BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Mission to Mars holds possibility of finding life there.

"Mars beckons..?" Cumbrian Sky. July 21, 2009: "The only good reason to send people to Mars would be to make their mission a dedicated, focused search for life on the Red Planet. [...] Why? Because, at the end of the day, all this space stuff, it’s all about Life. [...] As a species we are fascinated by Life. We are driven, with a ferocious, insatiable hunger, to learn all we can about its origins and fate, strengths and frailties, limitations and possibilities."
Many Apollo astronauts advocate going to Mars, not Moon

Captain Alan Bean, The 77-year-old was part of the Apollo 12 mission and became the fourth man to walk on the Moon, sided with going to Mars instead of returning to the Moon: "We ought to gather the international community and go to Mars. I know it isn't how others feel because it is much cheaper to go back to the Moon but I would rather we went to Mars. If we did it with all those other countries it would have a tremendously unifying effect on the Earth. It would be an inspiration for all people on Earth."[12]
Moon desolate, but still holds scientific mysteries

Richard Hollingham. "Why go back to the Moon?" BBC. July 19, 2009: "The exploration of the Moon is maybe best compared with the expeditions to Antarctica. They are both uncompromising, extreme environments that, at first, would appear to have little to offer to human advancement. As it's turned out, Antarctica has proved to be vital for scientific discovery. It has taught us about our atmosphere, oceans and climate. 18th and 19th century explorers were desperate to discover that last continent - in the 21st century the Moon provides an even greater challenge."
Mars is more hospitable than the Moon in many ways

Guy Gugliotta. "U.S. Planning Base on Moon To Prepare for Trip to Mars." Washington Post. March 26, 2006: "In some ways, the moon will be harder than Mars. Moon dust is much more abrasive than Mars dust; Mars has atmosphere; Mars has more gravity (one-third of Earth's); Mars has plenty of ice for a potential water supply, while the moon may have some, but probably not very much."
Going to Mars would unify the world

Captain Alan Bean, The 77-year-old was part of the Apollo 12 mission and became the fourth man to walk on the Moon, sided with going to Mars instead of returning to the Moon: "We ought to gather the international community and go to Mars. I know it isn't how others feel because it is much cheaper to go back to the Moon but I would rather we went to Mars. If we did it with all those other countries it would have a tremendously unifying effect on the Earth. It would be an inspiration for all people on Earth."[2]
General statements favoring a mission to Mars over the Moon

Mr. Eugene Cernan, who was the last astronaut to step off the Moon in 1972, said in 2009: "I think the next major goal is not to spend three days, or three weeks or three months on the Moon, but to have you folks, or your kids, or your grand-kids sit here and talk to a group of guys who can tell you what it was like to go to Mars."[13]
Solar radiation is no major danger to Mars astronauts.

Radiation only becomes dangerous when absorbed in large quantities, over short periods of time. According to the National Academy of Sciences National Research Council, a dose of 100 rem causes a 1.81% increase in the likelihood of cancer in the next 30 years of a person's life. Astronauts inside a spaceship during any of the last 3 large recorded solar flares would have experienced doses of 38 rem; inside of the storm shelter - 8 rem. On the surface of Mars, which offers much radiation protection due to its atmosphere, the unshielded dose would have been 10 rem, the shielded dose 3 rem. In total, radiation doses of 52.0 and 58.4 rem taken on the missions, are well below dangerous thresholds -- even were they to come all at once. [4]
A longer-stay and a Moonbase would be inspiring.

Staying for a longer period of time on the Moon, or possibly creating a Moonbase would be different than the initial trips to the moon between 1969 and 1972, and would be very exciting and inspirational. Having a human or a small group of individuals subsequently live on the moon would be even more inspiring, as humans would look up to the Moon every night and contemplate their common humanity with those living on the Moon. In general, it is possible for humans to design the next trip to the Moon in ways that are very distinct from the Apollo trips, adventurous, new, and inspiring.
Progressive systems could be refined by another moon landing.

When we wanted to go to the Moon in the 1960s and 70s we had progressive systems that allowed the building upon knowledge gradually as time went on, mission by mission. The unfortunate thing is that we have not been to the moon or attempted anything like that in a little under half a century. We have lost the progression chain and have only done orbiting and satellite repair/launch for the past couple decades. We need to restart the chain with another moon landing.
Mission to Mars will have major communications time-lag.

"Going to Mars: A mission fraught with risk." Canadian Space Agency. September 3, 2008: "The 20-minute communications lag. Another difficulty is the communications lag between Earth and a spacecraft travelling to Mars. Depending on the distance between the two, it can take almost 20 minutes to send commands, and then another 20 minutes before a response is received. Scientists must react quickly when problems arise, and then wait with great patience for the response, which will arrive 40 minutes after they send the initial signal. This also means that robots and systems we send to Mars must be able to make some of their own decisions, or at least know to wait for a command if something is not right."
World needs inspiring Mars mission now; Moon-mission delays this.

