BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
If God is the omnipotent and omniscient creator of the world, then complete free will is impossible

Good luck to you, may the best debator win, and please, in regards to those who will judge this debate, do so unbiased. Now, enough of the formalities. I negate the resolution. Be it resolved that an omnipotent omniscient creator of the world can coexist with free will. "[11]If someone knows everything, and created everything, then they know what they have created. God knows about every blade of grass and every leaf. [11] [22]He placed them there. He structured all the brains of every human. If a soul exists, he created every bit of it. [22] [33]Everything is in his knowledge, all of which he made. Therefore, nothing can be operating outside of his control. All that he made he has a plan for and nothing can divert from that plan. To divert from God's plan would be to trick the all knowing. It would be operating outside of his realm, which is the entire universe. [33]" I believe that was the gist of my opponent's argument. Let me break this down. As you'll see, I have placed numbers within my opponent's speech thus making it easier to break down. 11) That is an excellent point, however, just because He knows everything he created does not mean he dictates what they do. For instance, I create a toaster. If that toaster were to malfunction on it's own, is that my doing? Say I built that toaster to par but I never used it. After some time, it is unable to toast at all. Is this my fault? (And yes, I realise that's not how a toaster works, it was just a silly analogy) 22) Let us look to the Christian faith, as you have already used it as an example. The Bible speaks of us as beings of the flesh (being succeptable to sin). Since God does not cause us to sin, nor does he tempt us, we must have some free will, yes? Also, into any other monotheistic religion, there is typically an antagonist, a devil, Satan, Deceiver, or a Xenu of sorts. This being said, we are then given a choice. 33) What if it was God's will for us to have a choice? I can know a ladybug is going to move when touched but that doesn't necessarily mean I will control it. Don't get me wrong, I may choose to interfere at any time, the same goes for an omnipotent omnipresent God. Now, with all that aside, I can get to my one and only contention not having to do with my opponent's argument. .. For the most part. .. My opponent argues that MAN cannot have free will whereas the resolution clearly states: "If God is the omnipotent and omniscient creator of the world, then complete free will is impossible" I propose to you that even IF, not to contend my own contentions, man had no free will, said creator would, thereby meaning there is complete free will. For the above reasons and refutations, I strongly urge a CON ballot. Thanks, -EG
If God is the omnipotent and omniscient creator of the world, then complete free will is impossible

This is an argument that I have most come into contact with regarding Christianity, but it is also relevant in monotheism in general. Thanks to my opponent for accepting this debate, and good luck. The God I refer to is a being, for instance, the God of the Abrahamic faiths. This argument accepts the omnipotence and omniscience of God the creator as its independent variable. If someone knows everything, and created everything, then they know what they have created. God knows about every blade of grass and every leaf. He placed them there. He structured all the brains of every human. If a soul exists, he created every bit of it. Everything is in his knowledge, all of which he made. Therefore, nothing can be operating outside of his control. All that he made he has a plan for and nothing can divert from that plan. To divert from God's plan would be to trick the all knowing. It would be operating outside of his realm, which is the entire universe.
Beauty Pageants are more harmful than helpful to girls.

Conclusion Round: Its the choice of every people who join contests and games on how they will win the game and its not the contest's itself that is the reason why some people are fighting over it. Beauty pageants for sure do not require their players to use botox or any kind of harmful drugs, the same way, a sport like basketball and boxing won't require their players to use steroids to win it - its the player's strategy and choice. Thank you for the debate, hope you have a rematch with you soon. God bless. :)
Beauty Pageants are more harmful than helpful to girls.

