BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
The US should deport elderly people, not illegal immigrants

"1) Illegal immigrants actually work, elderly people dont."While I agree, elderly people have the legal right to live in the country, as they have either been born or immigrated legally to the country, elderly people have usually worked in the country their entire lives and have contributed enough to allow themselves to stay, as well as be cared for."2) Its way easier to catch the elderly than illegal immigrants"This isn't really a reason, why would it be better if they were easier to "catch"? Isn't the whole idea meant to be we allow those who are legally allowed to live in the country to stay, and deport those who don't? If they are easier to "catch" that doesn't mean we should."3) Its not like elderly people will remember that they were deported"I'm fairly sure if someone can't remember such an important event such as that, they need to be cared for and looked after, rather than thrown out of the country."4) It would save the US a sh**load of money"A valid reason, but haven't the elderly earned the right to be looked after and cared for, after all, they have worked their entire lives and now deserve some rest, don't they? It would also save the US a lot of money to euthenize people with special needs, deport all people that are unemployed and raise taxes to ridiculous levels, does that mean we should do it?I will now talk about why I think the elderly should not be deported, whereas illegal immigrants should be:Firstly, as I have already said, the elderly have usually worked their entire lives in benefit to the country, society and have earned the respect to be looked after, rather than thrown out. In comparison, illegal immigrants don't even respect the law of the country they are in, simply by staying, how can we allow people to just come into the country without reason? If we just allowed it the consequences would be a overworked infrastructure, more unemployment and many more detremental factors to the country.
The US should deport elderly people, not illegal immigrants

Reasons why the US should deport elderly people and not illegal immigrants:1) Illegal immigrants actually work, elderly people dont. Like seriously, you can get an illegal immigrant to work for next to nothing while elderly people dont work at all. There is a lot of data suggesting that illegal immigrants have a neutral impact on the economy due to low wages and paying for stuff they cant have access to use, while the elderly are the biggest ripoffs in the equation!2) Its way easier to catch the elderly than illegal immigrantsLets be honest, Illegal immigrants are fast little bastards who are also pretty crafty. We've sunk billions into a border wall and border patrol, yet they still pour into the country every year. Catching an elderly person on the other hand is like catching an elderly fish in a cracker-barrel, its almost too easy. The point is its way easier to catch elderly people than illegal immigrants, which means we could save a crapload of money and still be very efficient in how we do spend money catching these people3) Its not like elderly people will remember that they were deportedIf Grandma cant even remember that time she killed 8 people by driving into a Wal-Mart then she sure as hell wont remember where she lives.... That means she wont try to get back into the US if she's deported, and the same cant be said of an illegal immigrant4) It would save the US a sh**load of moneyI dont have the exact numbers to do the math, but its pretty easy to conclude that the money spent on border patrol and deportation is simply demolished by the amount of money that is spent on social security.....Those are my opening arguments, over to you con
God Is Real

We don't even know that Mary Magdalene existed, all we have is a story about her in a book that also contains a bunch of unverified miracle reports. She might not have existed, or she might have lied, or maybe she did exist but never said anything about Jesus being resurrected and the authors of the Bible put words in her mouth. We don't know. Judges, to sum up the debate: 1. My opponent has never introduced evidence for the existence of God that satisfies the burden of proof principle I introduced in Round 1. 2. My opponent has never addressed my point that the Bible was written by primitive people without the concept of science. 3. Finally, my opponent has never addressed my point that his case rests on several arguments from incredulity. For these reasons, you should vote Con. Thank you.
God Is Real

Yes, that would be the burden of proof principle I introduced in Round 1. Since my explanation clearly did not help you understand the issue, I will quote philosopher Philip A. Pecorino from his online philosophy of religion text: "Why is it that the burden is on the person who makes the claim? Well think whether or not it is a better way to proceed through life to accept anything and everything that people claim to be so. Experience should instruct every thinking human that there is a high probability that not everything that people claim to be true is actually true. Some claims might be made with the claimant aware that the claim is not true and some claims might be made with the claimant thinking that they are true but being mistaken. As it is for most humans not a very good idea to proceed through life based on beliefs that are false and thinking beliefs and claims to be true when they are not, most humans and those who would use reason to guide them will want some evidence and reasoning to support a claim being asserted to be true. So the burden is on those who make claims to offer reason and evidence in support of those claims." http://www.qcc.cuny.edu...
God Is Real