The world is ensnared in a number of major conflicts and challenges at present. Some label the rift between the Islamic world and the West and a "clash of civilizations". An inspiring mission to Mars can help soften our attitudes to other humans and resolve these conflicts. A mission to the Moon cannot do so as well, and such a mission would delay the pacifying effect of a mission to Mars. But, this should not be delayed.
Artificial gravity can overcome zero-gravity on Mars mission.

The problem of zero gravity during the trip to Mars is actually not a problem at all: zero-gravity conditions can be eliminated altogether during the trip, as artificial gravity can be created through the use of centrifugal force. Furthermore, we should take into account the Mir cosmonauts, Sergei Avdev spending a total of 748 days in zero-gravity over 3 missions, and Valeri Polyakov spending 438 consecutive days without gravity. There were no long term negative impact, having no reason to believe that zero gravity causes health problems. [5]
Humans can go back to the Moon and on to Mars.

There is no reason humans have to pick between going to the Moon and going to Mars? It is not a one-or-the-other question. We can go both back to the Moon and on to Mars. This is the general proposal put forward by George W. Bush and President Obama, calling for a return to the Moon around 2020 and pushing on to Mars in the mid 1930s. So, as much as the debate is splitting hairs about one "or" the other, this is a false dichotomy. Humans can go both to the Moon and on to Mars.
If we could go to the Moon in 1969, we can go to Mars now.

The idea that humans are somehow not yet prepared to go to Mars, and that we need more preparation and practice (by again going to the Moon, or through some other process), ignores the fact that going to the Moon was a monumental challenge in 1969, and yet we did it. Going to Mars now is an equivalent challenge to going to the Moon in 1969. It's a challenge, but we can do it.
Facilitating military recruitment through NCLB is wrong

NCLB (In section 9528) requires public secondary schools to provide military recruiters the same access to facilities as a school provides to higher education institution recruiters. Schools are also required to provide contact information for every student to the military if requested, and schools are not required to tell the students or parents. Students or parents can opt out of having their information shared.<ref>(nd) SEC. 9528. ARMED FORCES RECRUITER ACCESS TO STUDENTS AND STUDENT RECRUITING INFORMATION. Department of Education. Retrieved 6/7/07.</ref> <ref>(nd) Military Free Zone. website. Retrieved 6/7/07.</ref> Currently, many school districts have a generic opt out form which, if filled out and turned in, withholds students' information from college and job recruiters as well as the military.
No Child Left Behind over-emphasizes math and reading:

Robert Lynch. "No Child Left Behind Act wrongly left the arts behind". The Hill. March 12, 2007 - "[Congress] should correct the legislation’s unintended consequences, which include reducing the amount of arts education in our nation’s schools. [...] it also requires schools to report student achievement test results for only two subjects: reading and math. With the emphasis on just those two, the arts have suffered. [...] A recent national study of the Act’s impact by the Council on Education Policy reveals that a majority of school leaders saw gains in achievement, but 71 percent reported having reduced instructional time in at least one other subject to make more time for reading and math. Since the passage of NCLB, 22 percent of elementary school leaders surveyed reported a decline in their art and music instruction."
There is strong public support for No Child Left Behind

"Critics are many, but law has solid public support". School Reform News. March 2004 - "Solid Public Support. Bush and NCLB supporters on Capitol Hill also pointed to evidence of public support for NCLB standards and accountability. A national survey conducted in early January for Americans for Better Education by The Winston Group found a solid majority of Americans view NCLB favorably, with support highest among African-Americans and parents of children in public schools. [...] More than 100 black and Latino school officials signed a letter to Congress condemning calls to repeal NCLB’s accountability requirements, asserting the naysayers would “turn back the clock to a time when schools--particularly in suburban communities--could coast comfortably on the performance of a handful of high-performing students and hide serious problems behind misleading averages."
NCLB funds faith-based orgs for supplemental education

No Child Left Behind and Faith-Based Leaders. United States Department of Education. Retrieved February 18, 2009 - "Faith-based organizations can receive funds to provide tutoring and other academic enrichment services for eligible low-income students. Religious organizations can become supplemental educational services providers by applying to states and then working with districts to provide services directly to students in reading, language arts and mathematics. Many faith-based organizations are already providing these services in innercity and rural communities across the country, where assistance is needed most. Faith-based organizations often find it useful to establish their program as a not-for-profit (501c3) to receive funds."
Statewide standards are an improvement over major local failures:

Local failures have necessitated federal intervention to remedy issues like teachers teaching outside their areas of expertise, and complacency in the face of continually failing schools.[5] Some local governments, notably New York State, have voiced support for NCLB provisions, arguing that local standards had failed to provide adequate oversight over special education, and that NCLB would allow longitudinal data to be more effectively used to monitor Adequate Yearly Progress, also known as AYP.[6]
No-Child-Left-Behind detracts from the education of the gifted.

