the dead (zombies, skeletons, ect). If you read the last page of the Bile, you will see that witchcraft and magic are very sinful practices and you cannot be a Christian if you commit them. Demons should be self-explanatory. As for death, death is called the last enemy (1 Corinthians 15:26). If we dedicate an entire day to death, how can we defeat it? You do not defeat an enemy by following it's ways. Jesus defeated this enemy of death with his resurrection. We need to claim victory over it, not embrace it and accept it. After reading this, you should have come to the conclusion that Halloween is a day of witchcraft and death and Satan, which are all things a Christian (and everyone) should avoid and claim victory over with the blood of Jesus that was shed on the cross.
Halloween is a day of Satan and should not be practised.

Accepted by Christians does not mean accepted by God. Disapproved by God does not mean should't be practised. Catholics accepted war and violence (the crusades), but that doesn't mean it's right. Hitler accepted genocide, but that doesn't mean Germans should kill Jews.It is not definitive that God disapproved of these things. The rest of your arguments are the same. You are simply saying that it's not satanic because it's fun. The truth is, I would think serial killers enjoy murder. That doesn't mean murder isn't a crime for serial killers.Crime and should not be practised are not the same thing. It's about getting candy? Theft is about getting stuff you want. Wrong, the difference between theft and the obtainment of candy is the people giving candy to you are willing to give it to you. That doesn't make it acceptable. The truth is that many things which are fun for those who do them are not acceptable actions. Joy does not equal morality. And joy does not equal immorality. If satanic practice is fun for you, that doesn't mean that it's not a condemned action by others, including God.Halloween is not about worshipping Satan.
Halloween is a day of Satan and should not be practised.

Accepted by Christians does not mean accepted by God. Catholics accepted war and violence (the crusades), but that doesn't mean it's right. Hitler accepted genocide, but that doesn't mean Germans should kill Jews. The rest of your arguments are the same. You are simply saying that it's not satanic because it's fun. The truth is, I would think serial killers enjoy murder. That doesn't mean murder isn't a crime for serial killers. It's about getting candy? Theft is about getting stuff you want. That doesn't make it acceptable. The truth is that many things which are fun for those who do them are not acceptable actions. Joy does not equal morality. If satanic practice is fun for you, that doesn't mean that it's not a condemned action by others, including God.
Halloween is a day of Satan and should not be practised.

Halloween is not of Christian origin. If you simply look outside or on Google images, you will e many things that are related to paganism and/or against Christianity. As this debate is to convince reader's that Halloween is against the Bible, I will use the Bible to prove points.I never said it was of Christian origin, I said it is accepted by Christians nowadays.According to sources (http://www.cbn.com......), the practice of carving pumpkins is of demonic origins. It originated from a Biblically incorrect tale where a man names Jack was denied by Satan and forced to roam the Earth. When leaving hell, he was eating a turnip. Satan threw a coal at him. The pumpkin replace the turnip and the candle represents the coal. Making shrines to Satan (jack-o-lanterns) is not Christian. Halloween was invented by the Celtics (more specifically, pagan druids), which practiced paganism and were of the occult.Of course practices of Pagan druids in the 15th century are not the same as people today, modern day people are much more modest with this.Deuteronomy 18:10-12 says that no one should be related to the occult. Halloween is very occult in nature. It is represented by ghosts, which are generally defines as human spirits. According to the Bible, these spirits cannot return to Earth, but instead, spend eternity in God's kingdom or hell.Again people aren't worshiping Satan, they are having fun.You may say, "But many Christians follow it, and churches celebrate it with Halloween parties and decorations. I see nothing non-Christian about it." First off, what is considered law to Christians is what God said, not what man practices. If a church murders, it is still an evil action. 1 John 2:15 says to not follow the ways of this world. If this world says it is not satanic, that doesn't change anything. Use your basic observation skills. Look at people's homes. They have many occult objects on them.jMatthew 22:32 says "God is not the God of the dead, but of the living." By dead and living, it was referring to spiritually. Halloween is a day of embracing death. Due to the amount of pagan origin and belief in this holiday, it will not lead you to righteousness. The god of the dead is Satan, and Christians are trying to give him a day of praise and embrace him and his ways. It is obviously NOT a Christian day.It is not embracing death, it's about scaring people and getting yummy candy.
Halloween is a day of Satan and should not be practised.

