BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
PE courses should be mandatory for NC State students to complete in order to graduate

First of all, just because society deems people an "adult" at a certain age, that has no bearing on the decisions students make. Just because you graduate from high school does not mean that you transition immediately from a adolescent to an adult and can make "good" decisions. College is still a period for people to progress into adulthood and learn from school courses and the positive and negative experiences associated in and around it to later make rational adult decisions. What is to say that certain students graduating from high school definitely know or are concerned about their health issues. A required course is a definite way that all students will gain some sort of knowledge from the resources offered about health and physical education. And what is so terrible about requiring a course that will only benefit students with knowledge they can use for the rest of their lives? You may say how do you know that students are not going to seek out PE courses without the requirement, but how do you know that they are. Students who workout daily and want to keep benefits of the facility and all it has to offer also see all the other students partaking in these same activities. How do you know that they will not put off the responsibility onto all the other students to enroll in courses to keep the facility paid for. They could conceivably think that they are just one student and if they do not enroll everyone else probably will, so there is no need. Furthermore, students who workout there could just as easily be working out there merely because it is offered and not because it is a necessity. Students can work out outside or may have apartment complexes or other workout centers in other places that they attend. Therefore, having a free facility does not really effect them. Money from gym classes could be much better suited for academic courses that will never be scratched off the requirement list. PE is not a time constraint but rather a time of relief. People who are usually overwhelmed with school and work do not have time to incorporate physical activity in their schedule. With PE being a course required, they not only receive credit towards graduate, but can put in place time for them to engage in healthy activity each day. Also, PE courses take a mere hour out of your day. With the time people spend watching tv, socializing, "facebooking," or playing video games, they could take an hour out of their day to engage in a simple activity that will stimulate both their mind and their body.
PE courses should be mandatory for NC State students to complete in order to graduate

Though America is dealing with overweight issues, not all of these issues are directly apparent with the entire N.C. State student body. Furthermore, Students enter college between the general ages of 17-19 and are defined by society as adults. Therefore as adults, if obesity is a problem for any students they should be able to seek help that is necessary or take a PE course at their will. And other students are welcomed also to take PE courses, but should be at the same time trusted as adults to make rational decisions pertaining to their health needs and desires. If necessary, information can be easily obtained through other resources as well, such as online or books if necessary. With response to the PE course requirements benefiting students as a whole, how is this relevant if N.C. State has never not required PE courses. How does the administration know that students would not seek out Physical Education courses without requirement, knowing that it benefits students as a whole. Students who are taking advantage of the Carmichael Gym and other perks that are offered would enroll themselves in a PE course, knowing that it helps to provide them a place to work out. Therefore, students who really care for the workout area and programs would partake enrollment, and those students who do not care for the facility and its benefits can put their time into another course. Physical Activity may have these effects, but the problem here is a time constraint. People who want to work out daily are going to work out with or without the course requirement, therefore PE courses are taking away from time they could allot for a more brain stimulating course. For other students who may not care as much about working out, they may not be able to find a PE course that works with their schedule; therefore, they are forced to sacrifice more important courses to fit PE into their day. My roommate had to take a PE course, which did not interest her because of the inconvenient time and graduation plans. She would seem aggravated both before and after class because she believed it was not the most efficient way to spend her day. So, clearly although exercise helps relieve stress, if you are not willing to fully engage in activity to relieve your stress there will be nothing to gain, and therefore, the PE course will render itself unnecessary.
PE courses should be mandatory for NC State students to complete in order to graduate

PE is a mandatory way for students to be healthy. We live in an obese country and having physical education in state school such as N.C. State is one step in progressing in the right direction. For example, the PE courses offered at N.C. State teach you exercise skills that you can use for outside the classroom. These courses also take the time to offer nutritional information that students do not learn in their normal academic schedule. From this students can gain a great understanding in what to do to lead healthy lives. Having PE courses benefits the student body as a whole, because then they are given benefits such as the Carmichael Gym for extra-curricular work out activities. Without students taking these gym courses and contributing money towards the physical education sector of the college, they would not be provided with exercise perks that are currently in place. Students can not only work out in a full exercise gym with free weights, machine weights, and cardio machines, tvs, and radio, but also they can enjoy the more specialized exercise courses offered daily for different target areas of the body. Furthermore, exercise has been proven to make people both happier, and more focused when it comes to academic studies. Exercise provides stress relief for students who would typically be strained with school, work and deadlines. Therefore, the incorporation of physical activity allows for students to re-focus in order to perform in a better state of mind elsewhere. From my experience, I have seen drastic improvement in the organization of a particular day when I have worked out. I have been more alert and attentive in classes and organized throughout the day with what tasks I plan to accomplish. Exercise does not always have to be associated with long-term commitments in order to achieve results. The effects of the mind are immediate and relevant to the day at hand with a required PE/health course.
Black People and Indian People are Useless