I watched my wife give birth to our four daughters, and last month I visited my new grandson. I"ve stared at little Hananiah"s cute face and tiny fingers"and the cleft in his chin that resembles mine. How can anyone deny the reality of God when they see a baby? The amount of information encrypted in one cell in the human body is equal to that of 1,000 books. The total amount of information stored in your DNA is 40 times more than that of the largest set of encyclopedias in the world. King David felt this sense of awe when he wrote, "You wove me in my mother"s womb. ... I am fearfully and wonderfully made" (Ps. 139:13, 14, NASB). Life is truly a miracle!Paul wrote that "all Scripture is inspired by God" (2 Tim. 3:16). The Bible itself is proof of God"s existence because He used 40 unrelated people over a period of 2,000 years to write His unique love letter to us. There is nothing like the Bible because it carries the same consistent message throughout all of its 66 different books. Atheists can laugh at this idea, but those who have read the Scriptures and experienced God through its pages know why it is the best-selling and most-translated book in all of history. (Fact: 100 million copies of the Bible are sold every year. Richard Dawkins" The God Delusion has sold 2 million.)
Ghetto debate #1.

Mah opponentt bein dumbb , which comes as no suhprize wid datt nappy haiyuh . Ah hope yhu all see diss crazyy crapp an eitha vote fo Pro or buy dat poor boyy a haiyuh brushh fo dem cornrows . Thank ya fo screwin upp mah debate , e'en tho itt was still purdy fun . LAWNG LIVE DHA NAPPINESS .!
Ghetto debate #1.

HOLD UPP ;, WE AINT DONE YETT ! STILL GOTT 2 RAUHNDS LEFF ! SO SITT YO TAIL DAOWN AN LISTEN ! Naaah , Imma waitt an make sure yhuu is still wantin tew debate dhiss befoe ah continue , aiightt .? So steadda spammin dha debate wid dat "VOTE CON! VOTE CON! VOTE CON!" crapp , why don yhu tell me whetha yhu is still wantin to continue . Ah awaitt mah opponent'ss confuhmation on dhis . An comb dat weave while yhu att itt ... Lookin straightt nappy , as usual .
Ghetto debate #1.

aright thanks fro your beautiful roue. and hon i racy to insulin you. i wad Luke madman Eugene you be tepidness over tad 10 oft weave, you be loin like Socrates Souths chi dang streaker as forgave, get as furring hairdo, i hate peyote you pack sass dignified. i look in yo Vera and i wee three baby gs and fie and cats and numbness. get aye ROM with gay Hassan Wave and i pour q fire Guinevere i b Haiti toy anger, i men ginning i BR walking inc had ghetto an i be rein Toyota weave and i be like snagging, i beer lidded Chuck i gotten eat data fry Wave that troy ck wave Tabatha senescence we've. ND then i qr NIH my big niggler choc Andersen like dds, and he b dying ff AIDS got st crustily nasty weave. an Tyndale hr strewn yo eat yo weave, Toyota overgrew Warsaw. DAT Foucault eave. Merlin gm wee kn hmm v ND i be mil huh g f d r g breastfed ghytrde bghtrd btds gtqsdf ghytreeeddef rf r g dhfhhr f r ghuhuhfhr jsswqd grfds sgvfcved vffdedsws hyhgtf dhgfd tfded fgdsddd ffdsddd fdeffdd ddsv hmk juy tf hjh gf ds vcx ssevcd vcrffdf f g t gg tyh yh g tf gfgf rf gffgrf g g gf ggfgfr tvbff uje\hgcf\db g f vbgh n j y btbhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh h h hh bb hrenhbrgvecs9089y 9pol9olkujyhgtr 4tt45g yh67uji8o90[p8o7i6u5y4t3re2w g . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l ku ntybrd sd s nbg j j jh gjkhgf g h hg f d gh jk jhg f gghjhgfdfg h g f ghj h gf gh j hg fd vbh tg vc g hb vty nb h f hjhgfd h gf g g g g g f d sw h t rf f trewknjbh hj ug h g h ytrcex efrg hb n n hhynh hnn hn hnhh nhnhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnh hyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy gt fredws q v fdsbm5 4nu3ybt vvr rty m 4un63btqvrcwex e y u4nyb5t4vrcwe gyhg4fde 3dwxs This is just sad. I was originally testing out a glitch I heard about in the forums. .. However, it is now my opponent BoP to upheld "asd". I also ask that I get conduct, since he took this debate even though I never wanted him to.
Ghetto debate #1.

