BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Prostitution should be legalized in brothels

The title is "Prostitution should be legalized in brothels" I am Pro and you are Con no more need be said. You don"t get force my position on how I support my side, any more than I get to force yours. You get to choose HOW you prove that Prostitution should NOT be legalized in brothels. I contest your definition of Brothel and provide https://definitions.uslegal.com... as the definition. Condemns do exist, and have existed in many forms over the years, they cover the genital during sex to prevent transmission of fluids. From a company in Germany as proof of their existence. In 2003 Rhode Island, accidently decriminalized prostitution. The effects of this were "caused both forcible rape offenses and gonorrhea incidence to decline for the overall population. Our synthetic control model finds 824 fewer reported rape offenses (31 percent decrease) and 1,035 fewer cases of female gonorrhea (39 percent decrease) from 2004 to 2009" http://www.nber.org... This breaks down into two argument in favor of legalized prostitution. 1) Rape dropped by 824. The effects of which will affect the victim for the rest of their lives. https://mainweb-v.musc.edu... 2) Gonorrhea dropped by 1,035. STDs are a critical health concern affecting this country. https://www.health.ny.gov... 3) It is hypocrisy with prostitution being illegal, while porn is legal. Whatever argument can be for or against, one can be made for the other. http://www.cnn.com... 4) No one sees any problem with massages. No one sees any problem getting their hair, nails, or feet done. In all these cases, you are paying another human being to touch you. How is sex any different? 5) Freedom is being able to choose what you do with your body. Choosing to have sex with someone for money is no different.
Prostitution should be legalized in brothels

Pro did not establish any rules or definitions and so I will do so. Rules, (1) Pro has all burden of proof, (2) Pro must show prostitution to be moral, (3) Pro must provide a plan of implementation for his proposed legalization, (4) the debate centers around prostitution in Belgium, (5) Pro loses regardless of argumentation.Structure. Round 1 - acceptance and establishment of rules. Round 2 - Pro's case, Con's extension of Rules. Round 3 - see round 2. Round 4 Pro loses. I will present an argument for fun on the basis of the rules. Pro assumes prostitution is illegal for his argument to work, however, he loses the debate as he does not specify WHERE it should be legal. Prostitution is legal in Nevada in Brothels, and also Argentina, Austria, Armenia, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, El Salvador, Finland, France, Greece, Guatemala, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Peru, Portugal, Senegal, Slovakia, Switzerland and Turkey.Since the Rules established state that Prostitution is being considered in regards to Belgium, and prostitution is legal in Belgium, there is no debate here and Pro loses. In addition I would challenge Pro to prove that Condomns exist. However, I would argue that Brothels should require Condoms. I have noted the 2,000 character limit. Definitions: brothel: a place of fine dining of italian food, but only on Thursday nights or nights that have a full moon. -LIL
Michael Vick and Dog Fighting

Michael Vick's life is not being "ruined" by being cruel to dogs. Michael Vick is in prison......by simply breaking THE LAW. "Is a human life more valuable than an animals?" Yes for sure, a human life is more valuable than animals, but the thing here is that Michael Vick did not die, nor did any of his friends die, while his little matches were going on. So yes a human's life is more valuable, but not in the case of a scumbag like Vick when he is killing innocent animals. So therefore, Vick should suffer the consequences imposed by the United States government, The NFL, and basic moral understandings.
All parents should be legally required to take parenting class before having a child

