BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
You do not worship god, you are gay, you curse at you parents, you are an adulterer, you WILL DIE!

OIf you do not think that god printed the bible, then you do not think that god exists. Regardless there's no proof for this god's existence anyway. And since according to you"much altered" for those who actually believe in god, what are they supposed to go by to believe in the fraudulent hateful god who in the printed text hates just about everyone for every single reason imaginable including children of all things. Its all right there slapped down pat with it. "Pro. Overwrought with angst" Are you serious? Try harder. That's exactly what the bible and its printed god is. Do your pretend yoga properly to come up with a better excuse since you have none. And since that's all you have in a reverse account, and obviously did not read anything nor answer anything on YOUR god's side, I'm ending this debate.
You do not worship god, you are gay, you curse at you parents, you are an adulterer, you WILL DIE!

I don't think god actually printed the Bible. I think it was actually written by hand, or even chiselled into tablets of stone in some ancient cuneiform symbolic text. Not by god but by the hands of men. The printed version came a lot later. Much altered. Pro. Overwrought with angst in their inverse meditation. So fearful of nothing but fearing everything. Damned if they do, damned if they don't. Such anger and that pious document still wet with sticky blasphemous residue. Printed in all certainty but printed in no knowledge. Who were those storytellers? What did they behold? Maybe just the day to day tedium of the times. Maybe they were clever men. Men for sure, blessed women merely characters in their surreal melodrama. Hand etched melodrama. Hand etched melodrama, etched into hearts of gold and hearts of stone. Pro's heart etched with fear and their head wrought with fearful anticipation. Law layer who? God or Pro. Their tablets of wrath, an inverse justification for their own bewilderment. Lost in that ten billion sea of anonymity.
You do not worship god, you are gay, you curse at you parents, you are an adulterer, you WILL DIE!

Those deaf ears are from a groin pull of the fried ears to the barn door socket wrench caught by the slaughter of taunted fresh air yeah you stare neatly at yourself as you groom your stains its your brain that sticks to the fallout of your slobbering wet kiss oh how you miss your candle gift when wrecked on the naked moon did you die to soon was it elegant smell the fragrance so cool and crisp in the huddle and cuddle of the disposed laundry basket where did your friendly neighborhood casket go when will it bloom again the hours seem long and short before they bore you to abort your snort of the green fibers of a blade of grass I can't tell you where to stick your a$$ among the pools of glass was it a blast from the mass Nah its all just a knee jerk from the chin the tommygun declares a win from the dinner plate the see saw has already seen you all staring back at you and your own drool the fool, the fool
You do not worship god, you are gay, you curse at you parents, you are an adulterer, you WILL DIE!

You are so smart. You are such a genie-us. You are well edumacated. I shall kiss and worship your feet and give hugs and cuddles to your cute wittle swollen an inch wide tosies as I paint ooey gooey rich and chewy octagon nuclear furnace reactors on them so that they can blow up when you say "I am the power" at your next He-Man and She-Ra party even though you cannot tell the difference. But don't wurry, you also get to show off your peck-totals when you glide them across your battery powered easy bake oven as you learn to fry and bake water. You are really not that bright. Nor for a single second should you ---ever--- try to pretend that you are.
The US federal Government should ban ALL testing that requires the use of animals.

Response to First Contention: Actually, the first polio vaccine was developed from mice and monkeys by Maurice Brodie. That is true. The problem is this first vaccine not only was ineffective, but caused allergic reactions, paralysis, and death. After that, a vaccine using monkey kidney tissue was released, but often gave recipients polio, or resulted in death. Dr. John Enders managed to grow the virus in cell cultures in 1949, and his technique led us to the polio vaccine we use today, which was tested in human clinical trials, and has eradicated the disease. Animal research in polio actually set back discovery of the disease and development of the vaccine by about 40 years, since animals contract polio nasally, and humans contract it through their digestive system. Insulin is a little harder to defend - but not much. Insulin as a substance was discovered in humans. While the scientists who won the Nobel Peace Prize did their experiments on dogs, even they admitted they were merely replicating what had already been found in humans. In addition, animal-derived insulin often caused allergic reactions, which is why we now primarily use synthetic insulin, based on the insulin naturally produced by the human body. Penicillin failed animal studies due to its toxicity. The AIDS cocktail was completely ineffective in monkeys. Christian Barnard did one of the first transplant surgeries, using chimp heart, and each surgery was a failure until he began using human organs. Animal studies failed us in these cases and how many others. The alternative methods are what worked, and they continue to work for us now. The National Cancer Institute uses alternative methods to study cancer and to test the carcinogenic property of substances, and to test the efficacy of drugs in treating cancer as well. Pharmagene Laboratories tests drugs without using animal experimentation. It can, and should be done. Had scientists relied solely on animal research in the past, we would not have the AIDS cocktail, we would not have eradicated polio. My other contentions weren't simply alternatives. Look at the numbers. The alternatives have proven to be significantly more accurate than animal testing, and significantly cheaper. I agree that scientists can only learn more about living organisms through things that possess these traits (in certain circumstances), but a human is not the same as a monkey is not the same as a mouse. Pretending they are slows down medical advancement by assuming that a mouse is going to respond to a medicine in the same way a human does. Metabolism, toxicity level, physiological responses are all different. Would you let a vet perform surgery on you? I'm going to assume your response would be no, because you're not an animal.
Vampire Diaries is better than True Blood