Thank you for this debate. Here is my conclusion: I have mentioned how beauty pageants are harmful physically and emotionally, but they also damage the relationship between mother and child, and pageant competitors. The child may begin to see her competitors as enemies and this perception can follow into everyday life, creating a divide in all of her human interactions. According to clinical psychologist Lucia Grasaru, the type of interaction is "dissimulation as a form of interaction, which can be used outside contests too and become a habit." "I think it"s fun if they want to play dress up for a little while, but to insist on making that a career or that they"re going to be a model or a Hollywood star, the chances are very slim," he said. By RICK NAUERT PHD Senior News Editor of http://psychcentral.com... Because beauty pageants pressure children to look "perfect," beauty pageants should not be a culturally accepted activity for children.
Beauty Pageants are more harmful than helpful to girls.

The purpose of beauty is pageant is to expose people, particularly women, in their abilities, and see how they look good inside and outside. "A beauty pageant or beauty contest, is a competition that mainly focuses on the physical beauty of its contestants, although such contests often incorporate personality, talent, and answers to judges' questions as judged criteria. The phrase almost invariably refers only to contests for women and girls; similar events for men or boys are called by other names and are more likely to be bodybuilding contests. Winners of beauty contests are often called beauty queens. Children's beauty pageants mainly focus on beauty, gowns, sportswear modelling, talent, and personal interviews. Adult and teen pageants focus on makeup, hair and gowns, swimsuit modelling, and personal interviews. Possible awards include titles, tiaras or crowns, sashes, savings bonds, and cash prizes." http://en.wikipedia.org... "Beauty pageants are not only emotionally difficult, they are physically harmful.One of the most widely used products in child pageants is hair spray, which contains phthalates, or plasticizers, that can act as hormone disruptors.for a growing girl, the effects could prove detrimental. Excessive exposure to phthalates has been linked to stunted growth and even lung cancer." Beauty pageant, just like any other field, is based on your own strategy. Taking illegal drugs for the contest is not the fault of the pageant itself. "A 2007 report by the American Psychological Association found that the hypersexualization of young girls is strongly associated with eating disorders, low self-esteem, and depression, says Melissa Henson at CNN. It can also even lead to fewer girls pursuing careers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics." I am not a psychologist, but you have to be prepared when taking in such contests. As for women, they have to be prepared. Pageant, even for males, needs confidence and expectation of negative effects like people bullying and bothering you. Its PART of ANY contests. "A San Francisco mother hit the news in early 2011 when she was investigated by child welfare authorities for giving Botox injections to her 8-year-old daughter. The mother reported that the use of Botox on children was not uncommon in the world of child beauty pageants. Such contests for children have been controversial, raising questions about their effects on kids." Its not the fault of pageant, but the mother's fault. As said, when you join in any game, like contests, its your strategy. Taking those drugs or any ornaments is not required in pageants, the same thing, taking steroids is not required in any sports. Looking forward for Round 3. My conclusion would be posted on Round 3. Back to Pro.
Beauty Pageants are more harmful than helpful to girls.

Thank you for accepting my challenge. Beauty contests are criticized by child psychologists as damaging a child's priorities and perceptions. Children who compete in beauty pageants are often between the age of 2 and 10, but they can be even younger. According to psychologist Martina M. Cartwright, these participants often have self-esteem issues later in life. Beauty pageants are not only emotionally difficult, they are physically harmful.One of the most widely used products in child pageants is hair spray, which contains phthalates, or plasticizers, that can act as hormone disruptors.for a growing girl, the effects could prove detrimental. Excessive exposure to phthalates has been linked to stunted growth and even lung cancer. A 2007 report by the American Psychological Association found that the hypersexualization of young girls is strongly associated with eating disorders, low self-esteem, and depression, says Melissa Henson at CNN. It can also even lead to fewer girls pursuing careers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. A San Francisco mother hit the news in early 2011 when she was investigated by child welfare authorities for giving Botox injections to her 8-year-old daughter. The mother reported that the use of Botox on children was not uncommon in the world of child beauty pageants. Such contests for children have been controversial, raising questions about their effects on kids.
Yuiru is a Bad Debater