Aiightt naow , guess ah needa thank yo tail fo acceptin dis debate . Gud luck tuh yhu . NOW , since yhu be ignorin dha rauhnd structah , ah guess we best skipp rauhnd 3 if dhats cool wid yhu an we"ll staht widd dha weave . Aiightt , naow onto dat weave .! Lyke DAAANG , ion kno if ah evn needa pointt out dat crapp on yo head , cuz itt straightt lookin lyke dha dead muskratt in ya momma dishwasha . Yeyuh , it be lookin straightt greasyy ! Ion kno where yhu be coppin dat crapp frum , but dem greasyy cornrows, lyke GIT OUTTA HERE WID DATT ! YHU AINT GONNA GIT YHU NO WIMIN LOOKIN LYKE DAT !. YO STANK TAIL NEEDA GITT UPP AN FIND A HAIYUH DRESSUH CUZ AINTT NOBODY GONE DO DHAT FO FREE . So git yhu some bank an headd on outta mah yardd wid datt , cuz yhu rubbin yo grease spots all ova my lawnchayuh . Ah boutta bust a dang cap ova heyuh cuz ah keep havin tuh be breathin in yo napps , cuz dey floatin all ova dha dang country errtime yhu comb yo haiyuh or move yo head !. Yhu needa git yoself some qualityy haiyuh , not dhat ten dolla crapp yhu got up dayuh on yo headd . Ah mean dang , yo tracks prolly infestedd wid mites an dey prolly gone fall rightt out yo headd . Ion kno how yhu be walkin around in pulic lyke dhat , do yo momma kno yhu be lookin lyke dhat ? Ah should call hur rite naow an git her to come ova here an ring dem naps out yo head so yhu can stop bringin shame upon yo family .! YO HAIYUH NAPPY , YO HAIYUH GREASY , AN YO HAIYUH DUN GOTT FIVE YEAUHS UH GAHBAGE STUCKK UP IN IT . YHU BESTT RIP DHAT CRAPP OUT BEFOE ITT LAY EGGS IN MAH YARD . I AINT EVEN PLAYIN WICHEW NO MOE ! IMMA CALL DHA POPO IF AH FIND ONE MOE GREASY PIECE UH HAIYUH IN MAH YARDD FROM DHAT NAPPY WEAVE UH YOURSS , YUHEAR .?!
Ghetto debate #1.

Dhis here be dha first ghetto debate , an itt wull be dha only ghetto debate if ah dun be decidin nott to dhu no moe of em . Dha votin should be based on dha mostt consistently ghetto language , dha mostt consistently ghetto ahguments , an dha mostt consistently ghetto insults . Dha strongestt an mostt offensive , stubbornn , an ignorantt opponentt without usin no profanitii shouldd be dha winnah of dhis debate . AN LET ME JUSS SAY DHIS NOW, RIGHTT HERE : IF YHU STEP YO RATCHET TAIL INTO DHIS DEBATE AN BE FEELIN SOME TYPE OF WAYY , YHU BEST BE READY TO GRAB YO WEAVE AN LEAVE . Now here be dha importantt stuff : Rauhnd 1 ;; Attackin dha weave . Rauhnd 2 ;; Attackin eachotha's mommas . Rauhnd 3 ;; Attackin eachotha foe bein FAKE . Rauhnd 4 ;; Attackin errthang else we didn'tt gitt a chance to attack befoe . (Please note that this debate is just for fun. No logic, sources, or any other typical debate strategies are necessary, and none of the insults/attacks featured are legitimate. Also please note that this is by no means an attack on those who really do speak/behave in this manner, nor is it an attack on any particular race. It's simply a (hopefully) entertaining debate intended solely for--well--entertainment. I apologize in advance for anything that is found to be offensive, and I can assure you that it was not intended that way.) AIIGHTT NAOW , GO HEAD BEFOE MAH EXTENSIONS GETT LOOSE .!
exam for sports in schools.