1. But surely child-abusers cannot be fixed with simple classes.If they can't, that's what social services is for.2. And an entire class is needed?Punishments, warnings, and setting rules/ boundaries will be more likely to happen if parents took classes.3. Parents don't need a class to tell them this. A bumper-sticker would suffice.How do we know if parents are paying attention to these things? Alternatively, we can have parents taking an assessment before becoming parents.4. Schools also play a part. Why not increase funding for sex-ed and anti-bullying classes.Schools also (in addition to mandatory parenting classes) will be held accountable.5. If she was "clueless", then, quite frankly, she was a moron.If she took parenting classes, she would be less likely to be clueless.6. I'm not saying that parents shouldn't do those things, but for Celestia's sake, that's paranoid!It's not paranoid. It's called protection.7. Why not trust a child after giving them the information that Internet is deadly? How many kids were kidnapped due to risky behavior?Not all the time they listen.8. Good luck trying to store 20,000,000+ children of various needs, ages, opinions, and backgrounds!Just simply take the classes and you'll have no problems.9. Who's rules? My parents? Yours? Obama's? Joe Smith?The rules that the parenting class teaches.10. You still have not answered my question about those parents with full-time jobs.Just like you can take off work for jury duty, you can take off work for parenting classes.11. You still have not told me where we would get the money or the space to educate adults.Where did we get space and money for the public school system? The same way we get space and tax dollars to educate parents.
All parents should be legally required to take parenting class before having a child

It isn't child abuse. The breaking point is when someone is close to abusing their child, defined at #1. Parenting classes will teach parents more constructive form of discipline thus preventing yelling.But surely child-abusers cannot be fixed with simple classes.Punishments, warnings, and setting rules/ boundaries.And an entire class is needed?Parenting classes will teach them that.>Parents don't need a class to tell them this. A bumper-sticker would suffice.>Schools also play a part. Why not increase funding for sex-ed and anti-bullying classes. Then 13 year old Alicia Kozakiewicz ran away to meet an internet predator who abducted her. None of this would have happened if her parents had been monitoring her. Her mom was totally clueless of the dangers of the internet. With mandatory parenting classes, parents won't be clueless anymore>If she was "clueless", then, quite frankly, she was a moron.>A class isn't needed to teach parents; television advertisements would suffice. Keep the computer in an open area with the screens visible to everyone, where anyone can walk by and look- Install parental controls that include recording computer activity, time limits, blocking sites that prevent children and teens from accessing inappropriate things. If teens know their computer activity is recorded and people can walk by and see, they will be less likely to engage in risky or inappropriate activity.- Monitor and check the computers regularly (and DO SOMETHING if you see any risky or inappropriate activity).- Know all passwords to social networking sites and regularly monitor social networking sites- Install monitoring, blocking and time limits for cell phones like RADAR My Mobile Watchdoghttp://www.mymobilewatchdog.com......Dr. Phil indorsed this product after 12 year old girl named Kyra Schraiber met an internet predator on her cell phone and was raped by him.>I'm not saying that parents shouldn't do those things, but for Celestia's sake, that's paranoid!>Why not trust a child after giving them the information that Internet is deadly? How many kids were kidnapped due to risky behavior?Taking away their children if they don't.>Good luck trying to store 20,000,000+ children of various needs, ages, opinions, and backgrounds!>Who's rules? My parents? Yours? Obama's? Joe Smith?___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________>You still have not answered my question about those parents with full-time jobs. >You still have not told me where we'ld get the money or the space to educate adults.
All parents should be legally required to take parenting class before having a child

The tax-funded, 1 semester class will offer courses on taking care of a baby (e.g. burping, changing a diaper, feeding) discipline (the techniques seen on Jo Frosts TV program Supernanny), managing stress to prevent child abuse, how to recognize and prevent sexual abuse and parenting teenagers (e.g. discipline). They will get training on internet predators. There are many benefits to it including: - Parenting classes will prepare parents better and might improve parenting skills. - Parenting classes will teach parents to manage stress, and what do when they are at the "breaking point," thus preventing child abuse. - Parents taking this class will learn how to discipline teenagers, thus reducing teen pregnancy, drug and alcohol use, violence, bullying, sexting and many other issues facing teens. - Teens often face negative peer pressure to do risky things. If their parents parented, other teens won't imitate them. Now parents won't have to worry about their teen. - Many parents don't discipline properly. This has negative effects on the child and society. Parenting classes will give them the skills they need to discipline. - Many parents allow their child or teenager to use internet in their bedrooms, and not in an open area where everyone can walk by and look. This can result in the child having contact with internet predators, cyber bullying, posting inappropriate pictures of on self, looking at porn, etc. There is no good reason for a child or teen to have internet in their bedrooms. The parenting class will give parents advice on internet safety (internet devices are to be used in a family area when parents are home, parental controls including blocking, monitoring and time limits installed, parent or adult check regularly). - Many parents struggle with parenting teenagers. Parenting classes will give them they skills they need to gain control and set limits for their teen.
Was Lincoln Oppressive to the North