I merely made this debate off of what I have seen from you. You constantly call yourself bad, so I assume good and bad were established by you already.You say you use deception in your debates to gain votes, yet you have lost 5/10 of your debates.You also say you cause the opponent to underestimate you. What I see here is that you are underestimating yourself.You have great potential in debating and it is shown in your Debates. Your problem is you look down on yourself making you appear "bad".
Yuiru is a Bad Debater

"The use of ∵ by you is incorrect, it is the therefor symbol."Close...It is the "because" symbol, a backwards "therefore" symbol! What do you mean by "good" and "bad"I naturally assume you mean morally, but you could mean skill level... or both!!!Nevertheless, I am the worst, evil, debater, here's why:I use deceptive debating tactics to gain votes.I cause my opponent to underestimate me by claiming to be incredibly bad and unkowledgeable on logic (which I am mind you)I smell funnyI provoke!
Yuiru is a Bad Debater

Antics are fine as they add a spice to the debates fire making it burn brighter, welcoming the outsiders to a more enjoyable piece.The use of ∵ by you is incorrect, it is the therefor symbol.Although poorly used, the signs, and fake words, contribute well to your side making the other plan for a better refute.Fallacies might come out to be a problem, although fails to render your debating poor.What! This can't be! You follow under B'obo's brother!You are not bad because you say you are Yuiru.
Yuiru is a Bad Debater

Point one:Listed below are the reasons why Yuiru is the worst debater: List-colon-inception::∵ Yuiru plays antics on the above, which are not good!!∵ Yuiru incorrectly uses uncommon symbols and words such as ∵ to confuse the readers and opponents of his debates.∵ Yuiru tries to sound smart by using (fake) words, when in reality Yuiru is a dumbongous flompkle mank!∵ Yuiru uses fallacies all the time.∵ Yuiru is a firm believe of B'obo but in the atheist religion in his sleep!∴ Yuiru is a bad debater
Yuiru is a Bad Debater

The only problem I see is that you bring yourself down. I have seen good conduct in your prior Debates. Its when you set your mind to the idea that you are lower than you really are, thats when you really do worse. If you realize how good you are, you will really excel.I did read your Paradox debate, tricky indeed, yet you did amazing in it. You kept the paradox going through the entire debate, only a genius debater would do this.And you smell like B'obo's lavender, since you ate those cookies.
Yuiru is a Bad Debater

What about my conduct?It's simply unruly and rebellious!there are several bad conducts I did, forfeit from website glitches and lack of time to debate!all bad signs!!I also debated a paradox, that had a tricky solution!I have been throwing trolls at people in debates! Including, but not limited to: Thought Terminating Cliches! I also smell like, weird man.A combination of apple sauce and bad orangy citrus in some weird fruit places. I forget to mention BOBO, how could I do that?!
Murder should be legalised

REBUTTALS my opponent said. Oh good, another essay for me to read. If you truly want to debate, keep it concise, I'm sick of these responses simply copied and pasted from a wiki page; very original. But then, I must say, my opponent is a novice. The wiki I pasted was the definition of terms. And if I paste anything, thats is my source of information. The pasting I did, was the definition of terms. And for my opponent to say his getting bored, it means he has conceded. I must say, that my opponent using harsh words on me, is a real form childish debate. I hate debating with people who insult me. This website is for arguing not insulting. If this is how u argue, then I bet, anybody will agree to debate with you again. My opponent before calling me an imbecile said'Think of it this way: do you want your children/grandchildren to live in a suitable environment? Just a few years of killing should do the trick. No ramifications. Just a clear, bright future for us all to enjoy. Oh yes, you're completely ahead in this debate. I couldn't even be bothered reading past the first website reference. I know what murder means you imbecile, I wrote it in my initial proposition. What is this? Did you just get "Being an Attorney for Dummies" at the bookstore, and rip out a couple of pages? It's just that age old debate, of one man or an entire race. Do you want your relatives now to die, so that millions, even billions can live later on? Perhaps not, but simple minds think alike, and I'm starting to get tired. Now the children you mentioned, what if they were been killed? Or what if your generation is been killed? How will they then survive? Now if murder should be legalized, and the children should suffer for some time, just as you claimed,do you think that after that period, that evil and corruption will stop? Possibly no. So no matter how you said it, murder should not be legalized
Murder should be legalised

