BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
There is no scriptural basis for requiring Christians to tithe

Although there are many preachers and denominations that teach that Christians should tithe (give 10% of their income) to their churches, there is no scriptural basis for this. From the beginning, Christianity broke apart from the 614 laws of the OT, especially among gentiles. Yet, many preachers teach that this is the one law that we must keep. Meanwhile: 1. The scripture always speaks of the tithe as food, never money, 2. The first tithe was a customary offering to Melchizedek for protection as Abraham crossed his land 3. Jacob was actually command to EAT his tithe 4. The tithe of Israel was designed to sustain the Levite priests, who ceased to operate in 70 AD when the temple was destroyed. Jews have not tithed since 5. The church did not teach tithe until the 700s AD, when the religioned needed a boost to propogate into a political power 6. Jesus distributed the priesthood to all believers and even called them the temple. If the tithe belongs with anyone it is the individual believers 7. The authority to demand or collect tithes was never assigned to an institution 8. New Testament giving was never to be done under compulsion Therefore, any church teaching that tithes are required of Christians is robbing the believers of the their wages and using it to advance its own agenda. Mostly to pay for their expensive, unscriptural model of the institutional church.
Economic Globalization

1. Now if we do not accept economic globalization, it will only isolate our nation and limit out options. We have been doing economic globalization for years sense we invest money over seas and even have people that work for us companies over seas. To stop now would make it so we lose a lot of money. 2. Due to economic globalization nation's economies increase, and more money flows into these nations. A lot of these nations need that money to try to being moderation programs in these nations. Some such nations that have benefited from it in such a way is china. After china opened it doors for economic trading china's economy greatly increased and the nation started to become more modern because of it. Another nation that is also benefiting economically from globalization is India. India's economy had a strong growth rate until the global recession in 2008. But it is continuing to recover from 3. Due to trade deals witch is a result of economic globalization nations now have access to food they other wise wouldn't have. For example you can now go to a market place and buy banana's from nations all the way in Africa. They helps both nations, because now that nation that sold the bananas will have more money going into there economy. The nation that bought them can now sell them to the people in that nation. 4. Also due to economic globalization companies are starting to open stores in third world nations that originally did not have them. This is a great thing for these nations, for these companies need people to fill in new jobs. So there are more workers now in the workplace, witch means more money is now going back into the economy. This will help the people there, and help aging bring the government closer to being a first world nation. These new jobs will help create a whole new marketplace in some cases and there business will boom. Here is a great example of this, aging I will use India. Due to globalization more IT, and technological jobs are opening up in India. This causes more to be in the work force, and aging benefit the nation by more money going into it. So this is my first round, I will address cons points in the next round and whatever he brings up against me. So back to con. http://www.ibef.org... http://benefitof.net... http://www.tradingeconomics.com...
Can working parents contribute towards their child's education

In this debate, I hold the BoP, and so in this round I will lay out my argument. If Con is unable to refute my points, I shall win the debate. Working parents, though they are busy, can still contribute towards their child's education. In order to contribute to their education, they don't have to do much. Think about it this way. If there is a charity, and you can give either one-hundred dollars, or one cent. One cent is still a contribution, even though it is much less than a hundred dollars. In order to contribute to their child's education, all they would have to do is say, help them with a math problem or explain a historical situation. My parents work, and they both have, in my opinion, taught me more than the public school system. I hope that you can respond to my points, and this will be a productive debate, despite your forfeiture.
Football Helmets

Using a leather helmet means you are more expecting of a big hit. Your body is more prepared for that hit. When you wear a regular helmet you brain thinks you are safe. Think about the Chapocoenese soccer team plane crash. A devestating tradgedy. Most of the team died. There were screaming help while the plane was going down. Players who were sleaping survived. The brain didn't know of the big accident going on. That is just like a leather helmet. Your brain is more prepared.
Football Helmets

Football Helmets should not be used. Players will believe that their helmets protect them. They smash into another player and end up getting concussions. If you don"t want to get rid of helmets, switch to leather ones. There was less injuries back when they used leather helmets. Here is a study to prove my point. This is from thinkprogress.org, "Fifty players on the UNH Wildcats Division I NCAA football team, all with at least two years of NCAA eligibility, were involved in Swartz"s study. They were randomly divided into a group that participated in what"s called the "HuTTM intervention program"R02;"R02;essentially, a series of drills designed to train the athletes to safely tackle without a helmet onR02;"R02;and a control group that didn"t change their regular practice routine. All players were fixed with an xPatch head-impact sensor to track the head impacts each athlete encountered in practice and games throughout the season. By midseasonR02;"R02;about two months after the study beganR02;"R02;Swartz could already notice a difference in the number of head impacts the players involved in HuTTM training were experiencing. Essentially, learning tackling technique without a helmet on meant that these players were less likely to use their helmet-clad head for tackling during games. While this is the first known study about helmetless football, it"s far from the first suggestion that football helmetsR02;"R02;which started off as soft, leather coverings and evolved into today"s poly-carbonate weaponsR02;"R02;are actually making the sport more dangerous." Making the change will help! Don"t let helmets cause players to have a false sense of security.
Goku Vs Naruto