My opponent claims we could not have won without the draft. That is false, the Draft was unnecessary, as even without it we would have maintained an numerical advantage. The Confederate Army had 1,064,000 men. The Union Army had 2,100,000 men, 120,000 of which was Southern Unionists. If you eliminate the 850,000 who was drafted, the union still outnumber the confederates by 186,000 men. The Union suffered 140,414 casualties, while the south suffered only 72,524 casualties. So the Union suffered 67,890 more casualties than the south.A 186,000 man advantage is more than twice the 67,890 Casualty disadvantage. The North would have still won the war, with a great advantage in troops. Benjamin Franklin stated, "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." I believe he was right. James Madison once said, "If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. " The Lincoln and the civil war is proof of this statement. Don't forget the Civil war was a war of aggression. In 1861 Confederate President Jefferson Davis said, "We seek no conquest. All we ask is to be left alone." Contrary to popular belief the Civil War was not over slavery, it was over secession. Lincoln was not concerned about slavery, his main focus was Nationalism, and contrary to the Confederates who believed in States Rights, Lincoln believed that what is good for the Nation trumps everything else, including the rights of the people. The agricultural South seceded over the industrial north's National policies, no over slavery. In 1861 3 weeks after Confederate General Robert E. Lee was promoted to a Colonel in the U.S. Army, President Lincoln offered him a Senior Command with the rank of Major General, Lee replied, "If Virginia stands by the old Union, so will I. But if she secedes,... then I will follow my native state with my sword and, if need be, with my life." The Mayor of New York City, Fernando Wood, made an address to the City Council in 1861, recommending that, with the Southern states seceding from the United States, New York City should become an independent city-state. He stated, "When disunion has become a fixed and certain act, why may not New York disrupt the bands which bind her to a venal and corrupt master.... Amid the gloom which the present and prospective condition of things must cast over the country, New York, as a free city, may shed only light and hope of a future reconstruction of our once blessed confederacy. " Thomas Jefferson once stated, "If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this Union or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it. " Thomas Jefferson has also stated, "If any state in the Union will declare that it prefers separation... to a continuance in union... I have no hesitation in saying, 'let us separate.'"
Was Lincoln Oppressive to the North

On July 2, 1861 President Lincoln authorized General Winfield Scott to suspend the Writ of Habeas Corpus, "between the city of New York and the city of Washington" by executive order. On October 14, 1861 the suspension of the Writ of Habeas Corpus was "extended so far as Bangor, in Maine" by another Executive order, thereby suspending the Writ of Habeas Corpus in New England. After Replacing General Scott with General H.W Halleck on November 1st, he than ordered General Halleck to suspend the Writ of Habeas Corpus in the Border state of Missouri, on December 2, 1861 On Sept. 24, 1862 Lincoln extended the Suspension of Habeas Corpus throughout the entire Union, through Proclamation 94, under which he specifically stated, "all persons discouraging volunteer enlistments, resisting militia draft or guilty of any disloyal practice affording aid and comfort to rebels against the authority of the United States, shall be subject to martial law and liable to trial and punishment by courts-martial or military commissions" In other words, anyone who was reluctant to volunteer to enlist in the Military, anyone who dodged the draft, or anyone openly opposed the war, could find themselves Prisoners of War, without the Writ of Habeas Corpus. Prior to this proclamation on June 30, 1862, Lincoln ordered the Governors of several states to draft 150,000 men into the Militia. In 1864 he would order two more drafts, one for 500,000 men, and another for 200,000 men. During Vietnam only 1.2% of the population was drafted, and draft dodgers was pardoned. During the Civil war 3.8% of the population was drafted, and draft dodgers was hung.
Was Lincoln Oppressive to the North