Oh good, another essay for me to read. If you truly want to debate, keep it concise, I'm sick of these responses simply copied and pasted from a wiki page; very original. Think of it this way: do you want your children/grandchildren to live in a suitable environment? Just a few years of killing should do the trick. No ramifications. Just a clear, bright future for us all to enjoy. Oh yes, you're completely ahead in this debate. I couldn't even be bothered reading past the first website reference. I know what murder means you imbecile, I wrote it in my initial proposition. What is this? Did you just get "Being an Attorney for Dummies" at the bookstore, and rip out a couple of pages? It's just that age old debate, of one man or an entire race. Do you want your relatives now to die, so that millions, even billions can live later on? Perhaps not, but simple minds think alike, and I'm starting to get tired.
Video Games Are Good for You

1. Most video games aren't multiplayer. Skyrim, a popular game, is an extremely solitary experience. I've wasted hours completing idiotic quests as my social skills declined. 2. So can cigarettes, but it doesn't matter because, in the end, they cause more pain than they are worth. 3. These studies are pretty sketchy, and the authors were probably avid gamers attempting to justify their useless hobby. Having faster reactions and some largely useless skill is not a really of significant benefit, and, as you can see, there also exists numerous reports based on empirical data that have found a serious link with obesity and violent behavior. GG.
Video Games Are Good for You

Alright! This is my first debate on here, so I'll try to do my best. 1. Video games provide useful social skills. Most video games nowadays require teamwork and cooperation with other players in order to win. Playing these games can help you out in the real world, where social skills like these are important in order to complete tasks. Also, these kinds of games can help you connect with more people of different races and cultures. This can help you build relationships and become comfortable with different people. 2. Video games help relieve stress. Playing video games reduces your stress and pain. When you're playing games, your brain is more focused on winning the game than on thinking about stress and pain. Playing games release endorphins in your brain, which can make you happier while reducing the amount of pain we feel and stress we have. 3. Electronic games can help boost your brain. Believe it or not, playing video games can actually help shape up your brain. Playing games can improve your concentration and focus. A study revealed that kids with attention disorders had better test scores after they played video games because it helped them focus harder. Video games also teach you how to deal with problems. A ton of video games require the use of strategic thinking in order to win. Playing these games could help you make smart decisions faster and help you solve problems in real life. Sources: http://www.huffingtonpost.com... http://www.raisesmartkid.com... Rebuttals in Round 3 Conclusions in Round 4 (I forgot to include it in the rules) Your move! :)
abortion: should fetus have rights

If I'll prove to you that the fetus carrier is a mother all other issues are destroyed (dispute me if i'm wrong) except pregnancy complication. So the definition of 'child' in merriam webster is 'a son or daughter of a human parents' where do you think fetus came from? Isn't it from human man and human woman , being a parent means in merriam webster is 'the one that begets'and beget means 'to cause something to exist' and the fetus really did exist because of these two people. These definition that I found proves that the fetus carrier and the fetus itself is a family and rather be called mother and child for they are relatives that shares one flesh and blood. Just like us with our parents.
Is Hannah Montana a bitch