I'll simply offer a preliminary case. Investing in sports education offers little tangible benefit. The reason schools offer education in areas like science and mathematics and the like is because it provides a reliable benchmark which helps students who would like to take the respective subjects in college or pursue these areas as post-high school careers. There's no reason to think that sports exams would increase in any tangible sense the output of star athletes. Therefore, there's no compelling reason to invest more in sports education (which is all I can assume Pro mean by the resolution).
painting is better than photography

1) A photographer can "twist" reality by adding angles, lighting, etc.. Thereby, he creates a mood, a scene that not many people see, but one that he wants the viewer to see. It allows for creative photography, illusions, and such, the same way an artist can create intresting brush strokes. 2) One of art's main components is it's beauty, and I'm sure Pro would agree there are some beautiful photographs of nature, people, and the surreal (http://www.saatchiart.com...). 3) Photography can convey an idea or emotion the same that a painting can. I'm sure many of you have seen this photograph before, taken by Joe Rosenthal. Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima by Joe RosenthalPro?
painting is better than photography

You didn't seem to answer my question, but that's fine, this is the last round. I'll ask it as a hypothetical, then. If photographs are not to be considered art, then can one really say that they experienced art by looking at a copy of it on the Internet, in their art textbook, etc. ? To respond to your argument:1) Did you in fact "reach out and feel the bumps on the page from the paint? " If you didn't, you are not experiencing the texture of the art, per the hypothetical above. I doubt you did, as you would have set off the alarm. 2) Paint does fade over time. . http://webfootpainting.com... Also, paintings cannot be stored digitally. Photographs can.3) If you concede that photography ought to be considered art, then whether it is better or worse than a different form of art is a completely subjective opinion. 4) See above. 5) I have shown how photography can show beauty just the same as a painting. Seeing as Pro has brought forward an affirmative statement (painting is better than photography), Pro has burden of proof: that is, she must prove her case. I must disprove it. That means I don't have to prove that photography is better than painting, I must show that painting shouldn't be valued over photography. And I have disproven Pro's points.
painting is better than photography

Your site does have some good points but it still doesn't have the texture that I mean. The type of texture that I mean is the type you can reach out and feel the bumps on the page from the paint. and no matter how old the painting is it doesn't really fade or get discolored like photographs. And yes I just got back from a trip to Europe and I did see the Mona Lisa in person it was amazing and a lot smaller than I have imagined it. And you seem to think I don't like photographs, I do and I think they are pretty, but they don't have the elegant flair that paintings have. Photography does have a certain beauty but that beauty does not compare to acrylic, watercolor, ect. paintings. You just cant get that type of beauty from a printed out picture.
painting is better than photography

I disagree. Texture can be found in photography, as a matter of fact, it is inherent in photography. See this article for more detail: http://ronbigelow.com...Also, would you say that the Mona Lisa is art? If you do, have you seen it in person, or did you see a photograph of it? If what you are saying is true, then art is only looking at a subject in person, and not a copy of it. If what you are saying is false, then art is an accesible way of finding and experiencing beauty. So, Pro, have you truly seen the "delicate brush strokes" and "contrast of color" on Lenardo's Mona Lisa? Or have you been duped by, as you claim photography is, a forgery?
As long as the United States is a patriarchal society, women will not be truly equal

I propose the following debate: Given the United States is still in many ways a patriarchal society, the fight for equality among the sexes cannot genuinely be "won" until/unless this philosophical stance shifts. I will argue that a) the United States follows a long history of patriarchy, b) this has always taken part in hindering gender equality, and c) in order to achieve said equality, the philosophical social system needs to readjust Rounds: 1-Agreement/Introduction; 2-Past: Extremes, Precedents and Pitfalls; 3-Present: How Patriarchal Are We?; 4-Future: What Should Change?; 5-Closing Sources are encouraged, but only required upon request. For Rounds 2 and 3, only real examples are permitted. Theoretical extrapolations are for Round 4. Closing arguments are Round 5. Rebuttals are allowed at the beginning of each new round, including Round 5. I think that covers it
As long as the United States is a patriarchal society, women will not be truly equal