Halloween is not of Christian origin. If you simply look outside or on Google images, you will e many things that are related to paganism and/or against Christianity. As this debate is to convince reader's that Halloween is against the Bible, I will use the Bible to prove points. According to sources (http://www.cbn.com...), the practice of carving pumpkins is of demonic origins. It originated from a Biblically incorrect tale where a man names Jack was denied by Satan and forced to roam the Earth. When leaving hell, he was eating a turnip. Satan threw a coal at him. The pumpkin replace the turnip and the candle represents the coal. Making shrines to Satan (jack-o-lanterns) is not Christian. Halloween was invented by the Celtics (more specifically, pagan druids), which practiced paganism and were of the occult. Deuteronomy 18:10-12 says that no one should be related to the occult. Halloween is very occult in nature. It is represented by ghosts, which are generally defines as human spirits. According to the Bible, these spirits cannot return to Earth, but instead, spend eternity in God's kingdom or hell. You may say, "But many Christians follow it, and churches celebrate it with Halloween parties and decorations. I see nothing non-Christian about it." First off, what is considered law to Christians is what God said, not what man practices. If a church murders, it is still an evil action. 1 John 2:15 says to not follow the ways of this world. If this world says it is not satanic, that doesn't change anything. Use your basic observation skills. Look at people's homes. They have many occult objects on them. Matthew 22:32 says "God is not the God of the dead, but of the living." By dead and living, it was referring to spiritually. Halloween is a day of embracing death. Due to the amount of pagan origin and belief in this holiday, it will not lead you to righteousness. The god of the dead is Satan, and Christians are trying to give him a day of praise and embrace him and his ways. It is obviously NOT a Christian day.
Game of noughts and crosses (Round 3)

If this goes well, I'll do a round 3. Maximum 5 rounds. If game is not decided within 5 rounds, it can be decided as a draw. Board will be laid out like this: X - O - X - - - O I will be crosses and I will start. You must copy the board each time and add your move. Here is the first round for you. X - - - - - - - -
Should We Legalize Marijuana

Alright, so some of the chemicals found in weed have health benefits. However, guess what these 420 chemicals culminate into. That's right, marijuana. It kills sperm cells off. It bites away at your IQ, draining the intelligence from your body. And now, you are trying to tell us that we, the American people should legalize it?! I don't want to inhale that crap. Think about it. You are lighting a tube filled with harmful chemicals in your mouth and inhaling its contents. And guess what it does? It gets you high. Yea, that feeling may be "fun" , but guess what people do when they're high? Well, I shouldn't have to answer that question for your readers. Right now, some of you may be thinking "Well let's set designated marijuana smoking rooms so there is no second-hand smoke to harm the community and the citizens who want pot can have pot." Your tax dollars at work, America. The only source I should need for this is "Common Sense" by Thomas Paine (Of course, I'm just being facetious). Smoking is bad. Smoking of any kind is bad. Even with health benefits, all of the harmful effects cannabis that I have mentioned more than outweigh the good. I would be alarmed to believe that after all this, the people stand firm on legalizing marijuana solely for taxation and the few health benefits it provides, with no regard whatsoever to the ulterior human health. Whether you are an addict, or a second-hand, it is very serious and should not just be legalized willy nilly. First it's pot. What's next? Oh, now America decriminalizes cocaine. Now heroin is legal. Hey guys, the gas station just started selling meth. Wanna get some? Marijuana is the gateway to all of this horror that will, ultimately, bring us to our knees (because we'll be too high to do anything!). Thank you for doing this debate with me.
Should We Legalize Marijuana