Contention 1 My opponent states, "She does charities so people think she's nice." My opponent has given absolutely no proof or sources to this claim. Con has no idea whatsoever whether she did those things out of the kindness of her heart or for publicity. It is a baseless insertion unless Con can back that statement up with information. Contention 2 Con states, "She cut her pretty hair and died it. She got a nose piercing too." This is irrelevant to the debate seeing that the debate is about whether Miley Cyrus is a "bitch" or not. What people choose to their bodies does not define them as a "malicious, spiteful, or overbearing woman". In addition to this, I would like to note that the reason Miley cut her hair was to donate it to a cancer charity. (1) Contention 3 Con also states, "A lot of kids I know who liked Hannah Montana/ Miley think she's a bad person." You have not stated any reason why she is a bad person. You have only stated that people you know think she is a bad person, but why? This may pertain to what I have just asked you. You stated, "now she's old and people are starting to trash her. Of u know what I mean." No, I do not know what you mean. You will need to clarify. Contention 4 Con writes, "So what do YOU have to SAY about THAT" THAT'S what I say about THAT. xD This debate has been a pleasure, I await my opponents response.
Is Hannah Montana a bitch

She does charities so people think she's nice. Used to be a big fan of miley but now I'm now. She cut her pretty hair and died it. She got a nose piercing too. But I really think that she is now a bad I Person. A lot of kids I know who liked Hannah Montana/ Miley think she's a bad person. That take down there posters, there phone cases, that throw away the movies, books, and a lot of other stuff. I used to be a big fan. All her posters in my room, all her movies and her book. She worked hard as Hannah Montana, but now she's old and people are starting to trash her. Of u know what I mean. Some kids at school used to have her on there lockers and now well.... They don't. So what do YOU have to SAY about THAT
Is Hannah Montana a bitch

Hello! It is a pleasure to debate with you! Let's start with some definitions and rules shall we? Bitch - "a malicious, spiteful, or overbearing woman —sometimes used as a generalized term of abuse" http://www.merriam-webster.com... Rules No trolling, semantics, lawyering, or straw manning. Now then, I will be debating that she is not a bitch nor is she self centered. Let's start with some quotes from other people who know about Miley. "She's the most wonderful person ever and a very good rolemodel for kids!" "i love hananh montana i know all of her songs and everything! she has a great voice shes beautiful and is a great actor ,and would never be like brittany or lindsay!" "miley cyrus ROCKS!!!" http://answers.yahoo.com... As you can see there is a fan base which just adores her and what she has done, in addition she has helped out and supported 35 charities! Now no self centered bitch would do all that work! Nor would she have a fan base of people that love her! You can also see some of her other charity work here: http://www.looktothestars.org...
Dogs Are Mans Best Friend, Not Cats!

Even though dogs do love people they are still loud you can't make an excuse over that. Also you stated that cats could get injured more easily, but that is just not true at all. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that every year, more than 86,000 fall injuries are caused by pets. Dogs are the biggest culprits, causing 88 percent of the injuries. Cats cause 11.7 percent of the falls, according to the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. This piece of evidence shows that dogs get injured way more easily than cats. My opponent may try to say that only falling is mentioned in this evidence, but falling is the most common way an animal gets injured. Also you stated that the videos show cat aggression, but that argument is invalid because both dogs and cats can be aggressive it just depends on the owner. 2015 dog bite fatality statistics 34 U.S. dog bite-related fatalities occurred in 2015. Despite being regulated in Military Housing areas and over 700 U.S. cities
Dogs Are Mans Best Friend, Not Cats!

First of all, sorry for the late response, and good luck. The reason dogs are loud, and get excited is because they love human interaction, they just love their owners, and are willing to love you in conditionally. I can agree that dogs usually create more messes while shedding, eating etc. But cats have all their hunting instincts still in their blood, they kill birds and usually fight other cats. This causing them in danger of getting dangered, meaning more vet bills. When ever I look on funny cat videos, it all usually includes their owners shoving them in bathes, or pissing them off, a lot of those videos showing cat aggression. Cats can also be very dangerous to children, there's been way many cases of cat attacks then dog attacks, on people, owners and baby's. I'm curious why you said "brutally kill" how is that help in this argument? Your statement just basically confirmed you think cats are aggressive, so dogs win in aggressiveness. I would like you to vote for dogs, they're :)