BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Abortion

I am for abortion mainly because of our economic state as well as government funding. In our present day economy unemployment rates are at 8.2% in the United States. Also being as the job market isn't great jobs aren't plentiful. Many people are still on pins and needles about their jobs because people are still being let go every day for different reasons. For instance companies are moving, shutting down, being taken over by new owners, and/or just downsizing. So many people feel unsettled in their jobs because of the job market. So if they don't feel secure I believe abortion is a proper option to choose. Aside from the job market not being all that great right now you have the issue of unemployment. The government already pays so much in helping those that are unemployed sustain life and income because of the economy. Then on top of that they use "income" from FICA to support those that are receiving Social Security as well as those that receive Social Security Disability. Then, the government puts out a lot of money to fund programs such as welfare. So if you can't afford to have a child and give it what it needs then I'm all for abortion. You as the parents should have that choice because the government can only do so much, especially with our rising deficit. So at the end of the day, its done around the world amongst people as well as animals because they don't want to see their children starve.
Abortion

If a baby is conceived via consensual sex, then the woman has helped make that decision. Yes, the man has too, however, men don't have a say when it comes to deciding whether their child is killed or not. And I didn't intend to imply that Social Security be salvaged entirely, just enough for those who are already on it, and have little to no savings, and little to no chance at getting a job. Otherwise, it has to go, and pretty soon it will go. And when that happens, be prepared for millions of elderly to get on welfare. someone eventually will have to pay. That, or there will be millions of elderly living in the streets. Yes, I do believe that parents only want the best for their kids, however what may be seen as a "mercy killing" is completely the opposite. How is taking away someone's only chance at life "for their better good"? You have no idea what could happen in these kids' futures. And if you are worried about their living conditions, then you can easily give them up for adoption. It may not be the greatest thing for a child, but it is a much better option than taking away their only chance at life. In the end, I don't believe there is any good reason, aside from rape or the mother's health condition, for an abortion to be performed. It is both a physically and mentally dangerous decision to make, and just an overall selfish act. Because most mothers seek an abortion for themselves, rather than for the baby, which is incredibly hypocritical if you ask me. I would also like to say that this is my first debate on this site, so it may not be the best, but I did enjoy it. Peace.
Abortion

My point is that men have some sort of say in the matter if they're the father. It's not all just about the female. It is usually an act that is done with someone else and therefore the outcomes involves more than one opinion. People should have the choice of whether or not they bring a child into this world just as we have a choice with almost everything else. It doesn't matter the situation, which could range from rape to abortions occurring due to health reasons. Abortion is allowed because until that baby is born and takes it's first breath it isn't considered human. Also, social security thanks to the baby boomers, scam artists, and not very well planned retirements most likely won't exist, at least not by the time that our generation needs to use it. Therefore, the less people on it the better. So many government programs of this sort have been shut down because they have too high of a demand and not enough funds which is due to many people having children that aren't financially stable. So the right to abortions can decrease the amount of people on these programs therefore increasing the people in the job market who contribute to funding our country and decreasing the amount of people who are just sitting at home collecting checks. You mention that you agree that parents only want the best for their kids yet you say you don't think killing them is the best way. So if a parent has nothing to offer a child and by nothing I mean no bed, food, clothes, living quarters, and etc then that would be the best for them? To bring a child into the world under those conditions is selfish. So therefore in many cases abortion would be a better option. The government can only support so many people living off it. So it's in the best interest of our government and its programs.
Abortion

I did not say that eggs fertilize themselves, what I said was that most women have consensual sex, and therefore, should take responsibility for their actions. For those that did not take part of consensual sex, is a whole different story. I have been examining all aspects of the subject, and my opinion is, is that you should not be allowed an abortion if you willingly had sex to create the baby. Abortions should only be allowed in extreme circumstances, where the mother was raped, the victim of incest, or has a life threatening problem, otherwise, for a perfectly healthy women, who willingly had sex, abortion should not be an option. If you murder a pregnant woman, you are charged with two murders, so why is abortion allowed? And just for the record, Social Security shouldn't even exist. When I brought it up, I was implying (I admit not very clearly) that we need to salvage it for a period of time, for the elderly who are on it, and will have to either go on welfare, or try to get a job, which will be next to impossible. So, over the next few decades, there will be massive amounts of people on welfare (assuming that Social Security does in fact end, and the elderly are forced to go on to it), and we need people to support it. Yes, we need jobs, but we need workers to. Abortion is, yes just one small factor, but it is still a factor, no matter how small, so we can't have perfectly able women murdering potential citizens who are needed to support our ever weakening economy (I again apologize for looking at human life that way, but it is true). I understand that parents only want the best for their children, but killing them is hardly the best. So much good can happen to this person, and because of this person. He or She may grow up to save lifes, to lead people, to make the world a better place, or perhaps just live their lifes and help people in small ways we may not see. Either way, abortion, except in extreme circumstances, is morally wrong, and economically, in the long run, also wrong.
Yu-Gi-Oh! GX is way better than Yu-Gi-Oh! 5DS and Zexal