Section 1: I shall be going into the mind of a so called "stoner" in this section. So to start off I'll say that, pot isn't lethal. Marijuana is pot, and pot has never killed anyone. Plus marijuana makes all my problems go away, its fun. From here on out I shall be discussing the medical advantages of marijuana. Section 2, Article 1: The legalization can help researchers find medical uses for pot, which may be later used to cure a disease that may come up in the near future. For instance... Look at Ebola, its a disease that has killed many people. Now, think about whether or not another serious disease showed up and the only thing that could cure and/or subdue it for a time is marijuana, would you rather it be legal? Or would you rather have to break the law to stay alive and healthy. Article 2: There are two chemicals in marijuana that can be used for medicinal purposes. Those chemicals are cannabidiol (CBD), which seems to effect the brain without making the user high, and tetrahydrocannabidiol, which has pain relieving properties. I'm sure this sounds good and effective to anyone, especially if they have long term pain problems. Article 3: Marijuana can be used to prevent eye diseases, like glaucoma, which increases pressure in the eyeball, which damages the optic nerve and causes loss of vision. This drug can save people from going blind, and its probably cheaper than the surgeries they offer to fix they same problem. This is great for those people who can't afford the said surgeries. The drug itself, decreases the pressure inside the eye, while a surgery can cost you your vision entirely with the smallest mistake. Would this be a risk worth taking? Article 4: It has been proven that marijuana can't damage your lungs. It can, in fact, increase your lung capacity. Researchers compared tobacco users and pot users, and the pot users seemed to have more lung capacity than that of their counterparts. Though this may not be good for those who have asthma, but it can be good for those whose lungs are slowly decreasing in capacity. Which we all should know is bad. Article 5: It can help with epileptic seizures. This theory was tested on rats in 2003, and it proved effective. It took away the seizures for about 10 hours. CBD, and THC work together to bind the brain cells which are responsible for excitability and relaxation. So, marijuana is the ultimate 'chill pill' in this case. As my opponent can see, there are many medical uses for marijuana, and there are probably tons more. If the readers, or my opponent, would like to know more about how marijuana can help, I'd ask that they check out my source which is posted below. http://www.businessinsider.com...
Is man slave of machines

Thanks for sending the challenge again, and good luck! Rebuttal "There are many people across the world who's life is completely dependent on the machine and one of the great example is of the great scientist-Stephen hawking(who cannot even speak without the help of the machines)" I think this helps my case more than it does yours. He is dependent on the machines, so they have control over him. "The technology has given the power to the man to control over natural hazard over great extent and if it doesn't stops the hazard completely at least it makes the people aware of the disaster and the amount of the misshapen to be created by the disaster ,so that people can either migrate to some safe place or can take steps which can reduce the amount of the damage created by the disaster." Even if it's for our own safety, the technology is still controlling our actions (telling us to prepare things for a disaster). "but he has made the use of the technology for a better life, mentality, comforts, etc.." Without the technology, we couldn't have these things. We have become accustomed to it, and change doesn't come easily. If something breaks, then you either have to fix/replace it, or you have to do without something you are accustomed to having. A lot of money and time is devoted to the maintenance of technology, because it is crucial to the lifestyle we are used to. Argument Society has become dependent on technology. There is medical equipment necessary to keep people alive, technology that provides convenience, technology that is a part of our daily lives (electric lights, plumbing, the refrigerator), and even robots to babysit children. [1] As we are dependent on the technology, it has a certain amount of control over us. If, for example, your electricity goes out, it becomes a priority to fix it. You might reschedule something else you had planned to have the repairman come out, or take the time to fix it yourself if you know how. The technology in this example (electricity) has control over you. Sources [1] http://www.nec.co.jp...
Is man slave of machines

I think I would be wrong if i say that man is a slave of the machines or technology as the nature of the human being is to make life better and better and for this he is making machines or using new technology to give us better and better ,and there is nothing wrong if we care about our comfort .Now the man has become the friend of machine and gain total control over it .He is using machine for the improvement in the mankind .There are many people across the world who's life is completely dependent on the machine and one of the great example is of the great scientist-Stephen hawking(who cannot even speak without the help of the machines) The machines have completely changed the living standard of the people it has modernized the world .Now we cannot even think our life without the use of the machine .Technology have lighten the world .It has being successful in growing the mentality creation of a human being .The technology has given the power to the man to control over natural hazard over great extent and if it doesn't stops the hazard completely at least it makes the people aware of the disaster and the amount of the misshapen to be created by the disaster ,so that people can either migrate to some safe place or can take steps which can reduce the amount of the damage created by the disaster. So, can we say that the man is not a slave of the machines but he has made the use of the technology for a better life, mentality, comforts, etc.......?
Is man slave of machines