On July 2, 1861 President Lincoln authorized General Winfield Scott to suspend the Writ of Habeas Corpus, "between the city of New York and the city of Washington" by executive order. On October 14, 1861 the suspension of the Writ of Habeas Corpus was "extended so far as Bangor, in Maine" by another Executive order, thereby suspending the Writ of Habeas Corpus in New England. After Replacing General Scott with General H.W Halleck on November 1st, he than ordered General Halleck to suspend the Writ of Habeas Corpus in the Border state of Missouri, on December 2, 1861 To me this is unnecessary and a act of tyranny.
The Mongol horde.

As the great gengis had taken over most of the northern chinese Jin dynasty the genius leader known as Subodai was moving into a great campaign to the east. With him he had about 150,000 soldiers. 70,000 of them were mongol warriors. He rushed into russia fighting at winter and moving in summer. As they approached Hungary and Poland they fought two great battles and won both. Slaughtering over 40,000 Knights and infantry. Even the famous knights templar. Could the Mongols reach france? Could they conquer europe and create an empire stretching from sea to sea? After the battle in Hungary were they defeated King Bela IV's army the Great Khan Ogedai died and they had to return for ceremonial funeral and a new Khan.
The Mongol horde.

Alexander of Macedon was a brilliant leader and a great tactician. His enemies were numerous and but not skilled. These armies of Persia consisted of farmers forced into the army as a majority. Only some thousands were warriors for a profession. These Persians almost didn't have any heavy cavalry that could beat Alexander's Companion cavalry. And the sarissa was mainly used as a anti-infantry weapon, It could kill riders but not many commanders saw it as a good idea to rush horses into a pike wall. Genghis khan united the many tribes of Mongolia and turned them in the direction of China Using hit and run tactics the Mongols could harass an army for days without taking heavy losses. The tactic lay in the superior bow of the Mongols. All Mongolians were trained as a child to ride and shoot. to pull the string of Mongolian bow was the same force used as pulling yourself up hanging in three fingers. As for Alexander his army was about 30,000 warriors and 10,000 cavalry at the beginning. The Mongols had about 60,000 men and invaded china. They did not pass the great wall because they simply walked around it when invading Xi xia. As the Mongols invaded Jin they assaulted 93 cities within one year using catapults and ballista At first Gengis was set out to destroy the world and secure peace for the mongol people. His general Subodai was considered as the best military commander in the Mongol empire. He is the only general in history who led a successful winter invasion of Russia. The Mongolian empire horde was actually an empire under Ogedai khan. Gathering scripts and writing from all corners of Eurasia and held it in his white city of Karakorum. Which was greatly influenced from the Chinese culture. Kublai khan actually reformed the Mongols into a civilized nation. So they were not simple barbarians. They were that at first though. The Mongol empire lasted for 200 years more before being torn apart like the empire of Alexander. And if the Mongols were not superior and often outnumbered how could they conquer the most advanced nations on earth at the time?
The Mongol horde.