Once more, your so called "statistics" are off. You must understand that, even if the average IQs you give are correct (and I seriously doubt they are, I'm sure you skewed them to be lower than they really are to support your argument) Those are only averages. They do not consider the people in that race who are stupider or smarter than that average. There could be thousands of geniuses in either race- an average is not an accurate representation of a set of data. I ask you to present the entire data set as well as the average. I seriously doubt that revolutionaries like W.E.B. DuBois, Frederick Douglass, Martin Luther King Jr, or Neil DeGrasse Tyson, nor most Indian people, nor most black people, can be classified as "retarded," as you put it. (Just so you know, "retarded" is an offensive term, not an accurate medical mental diagnosis). Those people are up to some good. They stand for progress and equality, and they're not going to stop until bigots like you have either died or been set straight. Indians are not a "number one" source of problems these days (I'm not sure exactly how a problem can be classified as a "number one" problem, or how there can be "a" number one problem instead of just "the" number one problem-please clarify your pseudo-intellectual buzzwords). Indians are not stinky. Many racist students in college and racist, bigoted coworkers in offices complain about Indian people. Normal people understand that Indians don't stink and they're a wonderful race with a vibrant culture and they deserve to be accepted after the hassle we've put them through. Read up on British colonization and how Gandhi stopped them, you beast. That thing from Reddit you provided is written by an idiot who's obviously a racist, a white supremacist, and probably both. It's not a valid source. You can't show Mein Kampf to prove that Nazis are good, so you can't show me a hate speech to prove that I should be hateful like you. I think you probably just wrote that thing yourself. No, you didn't, but it's just one of the most twisted, insane things I've ever read. Do you look through the dark, deep pages of Reddit on a daily basis? The man who wrote that thing- he was insane. My brain is going to take a while to forget that garbage he's spewing from his anus. Anyway, that thing isn't a valid source. Yeah, you want all the blacks dead. Go and die.
Black People and Indian People are Useless

The average black IQ is 52, and the average Indian IQ is 67. Is that retarded? Yes. Those people are up to no good.Also, Indians are a number one source of problems these days. They are stinky, and many students in college and many coworkers in offices today complain about stinky Indian roommates.Just go ahead and read this:https://www.reddit.com...See what I mean here?Also, blacks cause too much violence. I honestly want them dead.
It is a good and holy act for Christians to honor Mary and ask her intercession

I accept christisking's debate challenge and thank him for his succinct opening statement and concise definitions. I agree with these definitions with one proviso: Namely that during the unfolding of this debate I propose to illustrate that Catholics go beyond simply 'honouring' Mary and stray into the unscriptural realm of worshipping her. I feel fully justified in this semantic discrepancy as my opponent has himself stated that I am, in essence, defending 'my' Protestantism against 'his' Catholicism. I invite my opponent to state his case.
It is a good and holy act for Christians to honor Mary and ask her intercession

Greetings to DATCMOTO and to our audience. I hope that this debate is enlightening and enjoyable for us all. In this debate, we will essentially be arguing over the differences between the ways that Catholics and Protestants view Mary (the mother of Jesus Christ) and the way we should act towards her. As the Pro, I will be arguing from the Catholic view point that it is a good thing for us to give honor to Mary and to ask her intercession (prayers) when we are in need. My opponent will be arguing to try and prove this resolution false. I would invite him to explain the Protestant view point in this issue if and only if he so desires. In this debate, since we are both Christians, the Bible will be considered the authoritative Word of God. The burden of proof in this debate will be as follows: Pro (myself) will need to present one or more arguments (either from Scripture or reason) that it is good to ask Mary for her intercession. It will be Con's goal to either disprove 'all' of Pro's arguments as untrue, or present separate arguments which (when fully debated and considered) are more convincing to the voter than Pro's arguments. Here are a short list of definitions to help make sure this debate stays on track:- 'good and holy act' - an action which either gives the doer or some other person benefit or is pleasing to God. - 'Christian' - a person who believes in Jesus Christ; adherent of Christianity. (Dictionary. com)- 'honor' - to hold in respect or esteem (Dictionary. com)- 'Mary' - The mother of Jesus Christ- 'intercession' - prayers made by one person to God for the benefit of anotherThe first round is for acceptance and any only arguments or questions concerning the definitions. In the fourth and fifth rounds only rebuttals are allowed.
It is a good and holy act for Christians to honor Mary and ask her intercession