"He uses the machines as a medium to express his views only and the machines tell the same which he wants to tell the people(as tested by the scientists) they don't add or detect any information from his orders." Maybe not now,but there is the possibility of some bug in the programming or someone deliberately messing with it. If something goes wrong, he is at the mercy of the technology. "So I want to ask that is there something wrong if we care for our own safety as the technology?? How can you say that technology still control our actions as we made the use of technology to get more comforts and ease in our life and in my opinion there is nothing wrong if we care for our comforts.." I didn't say that there was something wrong with comfort, however, there is a point at which you have to decide whether maintaining the technology that provides the comfort is worth it in the long run. "You want to say that we all are addicted to the technology--------so what's wrong in that we are also addicted to food do we stop eating it? And also we get the large production of food due to the use of technology and if we don't do so there will be a million of people who will die of hunger..." The technology is crucial to food production, but the technology allowed the need to develop, not the other way around. Were it not for the fertilizers, pesticides, and farming equipment, we would ever have been able to increase our population to a level at which the technology becomes necessary. We relied on technology for convenience, and now must rely on technology for food. "Money is itself an invention of technology and our time is saved much more with the use of technology than preferring walking over long distances…" If it weren't for technology, we would not have let everything become spread out so much. Again, you have things in the wrong order. We used technology to transport things over long distances, and now we have to use technology because everything is far away. "The use of technology you can see everywhere here also we are chatting or challenging each other as friends and even when we never meet neither see anyone face to face. The technology helps us to bind the relations as we can be in a regular contact to our friend and relatives with the use of technology…" It was because of technology that the friendship began, and the technology is necessary to maintain it. The technology is controlling peoples' social lives.
Is man slave of machines

I am not agree with your saying that machines have controlled over Stephen hawking as if the machines taken control over the man he would not be able to express his view only in the field that he studied or in other words he should have the knowledge in all the fields no matter whether the topic belongs to science or with history. He uses the machines as a medium to express his views only and the machines tell the same which he wants to tell the people(as tested by the scientists) they don't add or detect any information from his orders. Above you have written that--- Even if it's for our own safety, the technology is still controlling our actions So I want to ask that is there something wrong if we care for our own safety as the technology?? How can you say that technology still control our actions as we made the use of technology to get more comforts and ease in our life and in my opinion there is nothing wrong if we care for our comforts.. Society has become dependent on technology. You want to say that we all are addicted to the technology--------so what's wrong in that we are also addicted to food do we stop eating it? And also we get the large production of food due to the use of technology and if we don't do so there will be a million of people who will die of hunger... A lot of money and time is devoted to the maintenance of technology, because it is crucial to the lifestyle we are used to. Money is itself an invention of technology and our time is saved much more with the use of technology than preferring walking over long distances… The use of technology you can see everywhere here also we are chatting or challenging each other as friends and even when we never meet neither see anyone face to face. The technology helps us to bind the relations as we can be in a regular contact to our friend and relatives with the use of technology… so what do you think now?????????
The Nazis were evil

You're being completely and totally unfair to the Nazis. Sure, they've done some pretty rotten stuff at certain points of their existence (viz. the worst genocide in history). But that doesn't mean that the entire National Socialist German Workers' Party was or is a bad or "evil" entity. Using the sort of contentions that would prove the Nazis were evil, one could prove just about anyone "evil" based solely off of a few mistakes. Furthermore, consider this: "The Nazi racial philosophy was influenced by the works of Arthur de Gobineau, Houston Stewart Chamberlain, and Madison Grant, and wholly embraced Alfred Rosenberg's Aryan Invasion Theory. The theory traced Aryan peoples in ancient Iran invading the Indus Valley Civilization, and carrying with them great knowledge and science that had been preserved from the antediluvian world. This "antediluvian world" referred to Thule, the speculative pre-Flood/Ice Age origin of the Aryan race, and is often tied to ideas of Atlantis. Several of the founders and subsequent leadership of the Nazi Party had been associates — and very occasionally members — of the Thule-Gesellschaft (the Thule Society), which romanticized the Aryan race through theology and ritual.[22]" In other words, all they wanted was practical application of beliefs that they *truly* held; this cannot possibly be considered "evil".
The Nazis were evil

So you're saying that the Hitler Youth program also made the Nazi party evil? I'd be inclined to disagree. I think every child needs the sort of structure the Nazis provided through said program. We don't want a bunch of kids growing up with cultural diversity all around them, subverting the proper messages of conformity and agreeing with the leaders. Also, consider this: "After the boy scout movement was banned through German-controlled countries, the HJ appropriated many of its activities, though changed in content and intention. For example, many HJ activities closely resembled military training, with weapons training, assault course circuits and basic strategy. Some cruelty by the older boys toward the younger ones was tolerated and even encouraged, since it was believed this would weed out the unfit and harden the rest." So what we're talking about here is really nothing more than a Nazi Germany version of Boy Scouts. Are you saying you're anti-Boy Scouts? Clearly, then, the Hitler Youth was not an "evil" program of the Nazi party. And as I have said, the mistakes that they did make (e.g. mass extermination of the Jews and a number of other types of people in the most sinister, diabolical and downright *mean* genocide ever to grace the face of this planet) should not cause people to judge the entire movement as "evil".