1. Yu-Gi-Oh! GX had a good storyline (Btw 4kids sucks because they didn't air season 4 of gx and season 5 of 5ds). The progonist, Jaden Yuki, seems confident, happy, and godlike. Dm and 5ds were too serious about dueling, and zexal looked like they should be in pokemon. 5Ds was too rushed with the storyline and it looked like they duel 24/7. I know that's the goal to the game, but it's just too much. 2. First off, the later installments ruined the meaning of dueling. They have no connection with yugi whatsoever. Have the others duel yugi and won? Zexal didn't make any sense and the characters look childish (especially that Yuma character). First, you see duel bikes and now multiverse? I'm pretty sure the more modern it is, the more crappier it gets. 3. The only thing I liked about 5ds and zexal was the theme song and that's it. I admit that GX needs a little more help when it comes to music. Now I want to hear your opening arguments,. No rebuttals.
Yu-Gi-Oh! GX is way better than Yu-Gi-Oh! 5DS and Zexal

I know lots of people like Yu-Gi-Oh! (Original), but I just want to throw you off. Anyway, I decided that if I can't take DDO so seriously, I need to at least make DDO 'fun' (please, we already have serious topics and if we take them away, DDO will be what it was actually supposed to be.) I just had nothing to do anyway. If you are asking, I am not doing anymore impossible debates because:(1. It expires really quickly (2. No one wanted to accept my last oneSo, back to the topic. I think that Yu-Gi-Oh! has been more modern with its way of 'dueling'. As the series went by, you can pretty much see Yu-Gi-Oh! ruined because of the modern dueling. See the pattern:Yu-Gi-Oh! DM and GX: normal dueling5DS: duel bikesZexal: multiverseYu-Gi-Oh! GX was pretty decent. 5DS was a good show, but Zexal? Zexal! That was the worst. Anyway, if you disagree, then you're pretty much a new Yu-Gi-Oh! fan. Here are the rules:1. No forfeiture2. Great knowledge of Yu-Gi-Oh!Here is the format:R1: Acceptance R2: Opening argumentsR3: Rebuttals and/or comparisons (no new arguments here or R4)R4: see R3R5: ConclusionYep. That's it. - PeriodicPatriotP.S. I am not accepting hate comments. All hate comments will be revoked. If you want haters to hate, then that's ok with me. Just ignore the haters
Yu-Gi-Oh! GX is way better than Yu-Gi-Oh! 5DS and Zexal

Oh, well, Pardon me then, I did not check your gender beforehand.Back to the debate:When we are talking about ratings I was talking about how popular the series was with it's fans, not how many watched the "brutally murdered version that 4Kids aired" as one of the reviews chose to word it; Where we found that 5D was better received by the audience of the franchise.Now, from your long quote in the fourth round that was only vaguely related to the debate you can read that 5D was cancelled due to low rating; But remember that this was also the case with GX. They chose the first season of 5D over the last one of GX because they didn't have enough money to run both series at the same time and instead of putting 5D on hold for a while they killed GX because it wasn't popular. 'True' fans preferred to watch the subtitled anime instead of the dubbed version and that meant that they bypassed 4Kids. This caused a drop in viewer ratings that was never recovered. 4Kids aren't loosing ratings just because one series is better than the other, they are loosing ratings because they are doing a terrible job at translating and localizing the material.And that is the main issue: The cartoon isn't a valid scale when it comes to deciding what spin off is the best one, because we're talking about 2 different shows: the anime and the cartoon. The anime must be the reference point because it came first, it was the original. And because there isn't a fixed scale that measures how good a show/series is we must turn to those that consume it, the audience. As I pointed out in my opening arguments a large portion of the demographic chose 5D over GX over Zexal. Hence, out of the two series that my opponent claims that are inferior one is doing better, just by a negligible amount. The show that was deeper and tried to break in a new, dark era of the show provided the franchise with new angles, new merchandise and new stories that entertained the masses. And in show business, entertainment is everything.
Yu-Gi-Oh! GX is way better than Yu-Gi-Oh! 5DS and Zexal