As My opponent has forfeited this round it only remains for me to briefly sum up my position: As the numerous Scriptures I have provided (and which have gone largely unaddressed) show, Mary did not remain a virgin after the birth of Jesus Christ. Not to honour the basic facts of someone's (anyone's) life is to NOT honour them and their truth. We may willfully ignore the facts of someone's life for 2 reasons; Either to denigrate them or to exult them, which is case here. By ignoring these facts, Catholics exult Mary to a Holier state than scripture allows and is so sinful Idolatry: Worship. Earthly intercession (prayers) and the Biblical role of 'Heavenly Intercessor' are NOT interchangeable theologies and nowhere has my opponent provided any scriptural evidence to support his contention that they are. God exists outside of His creation, which includes time, so all times appears to Him simultaneously. However, to us, who are in time, Mary is dead and has not yet been resurrected as, to us, Judgment day has not yet arrived. If Mary is already in heaven then so are we, so praying to her does not make sense, theologically speaking. Even if Mary had somehow 'jumped ahead of us' into Heaven it would not solve the problem of women and Spiritual Authority: As the scriptures I have provided (and which have gone largely unaddressed) show, women may not have authority over men. If we think of just a few of the men in scripture; Adam took the fruit from Eve.. Abraham listened to his wife's advice to sleep with the servant girl.. Lot's wife looked back.. Samson was betrayed by Delilah etc etc.. we can see that even apart from the direct instructions regarding male authority we may take these example as warnings. I thank you for taking the time to view and vote on this debate. DATCMOTO.
Death Penalty

I will be arguing against the abolished of the death penalty in the US. First of all, there is an obvious flaw in my opponent's point that I thought she would have seen. She claims that "additional cost of confining an inmate to death row, as compared to the maximum security prisons where those sentenced to life without possibility of parole ordinarily serve their sentences, is $90,000 per year per inmate. With California"s current death row population of 670, that accounts for $63.3 million annually. "which is true. However, let's do some simple math. In the first round I stated that each life sentence, on average costs $1.5 million. She tells us that California's death row costs $63.3 million annually, which is way too much. That life sentence is better. So using the same 670 inmates, and life sentence costing $1.5 million each, that comes to over $1 billion. We would save over $936 million by using the death penalty. My opponent goes on to inform me that five methods of execution are used. I was not aware of that. It matters not to this case, however. My opponent for some reason is clinging onto the idea of eliminating the death penalty, when she wants reform. She speaks of how inhumane some of the methods of execution are, so we should use humane methods. She says that she "[is] not exactly sure why [I] [claim] that the firing squad is humane if we're only using it in one state. "Because, we could use it in fifty states. If everything else is inhumane, let us use that which is humane. Why wouldn't we? That is a reform problem, not a full-scope problem. If we use firing squads everywhere, which is seemingly the only humane method, then we have no problem. The only thing I must cover is my opponent's idea of paroling 1st degree murder victims, which is certainly the worst idea on the board. Allowing convicted murderers in our society again, even if on parole, is unacceptable and frankly just not smart.
Death Penalty

It is a disappointment to me and hopefully the audience that my opponent has chosen to ignore the second round and forfeit. I was looking forward to seeing the response to my contentions, but hopefully we shall see this in the third round provided my opponent arrives in time. Until then, I would like to point out that this is a lacking in the punctuality and credibility of my opposition, and I therefore encourage the voters to support the Pro side of the debate. Thank you, and I hope to see the last round completed soon.
Should PE be Mandatory in Schools

You may argue that PE shouldn't be mandatory because some might have trouble doing some thing in PE and feel uncomfortable around their peers, but this only happens if you set unrealistic standards for athletic performance in schools. PE should be mandatory in schools. Kids and teens in school are still growing, and going outside and being active is essential in doing this. As well as lowering risks of obesity, diabetes, high cholesterol, and high blood sugar, PE allows students to bond with their classmates in an environment outside of the classroom. PE also clears your mind, and helps you release energy and calm down. If kids and teens go outside and do light exercise while having fun and making friends, it will help build good habits for the future.
Euthanasia