Goku vs NarutoThe reason Naruto would win the battle is because, he is Goku is a vulnerable weak soul compared to Narutos "Sexy Jutsu". Yes, there is no way Goku can withstand the amount of female hormones potruding from Narutos "Sexy Jutsu". Your name could also be very biased sir. "Supersaiyanchris" http://archiveofourown.org... there is NO match in this battle. All men are weak. Hinata is nothing compared to Narutos tits.
Goku Vs Naruto

I am a huge fan of both anime characters but Goku is much Faster, Stronger, and is skilled in every form of martial arts known to man and thanks to his saiyan history goku can adapt to Naruto's taijutsu, and Goku's speed can move at the speed of light. Even if Naruto uses nine tails fox Goku has fought giant creatures before. Also Goku has been fighting planet destroying villians every season, even fighting the God of Destruction Lord Bills/Beerus, Goku's super saiyan forns are way to much for Naruto to handle even the God Form. Goku has a lot more durability because he blocked Lord Bills attack which was hotter that the sun and he can absorb energy like he did in super android 13 with the spirit bomb and Lord Bills attack> Sorry but Naruto has no chance.
Goku Vs Naruto

Sasuke is able to resist Naruto's sexy justu so Goku can too. Even if u bring the entire series to fight Goku would still beat them Naruto characters are just to slow weak and will never keep up with Goku. Goku fights at speeds faster than light and can also travel faster than light too. In Dragonball not even Dragonball Z was able to withstand Piccolo's explosion which destroyed the entire city and in Dragonball Z Goku can take Vegeta's Galick Gun head on without hesitation. Gee man I hope u can make a counter argument this time cuz I can go on and on but I do not hate Naruto I put that as one of my favorite animes in my top 10 anime list
Goku Vs Naruto

I am not biased towards Goku because Naruto is also one of my favorite characters and Naruto's sexy jutsu won't have any effect because Goku is not a pervert and h does not know how to be a pervert and Gokus Kamehameha wave, solar flare, spirit bomb and dragon fist is more than enough for naruto. Plus Goku's Kaioken and super saiyan forms are beyond Naruto's nine tails fox, plus Naruto throws stuff like shuirekens and kunais stuff Goku can block with his fingers like he did with Trunk's sword
Legalize gay marriage

As stated in round 1, Pro has the burden of proof. I will attempt to refute his points by breaking them down into three distinct arguments. Marriage should be legalPro argues that marriage is a type of thing that should be available to anyone who wants it, and it is legal in some states. Generally, I am in agreement, and currently marriage is legal in all US states. However, there are some restrictions. In many states you are not allowed to marry a first cousin (1). In ALL US states polygamy is illegal. Just because a “thing” is wanted or desired by some people does not necessarily equate to the notion that it should be legalized. A person may want to have multiple wives, but it may not in the best interest of the state to legalize polygamy. Religious beliefsPro makes the point that, “Most people use religious believes (sic) as an argument against gay marriage”. This may be true, but since I am not (nor intend on) using religious beliefs as part of my argument, this point is merely a straw man (2). LovePro provides us with his opinion that “marriage should be for anyone who loves each other. ” In order for Pro to uphold his burden of proof, he must show why the state should be involved in “love” relationships. Should states legislate boyfriend and girlfriend relationships if the parties are in love? How does the state determine if the parties truly are in love. Should states administer some kind of love test? I agree that love is an important part of marriage, but from a legalization perspective, I do not see the relevancy. SummaryIt does not appear that Pro has upheld his burden of proof. The only real agreement he made on the specific topic of gay marriage related to a straw man argument about religious beliefs. The balance of his arguments merely focused on marriage in general , but he offered no compelling evidence that gay marriage should be legal. Sources1 . http://www.ncsl.org...2 . http://en.wikipedia.org...
Legalize gay marriage

The resolution as stated is, “Legalize gay marriage”. Pro continues in round one by stating that, “Marriage is a right that everyone SHOULD HAVE no matter if they are marrying a person of the same sex”. As Pro is making a positive assertion against the federally established norm, Pro has the burden of proof. I accept this challenge, and I will show though rebuttal that although marriage may be construed as a “right”, the notion that an individual should be able to marry a person of the same sex may not fall under the auspices of a legal right. I look forwad to Pro’s arguments.
Is extreme patriotism any good