I'd like to point out that the last set of arguments made by my opponent were more or less directly copied and pasted from his respective sources. Despite the fact that they are all correct they have nothing to do with the debate topic, or at least my opponent didn't properly explain how they are connected to the resolution. he didn't effectively refute any of my arguments and didn't put any more arguments on the table to refute.I'm going to extend my arguments and hand the debate back to my opponent.
Acts of racism should be illegal

God would be okay if black people go to prison or go to hell. Ham disgraced his father, and as the father of all Africans, black people are naturally cursed. As a 100% Russian straight and able-bodied male, I don't care what happens to black people, gay people, retarded people, and whatnot. God wanted for us to be divided. He gave East Asians and Caucasians a high IQ (Russians include either way). On the other hand, he gave black people and Hispanics a lower IQ. On average, white people do much better than black people at most things except for basketball and rapping, so that is why God intended for races to be separated. Now that America is a culturally diverse nation, black people cause us too much trouble. Please keep racism legal. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH MISTREATING BLACK PEOPLE. IT IS GOD'S WILL FOR BLACK PEOPLE TO BE MISERABLE.
Acts of racism should be illegal

We're all people until race divided us, wealth classified us, and stereotypes difined us. You're clearly forfieting the arguement becasue you nothing to say when your primitive ideologies are tested. I assume your Christian or something... so do you think Jesus would agree with you, Do you think that GOD intended us to be divided. GOD is off no race, so he loves everyone equally. DO YOU THINK GOD WOULD LIKE IT IF A RACE OF HIS PEOPLE WERE ALL BASICALLY INPRISONED!? RACISM, SEIXSM, CLASSISM, TRIBALISM, ARE ALL SINS THAT PEOPLE LIKE YOU PROBALLY LOVE TO DO AND SHOW.
Acts of racism should be illegal

You must a total troll, you didn't even read my previous argument since I explained why that 1/3 black people nonsense was flawed (go read it). You also just copy pasted your previous rant to mine. You say your not a racist, but you say their dark skin absorbs too much sunlight for the whites... meaning you only really care for them. And the population doesn't change if your just putting them in a certain place, unless you plan to murder them like Hitler. Over population isn't a problem, and even if it is, WHY INPRISON BLACKS! when there aren't the most populous people. You are a racist! tell anyone your stupid ideologies and see them scoff at you. You just try as hard as you can to find silly reasons why Blacks should be imprisoned. You say they're a bad influence, but if YOU SEE MY PREVIOUS ARGUMENT... you'd know it's not there faults for drugs, violence, etc, but it's the white's fault. see this video for further explanation: watch it until the end.
Acts of racism should be illegal

We have to have a strict limit of one black family per neighborhood. Black people are nothing but a bad influence on the world. Here are the facts about black people that we must seriously consider: 1 in every 3 black men will end up in prison. Many black families on being headed by single mothers making barely more than minimum wage. Those families often have kids and youngsters who get in trouble with the law. Many violence in public schools, especially in downtown and big metropolises, are inflicted by black students. Furthermore, there have been many incidents where white people were attacked, targeted, and assaulted by black people. If we completely segregate neighborhoods and cities into black people and non-black people, it is downright racist and cruel towards black people. The only way to prevent black violence from occurring, or at least to minimize it as much as we can, is to have and enforce a strict limit of one black/African family per neighborhood. Please think carefully about it: once there is already one black family in every neighborhood, what can we do with the remaining black families? We cannot put them in ghettos, because that would be very racist and reverting back to the 1950s and 1960s. Nor can we kill them because that is simply immoral. (I mean, isn't that what Hitler would do?) Instead, the best solution is to throw them in prison, and then let them out of prison once there is a neighborhood with no black family living in it. Furthermore, if we put black families to prison, we will put them under control. (I think we must segregate prisons by race too.) No offense and not at all being racist, their dark skin absorbs too much sunlight, reducing the total amount of sunlight white people can harvest. And beyond that, throwing them in prison is a solution to overpopulation, because the world will be less crowded. You see what I am saying here? Now you might be thinking that it's racist and cruel, but it's not. Just read on. No, I am not being racist. It's true. How would you like to be assaulted by black people or a gang. You said that you are not a black person. Non-black people are vulnerable targets to black people. Since no people want to be assaulted by black people, but we cannot totally segregate the world based on race or skin color, the best way to combat black violence is to limit each neighborhood to one black family. If we throw remaining black families in prison, we are also combating overpopulation so they won't be crowding up the Earth.
Acts of racism should be illegal