Does that mean you are changing your point on the 1 year cut off? And once again you are changing what you said by saying the teen would be able to choose for themselves. Initially you stated those who could legally make medical decisions would be able to and minors are unable to make said decisions on their own. it is instead their legal guardians right to make medical decisions. no choosing to have your child murdered I do not believe is a loving act. Back to my point of the ability to have a cure found I believe it is much more loving to instill the hope in your child and love of life. Your point from earlier with that some palliative care methods do have adverse side effects does have some merit. Yes, high amounts of narcotics have negative effects that even if a cure was found might have lingering adverse side effects. Having to deal with those side effects I personally feel would be worth it to be alive. One of these adverse side effects that is extremely common in pro longed use is depression. (https://www.pbinstitute.com...) Since most people with terminal illness have been on opioids for extended periods their chance at depression is higher. This gives yet another reason as to why more questions should be answered before euthanasia is legalized. I concede to you that it is a good idea you have swayed me to thinking of it as an option. My issue still lies in that much has to be discussed and pin pointed before any laws could be passed to allow it.
Euthanasia

They should have the right to choose if they are dying of an incurable disease regardless if there is a chance they are going to die in 6 months. Why is it a different thing to comprehend just because we change it to I child. If that child is in pain suffering every day, and says mommy I don't want it to hurt anymore, why is it not a merciful and loving act, or later you mention teenage girls, someone that age with more comprehension, why can't they choose for themselves, obviously after discussion which there would be in any hypothetical we discuss. As for your other point, joking as it may have been no sane person is going to kill their daughter, and no one is forcing the person to die, you seem to think that if the child says no they still can kill it? It's a scenario that would be discussed with that ill party. . "Physicians in Oregon who received requests for aid in dying from 143 patients after enactment of the Death with Dignity Act reported that 20% were depressed"a proportion comparable to what we found in this study. None of the depressed patients on whom they submitted information received a prescription for a lethal drug.34 Studies of healthcare providers, including hospice professionals, and family members in Oregon indicate that they believe that depression was rarely a factor influencing requests for a physician"s aid in dying." According to two other studies it's in the 20% range, rarely depression is a factor in asking for assistance, and none who were suffering from depression received that assistance. Suicide being illegal doesn't stop someone, they'll be dead after, if they stop themselves it's not because it's illegal and if they are motivated and get turned down for assistance, they will do it themselves. So not only are there measures preventing someone who is depressed from killing themselves in this way, but let's say there were not and someone did slip through those measures,why is that so terrible, medication will take weeks for their depression, therapy could take months or years. At the end of the day you have 6 months to work with, choosing this would still save them that painful death and choose something peaceful. Hospice can be so cheap for a very simple reason, the care is similarly cheap. Patient's in hospice have a 6 month prognosis, and also are not allowed to seek curative care. With everything but pain medication being cut and very basic care, on top of being government funded is why it can be so cheap. Its a place you go to die, some people might not want a slow 6 month ride to death and should have the right to choose otherwise if they;re going to die so soon anyway.
Euthanasia

That time frame would bring about other issues. When doctors give a diagnosis they do not give a set date they give a range and depending on the illness the range can be rather large. What happens if someone is told it could be 6 months or 6 years. Although this range is rather large for most illnesses it is very possible for rare illnesses that their just isn't the information to give a more direct time. Does that mean they would fit into the group of people allowed. I also think it is not okay for a parent to be able to choose to euthanize their child. Even if they have the right to refuse treatments it is completely different to say I want you to overdose them to end their missery. It is not their life and they should not be able to choose to do it. Plus, not to mention, have you been around 13 year old girls? Any person would opt to euthanize their preteen daughter if given the choice. As for if you are letting anyone who has the ability to make medical decisions make the decision there is no way to factor for those who have depression and suicidal ideation. The National Center for Biotechnology Information has a piece discussing euthanasia for terminal patients which states "They found that 59% of the patients who expressed a desire for hastened death had clinical depression, while only 8% of patients without a desire for hastened death were depressed" Their statistics show a large amount of people who would be interested in euthanasia are clinically depressed and that it does have a significant impact. Since suicide is an illegal act why would it suddenly be okay if one were sick. that makes is unfair to those who are depressed without terminal illness. How would one know that they were making the choice for the illness and not just because of the treatable depression. If cost is that big of an issue that is why hospice care is around. Hospice care is much cheaper, sometimes covered by insurance, and often has sliding scale care or "scholarships" to cover what is left of the costs.