The Mongol war machine of the year 1240 was a system of 10 to 10 000. This army used ambushes, tactical warfare and had a superior range and accuracy to any European bow at the time. The medieval knights who dominated the battlefields of Europe had no chance to defeat an Mongol light horseman. If the knight rushed into him he could simply ride away with the skill of one born in the saddle and quickly turn around to kill the knight. From the front a knight was undefeated but if his horse was shot in the back and fell he do no more than a tortoise.
eSports should be recognized and respected as official sports

Thank you for being timely and never forfeiting. This is quite a hot topic to dig through. I would like to finish off by saying that esports should not be considered a sport because of all the reasons above. These include Differences between sport and competition The actual definition of sport, The lack of physical or real world communication So in conclusion, for all the athletes that have made there way to the top by hard work and physical conditions that believe sports should stay in the real world, I personally believe that sports should stay physical. My name is Brian N. Johnson, thank you for your time.
eSports should be recognized and respected as official sports

Before I begin this summary I would to say that it has been great debating with you and apologize for taking so long to reply, the holidays had caught me up. Now, on the main topic. eSports should very well be respected as a sport in my eyes and definitely in the eyes of every proclaimed professional athlete participating in these games. It is obvious that sports can be defined by not only Physical effort, but expert mental prowess (e.g. Poker), which is shown throughout many eSports such as League of Legends, Counter-Strike, and Starcraft. These players in the top of these sports lead the top of the 1% of players who even manage to make it to this level of play, putting in countless hours of practice to remain respected and good. With these points in mind, I say we respect these eSports as Sports.
eSports should be recognized and respected as official sports

Alright time to get down to work here. Your argument is now based on the fact that there are other less physical competitions that are considered sports however there is some problems with that. Should we start drawing the line on what a sport is? By definition there are already games that are considered sports that shouldn't be. Such as pokers, chess, and the only one important in this debate videogames. Let's examine virtual verses reality. Every sport that is a sport has interactions between two or more people. Someone you can touch and interact face to face with. Egames does not have such teamwork as hockey, basketball, Soccer or any other "classic" or real sports. Stressful situations does not make something a sport. If you can make a good comparison between a classic sport and egames we may have something. However all we have is people glued to monitors. If esports is going to be considered a sport all videogames will become a sport. Rough and tumble interactive skilled sports is what has been the sports since the beginning. From the stoneware when ancient hunters would hunt wooly mammoths, sports have been around since ancient times. It is not time to make a virtual reality where what I watch on TV is other people watching a screen. For the definition of sports and the difference between reality and virtual it is clear that now is not the time to confuse the two. http://mp1st.com...
eSports should be recognized and respected as official sports

You do bring some interesting information to table, but I can bring some counter-arguments to your statements. You said eSports are a competition. This is true, and as you said many sports are also competitions in your third paragraph. By saying this we can say some activities can be Sports while still being a sport. I see eSports as the same way, and some others do too. I could argue Poker is a competition, but it is respected as a sport. ESPN even recognizes it as a sport and there is not much a physical aspect to it. Poker is a mental sport, you must be focused and smart, much like eSports. Going on with the topic of ESPN, and what the John Skipper said. He may say that eSports are not sports. He can have his opinions, but officially the U.S does recognize eSports as Sports, and Foreign players from places as far as Asia, Europe, and even Africa coming to the U.S for gaming tournaments can get Visas with the identifier, "Professional Athlete"[1] For my last point this round I would like to bring Razer's eSports associate manager Drew Holt-Kentwell's words on this matter into it. He says,"According to Merriam Webster, a 'sport' is 'a contest or game in which people do certain physical activities according to a specific set of rules and compete against each other, eSports is a competition, absolutely. Moreover, gaming athletes have to train bodily and mentally to be competitive or they lose. eSports requires extraordinary coordination, hyper-fast reflex responses, teamwork, and physical and mental dexterity and endurance " often for extended periods of time under the pressure of strictly enforced game rules." He then goes on to say, "The legitimacy of a sport really comes down to its cultural impact, adding that professional gamers are already recognized for work visa purposes for competitive events just like real-world athletes." [2] If these players are being recognized on this level by governments, then why should they not be recognized by networks such as ESPN, and the people of the U.S. http://www.forbes.com...[1] http://www.polygon.com...[2]