Patriotism is love of your country. Of course America is great. If you don't believe that, try living somewhere else. No? Didn't think so. * Without patriotism, no one would really care if our country looks like a landfill or if we get taken over by our enemies. * It takes extreme patriotism to combat extreme patriotism. Our enemies are very patriotic. Liberals refuse to believe that not all cultures or people are the same. They refuse to believe that Muslims take the Quran's commands to conquer us through stealth jihad seriously. Their lack of extreme patriotism has led to our enemies infiltrating the societies of the West and becoming ruthless killers within our own borders that Conservatives living in reality are trying to wake them up towards. Fort Hood massacre of U.S. soldiers? Islamic. San Bernerdino massacre? Islamic. The Boston Marathon bombing? Islamic. The Bataclan theatre in Paris massacre? Islamic. The rape jihad of Cologne? Islamic. 9/11? Islamic. The Belgium airport bombing? Islamic. Sharia for UK? Islamic. The London train bombing? Islamic. The Philadelphia blindside shooting of a policeman? Islamic. The beheading in a manufacturing plant in Moore, Oklahoma? Islamic. Patriotism opens your eyes. Anti-patriotism makes you a blind fool. Our instincts exist for a reason. Anti-patriotism is a supression of those survival instincts. https://en.m.wikipedia.org... As a matter of fact, fear is the greatest instinct neccessary for survival. http://www.seeker.com... http://science.howstuffworks.com... * Patriotism saved the world. http://youtu.be... * Why should we be patriots? Because it is time to drop the childish thinking and grow up. https://m.reddit.com...
Is extreme patriotism any good

OK so my first argument is that extreme nationalism can make you blind to facts and can prevent you from actually learning from other countries. I'm also afraid that it creates a divided group of people in the country because some people will believe they are better just because their parents come from said country, which will create a divided country, and as you said yourself a divided kingdom will not stand. Like i said in the beginning if you believe your country is the best it might prevent you from learn from other countries and what they are doing that seems to work. You say that it saved you during WW2 but i think what really started WW2 was extreme patriotism mainly in Germany but also in other European countries like Italy.
Is extreme patriotism any good

Extreme patriotism is good. Why? 1)It keeps us protected from extremist terrorist groups. 2)It saved the world during World War II. 3)It gives the other side of politics. 4)It's a bulwark to something worse. 5)A kingdom divided will not stand. 6)Most other cultures and countries suck. Not all cultures and nations are equally good or good at all. Some nations are better because they choose to be better and fight to be better. No nation is like the U.S. It is the greatest nation that has ever existed in the history of planet Earth. Period. The LGBT community can marry or adopt children. Secularism wasn't snuffed out. People from every country on Earth and every religion live in America. That's a first in world history. 7)America was the only bulwark to Naziism. It would have taken over the world. 8)America was followed as an example to the rest of the world and was followed. 9)People keep coming to America for a reason, and they most certainly are never going back. 10)Patriotism unites. It united America during WWII, after 9/11, and after the attack on Orlando.
Establish education policy to significantly increase academic achievement in secondary schools

P1: I don"t know what studies you are citing but according to the National Center for Education Statistics in 2009 and 2011 showed that black and Hispanic students trailed their white peers by an average of more than 20 test score points on the NAEP math and reading assessments at 4th and 8th grades, a difference of about two grade levels. P2: The National Assessment of Educational Progress regularly show that two-thirds or more of American students of all ages have mastered basic skills, such as reading and recalling information, but only one-third can do more advanced work that involves the application of information or analysis. American students fall in the middle of the pack on international assessments that measure higher-order thinking, scoring 14th in reading, 17th in science, and 25th in math on the 2009 Program for International Student Assessment. P3: The source for the article is the National Center for Education Statistics. Race to the Top, an Obama administration initiative that has tried to incentivize change by offering competitive grants to states pursuing reform agendas but U.S. schools still languish in the middle of international rankings, behind the schools of such countries as Estonia and Slovenia. Countries at the top of the international education rankings owe their success partly due to choose their teachers from among their most talented graduates, train them extensively, create opportunities for them to collaborate with their peers within and across schools to improve their practice, provide them the external supports that they need to do their work well. A recent McKinsey report found that most U.S. teachers come "from the bottom two-thirds of college classes, and, for many schools in poor neighborhoods, from the bottom third." We can and should do better to maximize a student"s ability to learn and perform.
Establish education policy to significantly increase academic achievement in secondary schools