When the focus of the educational system and teachers is on the standardized average, this detracts from the education of those at the low and high end of educational achievement. The gifted will not be taught to their full potential as a result. This has consequences not simply for these students, but for society as a whole, which depends disproportionately on the cultivation of the best and brightest into tomorrow's leaders.
States are free to opt out of No Child Left Behind

Chester Finn Jr. "5 Myths About No Child Left Behind". Washington Post. March 30, 2008 - "1. No Child Left Behind is an unprecedented extension of federal control over schools. [...] But NCLB isn't compulsory. States that don't want to jump through its hoops are free to forgo their federal dollars. (Several, such as Utah, Nebraska and Virginia, came close to doing just that, but the lure of those funds helped them overcome their reservations.)"
NCLB gets teachers to over-focus on those just below passing

Because No Child Left Behind makes passing tests such a central priority, teachers don't have much of an incentive to spend time helping those that are already likely to pass nor those that are highly unlikely to pass (it would be wasted energy). The greatest bang-for-the-buck for teachers under threat from NCLB penalties is to focus on students that are just below the passing grade. This is unfortunate because every child should be given equal attention to grow regardless of their abilities.
Standardized tests poorly measure real student learning

Standardized testing often tests only a very limited range of skills rather than the broad range of skills we would hope our educational system is teaching. Standardized testing focuses largely on memorization, speed of recall, and critical thinking. Yet, a full education entails much more, including creativity, emotional insight, composure and dignity, physical health and an understanding of nutrition, and many other basic human values. NCLB, therefore, does not measure the most important factors in a student's education and future success and happiness. It is, therefore, useless as a measure of a student and school's performance.
NCLF does not track progress of individual students

"Commentary: No Child Left Behind needs revision". McClatchy. December 11, 2008 - "schools should be judged on whether each child progresses from one year to the next, which is called a 'growth model.' It asks, did the child's knowledge and skills grow at least one year's worth? Are children who are behind getting enough attention to help them catch up? Those are the important questions, not whether this third grade scores better than the previous year's third-grade class [under no child left behind]."
No Child Left Behind encourages states to set low standards

Ryan, J. "The Perverse Incentives of No Child Left Behind Act." July 2, 2004 - "the Act unintentionally encourages states to lower their academic standards. [...] The requirement that an increasing percentage of students in every school achieve a certain test score each year is arbitrary and unrealistic, in that it establishes achievement goals without any reference to past achievement levels or rates of achievement growth. Many schools, including some that are considered effective, will be unable to meet these achievement targets. This will create pressure to make the targets easier to meet by dumbing down the tests or making scoring systems more generous. By this process, a law intended to raise academic standards may lower them."
Standardized tests ensures students learn essential information.

There is some information in the world that is essential to know as a means of communicating effectively and analytically with other individuals in society, whether as a citizen or in the marketplace. Standardized tests help ensure that all students learn this important information. It is true that this information can be cut-and-dry and perhaps even boring, including history, literacy (reading comprehension), and math. Yet, it is, nevertheless, essential, so testing for it and ensuring students know the information is socially and educationally valuable. Yet, it is also true, that this essential information does not constitute all the information that a community may believe their children should know.
No Child Left Behind draws, keeps, motivates good teachers

"Fact Sheet on the Major Provisions of the Conference Report to H.R. 1, the No Child Left Behind Act". United States Department of Education - "Strengthening Teacher Quality [...] H.R. 1 asks states to put a highly-qualified teacher in every public school classroom by 2005. The bill also makes it easier for local schools to recruit and retain excellent teachers. [...] H.R. 1 will consolidate smaller programs within the US Department of Education. The bill also creates a new Teacher Quality Program that allows greater flexibility for local school districts. [...] In addition to specific funds for teacher quality, H.R. 1 will also give local schools new freedom to make spending decisions with up to 50 percent of the non-Title I federal funds they receive. With this new freedom, a local school district can use additional funds for hiring new teachers, increasing teacher pay, improving teacher training and development or other uses."
NCLB helps narrow the achievement gap for minorities.