Your thought of racism says that it's simply discriminating others for their race, cultures, nationality, etc. But you just proved how it is a bad thing. But of course you were seeing it more as a humor side, with like funny "blacks can't swim" or "Asians can't drive" stereotypes. As a Hebrew-Black, I'm not offended by Jewish or Black jokes. But I'm talking about racism where the person believes those stereotypes are 100% true, and should have all members of the race faulted for that. Like how "all blacks are criminals", You debated to make Neighbourhoods only have at least 1 black household and to put the rest and Muslims in prison. As crazy as that suggestion sounds, you were totally serious. Like how a good man said: "Judge a man not by his skin, but by the content of his character" - Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Jokes once in a while or ok, but people shouldn't be judged for it. Like how you say 1/3 blacks get arrested, a black has higher odds of getting in trouble than a white person, after doing the exact same thing. They also get paid less from the same work, and hired less often from the same resume.
Acts of racism should be illegal

So I should say why acts of racism should not be illegal or prohibited. Please define what racism is. I see racism as purposely discriminating or mistreating certain people based on their race, culture, ethnicity, or skin color. Using my definition, I don't see anything wrong with racism or stereotyping. Why did you issue this debate to me? I think it;s because you saw my debates about schools segregating by race or limiting each family to one African family. The main purpose of those debates was to deal with black violence and deteorating, negative black culture. I don't see anything wrong with racism. As a Russian myself, I am not at all offended when somebody calls me Vladmir Putin, or asks me if I would like lots of alcohol, or asks me if I am an orthodox. I don't care if white people think all East Asians are Chinese and highly intelligent, or if they think all Irish people have red hair. There is nothing wrong with being racist. I mean, you would definitely think that your race is superior to other people's race. The concept of race, just like the concept of height or age, can never be abolished. With that said, racism is inevitable, so why bother preventing it? Thank you for offering me this debate. I'm enjoying it. And I am glad somebody pays attention to my profile and debates. Good luck!
know=true

For all I hardly understand your previous argument, I will try to respond to your points. You accept that gravity is true, and yet how can you KNOW that there is no other justification for things falling? You cannot, you simply have some evidence and you choose to believe the conclusion you come to. Natural selection is the theory of survival of the fittest. This is the key device for evolution and yet, although it is believed to be true and is used as evidence for a different theory, it is not something we actually know for certain.
should standardised testing be eliminated

Please do some research before you go and make a fool out of yourself. You are posting is what is called a "Circular reasoning or Circular argument" which means your just saying the same thing over and over again. The link I posted (1) below is a list of all the Standardized test in the united states. The second link (2) is the definition of circular reasoning, just so you know. These test are not for everyone. They are for the people that want to do the best they can and get as far as they can. Colleges that have prestige will look at the standardized test scores and evaluate them that way. Test like the SAT are also part of the standardized test. My Statement stands. These test are not expendable and should not be removed. (Ref) http://en.wikipedia.org... (1) http://en.wikipedia.org... (2)
should standardised testing be eliminated

As a college student. I feel like there are things that are wrong with the test that should be fixed and more focus should be put into the areas that are actually thought in school.. Some might say that the test dose not accurately measure the intelligence of the kids in the USA, compared to kids in other Countries. The argument that "kids are not being treated right by the test" is valid and may stand. But when this comes to be the problem there is more then one solution. The kids could be better prepared by taking the time to study more and play less, they could also have the parents help. In 2009 The United states scored "statistically significantly below the OECD average" We as one of the most powerful countries in the world, scored with 2nd and 3rd world countries. That alone should be a flashing light as to how we are doing. We are not headed in the right direction. Our schools are failing and our kids are not being taught right However this is not a problem with students or their parents. Instead its a problem with the teachers and what they are thought. In most countries that are outdoing the United states the teachers are required to have a masters degree. Not just that but they are also thought very differently and even the standards for being a teacher are different. The lack in pedagogical content knowledge, the "how" of teaching, is also a big problem. No matter what side you are on in this, I hope you realize the affects that eliminating these test will have. (References) http://standardizedtests.procon.org... http://www.takepart.com... http://www.ascd.org... http://www.thedailyriff.com...
should standardised testing be eliminated

Standardised testing should not be eliminated, it should be improved and made more difficult. Why you may ask? It's simple, we as a nation are falling behind. Our kids know absolutely nothing. These test you want to eliminate help the school systems know where they need to improve. Nothing good will come from eliminating this from the school. Instead we should be pushing kids to do better and encouraging them to keep learning. Not the opposite. Without the test kids can just do nothing and still pass till they graduate and spend the rest of their life at mcdonalds.
Evolution never happened and is not real

Ivan Reitman's Evolution was a megadud el stinkero, cow silk laundry as a film and his worst film that I've seen that he's directed. I've only not seen his No strings Attached and Draft Day. Needless to say the description of the film, so what? Yawn. Boring. Boring boredom bores a boring bore. That's the worst thing is a supposed comedy.