1) The point of the debate is to show that establishing policies to help academic success. Two different studies have shown that when implemented, the education gap closed. While the country as a whole may still be lingering behind because there is no nation wide policy that has succeeded because there are many flaws with the nationwide policy. We cannot determined what each school needs, so if it by law each school, or state, set up its own education policy, this gap could be closed. If we can create a program state wide, or individual school-wide, that can help assist children (like tutoring or mandatory counselling) we can address the issues of falling behind and the negative effects of the home life on a child. Social and emotional learning has a huge impact on children and can help improve their learning overall. http://books.google.com... 2) In a perfect world, yes we do not only focus on standardized tests as a way of saying how knowledgeable our children are but unfortunately that is how the grading system in America works. That is why we also have children go into extra curricular activities, and we have teachers write recommendation letters. " A University of California study found that if the University did not require SAT scores from prospective students, they would have to raise their standard high school GPA to unrealistic expectations just to balance out the admissions process." Standardized tests are the same for everyone. They measure the same level of intelligence for everyone. http://astro.temple.edu... 3) I think my government website is a little more reliable than your news website. Many cities as a whole are closing on the achievement gap because they know what is working for their children. As I stated, a statewide, or school wide policy will help take away the educational gap. http://www.startribune.com... "Cincinnati attributes its success to measures, big and small, that ensure its poorest students receive the basics in the classroom and out, including tutoring, mentoring, food and health care. " They receive their money from non-profit businesses. In a decade, their graduation rate went from 50% to 80%. They figured out what works for their children, and if every state did the same, we can close the education achievement gap.
Establish education policy to significantly increase academic achievement in secondary schools

P1: The educational achievement gap has not closed. The White " Black score gap in reading was wider in 2013 than in 1992. In both subjects, White and Asian/Pacific Islander students scored higher on average than Black, Hispanic, and American Indian/Alaska Native students in 2013. (http://nationsreportcard.gov...) P2: Standardized tests oversimplify knowledge and do not test higher order thinking skills. One size fits all standards either dumb down instruction to the lowest common denominator or doom students to failure who cannot perform. P3: Test scores went up across all categories but the educational achievement gap still persist. The No Child Left Behind Act, was intended to raise educational achievement and close the ethnic achievement gap. The law has failed to achieve these goals, and has number of negative consequences which frequently harm the students the law is most intended to help. Among these consequences are a narrowed curriculum, focused on the low level skills generally reflected on high stakes tests, improper evaluation of ESL students and students with special needs; and strong incentives to exclude low scoring students from school, so as to achieve test score targets. (http://www.msnbc.com...)
Establish education policy to significantly increase academic achievement in secondary schools

1) a 2010 study in Rochester showed that children placed in an expeditionary learning school resulted in substantial and statistically significant achievement advantages for elementary students in English/language arts (ELA) and math, and for both years of middle school ELA. http://elschools.org.... "Effect sizes suggest that the EL schools in this study are substantially closing achievement gaps for students eligible for free or reduced price lunch, English language learners, and African-American and Hispanic students. In many cases, the achievement gap was completely closed. " 2) In schools, standardized tests are the way to measure quality of education. Standardized tests show much information the student can retain, how well the teacher are presenting the material, etc. http://www.cse.ucla.edu... 3) Of course there could never be a 100% fix. I am not sure where you obtained your information, but according to my source, test scores actually went up and it is working on our children. The gap in achievement is closing. With changes made and more progress, the NCLB Act could help improve children's quality of education among other factors as well. http://www2.ed.gov...
Establish education policy to significantly increase academic achievement in secondary schools

P1: There are several reasons for dropping out of high school, making the wrong decision, social background, the school itself and the teachers. An education policy increase academic achievement in secondary schools does not address any of these issues. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com...). P2: Standardized tests are not objective and do not measure the quality of education. A paper published in the fall 2002 edition of the peer-reviewed Journal of Human Resources stated that scores vary due to subjective decisions made during test design and administration: "Simply changing the relative weight of algebra and geometry in NAEP (the National Assessment of Educational Progress) altered the gap between black and white students." (Limitations in the Use of Achievement Tests as Measures of Educators' Productivity). P3: After No Child Left Behind (NCLB) passed in 2002, the US slipped from 18th in the world in math on the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) to 31st place in 2009, with a similar drop in science and no change in reading. (Shanghai Tops International Test Scores) C: We should have an education policy that will maximize a student"s ability to learn and perform.
Establish education policy to significantly increase academic achievement in secondary schools

1) "High school dropouts are four times as likely to be unemployed as those who have completed four or more years of college" http://www.dropoutprevention.org... 2) When there was an established language program implemented, "students in the Spanish classes scored significantly higher than the group that did not receive Spanish instruction in math and language on the Metropolitan Achievement Test (MAT) http://www.actfl.org... Conclusion: We should establish an education policy to help increase academic achievement in secondary schools