NCLB seeks to narrow class and racial gaps in school performance by creating common expectations for all. It also requires schools and districts to focus their attention on the academic achievement of traditionally under-served groups of children, such as low-income students, students with disabilities, and African Americans and Latinos. Many previous state-created systems of accountability only measured average school performance, allowing schools to be highly rated even if they had large achievement gaps between affluent and disadvantaged students.
NCLB ensures disabled students are not left behind

Bill Byrne. "No Child Left Behind — Really? Why I like this law." - "The fact is that in many, many public schools, kids with disabilities are not learning to read and do math — while the vast majority of them can master these skills with proper instruction. [...] No Child Left Behind will short-circuit all of the excuses and explanations. School systems that do a good job with children with disabilities will show their progress, and those that fail to do a good job will have their ineffectiveness exposed. Then parents and voters can make informed decisions about how to get the underachievers on track."
NCLB tests what is testable; art and music is not testable.

While music, art, culture, and physical education are important, they are not testable. You can only create a standardized test around information that is common and fairly objective. No Child Left Behind does this, focusing on history, math, and reading comprehension. It cannot be blamed for not testing arts and music. These subjects are not testable. Schools should, however, teach them, and not merely focus on teaching to the NCLB test.
Teachers are not necessarily to blame for poor student performance.

Critics of the NCLB requirement for "one high, challenging standard" claim that some students are simply unable to perform at the level for their age, no matter how good the teacher is.EdAccountability.org While statewide standards reduce the educational inequality between privileged and underprivileged districts in a state, they still impose a "one size fits all" standard on individual students. Particularly in states with high standards, schools can be punished for not being able to dramatically raise the achievement of a student who has below-average capabilities.
No Child Left Behind encourages parents to engage more actively

No Child Left Behind establishes the foundation for schools and school districts to significantly enhance parental involvement and improve administration through the use of the assessment data to drive decisions on instruction, curriculum and business practices. It provides information for parents by requiring states and school districts to give parents detailed report cards on schools and districts explaining the school's AYP performance. It notifies parents of schools that do not meet standards, giving them a way to weigh alternative school options. Schools must also inform parents when their child is being taught by a teacher or para-professional who does not meet "highly qualified" requirements.
No Child Left Behind does nothing to improve teachers

Alfie Kohn. "NCLB: 'Too Destructive To Salvage'". Common Dreams. May 31, 2007 - "according to a recent 50-state survey by Teachers Network, a non-profit education organization, exactly 3% of teachers think NCLB helps them to teach more effectively. No wonder 129 education and civil rights organizations have endorsed a letter to Congress deploring the law's overemphasis on standardized testing and punitive sanctions. No wonder 30,000 people (so far) have signed a petition at educatorroundtable.org calling the law 'too destructive to salvage.'"
NCLB encountered some problems due to low funding

No Child Left Behind had some significant problems when it was first implemented under the Bush administration. But this had much more to do with insufficient funding than with any inadequacies of the program itself. Barack Obama recognized as much in the following remark: "I'll tell you what's wrong with No Child Left Behind. Forcing our teachers, our principals and our schools to accomplish all of this without the resources they need is wrong. Promising high-quality teachers in every classroom and then leaving the support and the pay for those teachers behind is wrong. Labeling a school and its students as failures one day and then throwing your hands up and walking away from them the next is wrong. [...] We must fix the failures of No Child Left Behind. We must provide the funding we were promised, give our states the resources they need and finally meet our commitment to special education."[3]
No Child Left Behind motivates unfortunate "teaching to the test":

The focus on standardized testing (all students in a state take the same test under the same conditions) as the means of assessment encourages teachers to teach a narrow subset of skills that will increase test performance rather than focus on deeper understanding and life lessons that can be applied in the marketplace, real life, and to citizenship and democracy generally. Because teachers and schools may be punished if they fail to live up to standardized test score goals, they often have a perverse incentive to focus almost entirely on teaching to the test, especially where a school is at risk of being designated as "failing".
Expanding to include mostly poorer states will strain EU budget.

Even if expansion was limited to the six best candidates, the EU would gain 63 million people, adding 17% to its population but only $255 billion, or 3%, to its GDP. This will put great strains on the EU budget, resulting in the removal of much of the regional aid currently available to poorer members - at a time when the advent of the Euro makes such redistribution of wealth ever more necessary to ensure economic stability.
EU expansion is good for current EU members politically.

It will extend to almost all of continental Europe a project which has ensured unprecedented levels of peace and cooperation among former enemies in western Europe for nearly half a century. Entrenching peace, democracy and economic integration throughout the continent is to the benefit of all European nations, as has been demonstrated by the negative examples of recent Balkan conflicts, which have involved other European nations in (expensive) military and humanitarian missions, and have created major refugee problems.