Ugh.. Ok. So I see there is no middle ground for the incurably biased. I was trying (and failed) to approach a compromise. My bad it seems. Refresher- the main argument IS about women's equality. Not JUST about how they function within a family. It is clear that you think that is the ONLY function of women. Single-income family does seem better, yes. Better for the economy, better for the family unit, etc. But this speaks little or nothing to who will work and in what capacity. Women can breast feed and men cannot. So that fact combined with the assumption that this, being better than formula, is preferable if possible, and thus leading to a year or less out of work makes women undeserving of an education that changes the course of their entire lives?!?! NOT WHAT I SAID, NOR WHAT I MEANT Also, I said its better, not required. Women should get educated because they WILL WORK. Education is not merely a system of chutes and ladders, but an innately valuable system. Education is some people's only means of having a better life. Even if child rearing detracts a handful of years from the overall work years of a woman, she is still more than a puppy mill! Further, what "hand-outs" do you speak of exactly?? One year off would not make a huge difference. Perhaps the father should take the next year off, eh? Why would his years of education and professional development trump the mother's??? In fact they do NOT unless you inherently give them greater value..OR if the system were set up (ie: rigged) so that it were the convention for men to be more educated than women. Not really sure why you are so unsettled by the idea of educated women?? You did not answer any of my questions. May the future be brighter than the past some are stuck in..
Republicans are slowing down the progress of America's society.

America's society is steadly progressing toward the destruction of the nation. Republicans are not stopping the progression.America, the USA, is defined by the US Constitution and in progressively changing into a netion which voids the US Constitution and replaces it with something else. When a person can run for office and get elected before he proves that he is a natural born United States citizen, the Constitution is pretty much void and Republicans are watching the progression toward the collapse of the nation. Republicans should be stopping the progression toward destruction, but they are in bed with the Democrats and for the most part only put on a show of caring about the nation as they do whatever it takes to get voted into office. The United States has turned its back on God by putting ungodly people in place to make our rules, and the nation is steadily progressing toward the judgement of God which will be the complete voiding of the US constituion and the end of America as we know it. My guess is that the USA will become a province of China. All nations of the world are going to go into battle over and agaisnt Israel and the USA cannot be in that battle untill the USA is totally changed into something it is not today. The progress toward that change is not being hindered by Republican. If the change happens too fast, it might cause civil war. The Republicans are keeping the progress from exploding into civil war. They are not hindering the progress of American society. The progress toward the destruction of America is steady and pickiing up speed.
Common Core

I would like to defer this round, and I hope my contender will agree to do the same, for the sake of time and the proper structure of this debate. After reviewing a plethora of different arguments, I would like to structure the rest of the debate as: Round 1: (Completed) Opening Statments and Acceptance Rround 2: Defferred Round 3: Contentions Round 4: Rebuttles Round 5: Closing Statements
Common Core

Common Core has become a hot button topic in the United States as more and more schools start to adapt to the standards. These standards are some of the most high-quality standards produced in the subject areas of Mathematics and English Language Arts. According to Core Standards, the Common Core website, "For years, the academic progress of our nation"s students has been stagnant, and we have lost ground to our international peers. Particularly in subjects such as math, college remediation rates have been high. One root cause has been an uneven patchwork of academic standards that vary from state to state and do not agree on what students should know and be able to do at each grade level." The staggering among students has been exemplified repeatedly not only on the international level, but within out states as well. Students who move from state to state are often faced with the challenge of making up course work just to be on the "same playing field" as the natives to the state. Previously, education has focused on rote memorization and reiteration and regurgitation of facts. Students, although well prepared and with much knowledge, were and are still unable to explain various concepts. Previously, education, the "old classroom," was very lecture based and very teacher oriented: straight rows, a teacher at a podium with writing on the board. With the introduction of Common Core, we can see an introduction of a student oriented classroom, most demonstrated by the various "I can..." statements that Common Core has influenced, Project Based Learning, and groups instead of the typical rows. In conclusion, the Common Core writes that the standards are: 1) Research- and evidence-based 2) Clear, understandable, and consistent 3) Aligned with college and career expectations 4) Based on rigorous content and application of knowledge through higher-order thinking skills 5) Built upon the strengths and lessons of current state standards 6) Informed by other top performing countries in order to prepare all students for success in our global economy and society. Common Core is an American asset that will produce students who are college and career ready.