First off, you copied all of your info word for word from this debate.....http://www.debate.org................................. -___-Thought this was kinda funny>>>>> http://answers.yahoo.com...1. True blood is original!! Today there are so many vampire series out there, that they all seem to blend together. For example, TVD is very similar to twilight. 1. They both have teen main characters.2. The setting takes place largely at a high school.3. The characters are 2 boys fighting for 1 girlIn True Blood, the characters are middle aged. Not only that, but Sookie has a kick AZZ backbone. She doesn't need a male character to help her stand. She is strong and independent. Also, another thing that makes TB original is that it takes place in the deep south. It puts a whole new spin on things. And last, the vampires in TB live in the open. They don't hide from society. P.S. The Vampires in TB can also fly.
Vampire Diaries is better than True Blood

1. The Vampire Diaries" boys are loyal to the end. Sure, True Blood"s Bill would die for Sookie " now. But where was he back in her grandmother"s day? Stefan and Damon Salvatore have been in love with Elena and her kin (read: Katherine) practically since time began. As they"ve repeatedly said, they"ll "always choose Elena." True Blood"s Bill and Eric, in contrast, might sometimes choose their vampire exes or their blood-sucking king or queens over Sookie Stackhouse. 2. The Salvatores can"t be bought. Let"s not forget that on True Blood Bill was paid to get close to Sookie. That"s right. Quiet as it"s kept, Bill Compton"s so-called Queen hired him to seek the supernatural waitress out. Meanwhile, love brought Stefan back to Mystic Falls and Elena"s door. Lust made Damon follow. But, hey, not everyone"s perfect. 3. TVD"s neck nibblers know their place. And it"s beneath humans. Yeah, we said it. Not to sound all elitist or anything, but The Vampire Diaries" vampires know enough to be at least a little ashamed of the fact that they are not human and that they prey on mankind. They"re not marching in the streets talking about "We"re here. We"ve got fangs. Get used to it!" They"re not demanding equal rights. They accept the fact that they"re something unnatural about their existence and they don"t try to shove it down our throats. And that"s kind of endearing. Besides, there"s something to be said about putting humans on a pedestal. And being of the mortal kind, we like that.
IVF Debate

Well as I stated prior, there are many issues involving the ownership of eggs,. If there is ever a dispute or divorce of the couple and they can not resolve who would keep them and decide what would happen to them, then they would possibly go to court to resolve this issue. Which would cost more money, about an average of $10,00 (legalmatch). which would cause more problems, since the court would have to decide to what the eggs would be, they would decide if it would be a custody or property dispute. In which they would fallow there respected prepossesses (pcblawfirm). This would be one of the many problems with the use of IVF. Which would include financial dents, medical problems, legal issues involving custody, and moral publications. In which would greatly over come the good, since those who use this alternative pregnancy's as a last resort.
IVF Debate

Well the professionals do a clear and thorough procedure for the IVF. They would begin to do some baseline ultrasounds and some blood testing usually for follicle stimulating hormone and estradiol. Then they do ovarian suppression for two to four weeks. Also two weeks before ovarian supprestion the do a daily ejection called lupron to complete the pre-stimulation ovarian suppression. Then ovarian stimulation is started with injectable fertility medications and a reduced dose of lupron for eight to twelve days. Regular office visits have now begun until follicle aspiration. During each office visit, an ultrasound and blood test for estradiol are performed. Then ovulation is triggered with an injection of human chorionic gonadotropin, administered when the follicles are judged to be mature. One the day follicle aspiration happens the egg collection will start and the sperm collection.Then the fertilization could begin and the screening to collect the healthy ones. Then embryo transfer will begin three to five days after egg retrieval in which the patients are given Valium to help relax the muscles. Then the remaining viable embryos would be frozen for more use. Then the patient would return to the clinic for pregnancy tests (uscfertility.org) The IVF procedure seems to be a successful and safe procedure in comparison to alternative births. Allowing there to have healthier pregnancy's and more families for those who cant conceive one naturally.
IVF Debate

Well even after the remaining embryos ownership problems, there is also a more lively issue that could very likely come into play in a IVF. Since a IVF uses multiple embryos, normally 2-3 and in some cases 4 too maximize the success rate. Well it is possible that all of the embryos are fully successful in coming out of the female, this would be in simpler terms multiple births (Multiple Births in IVF). There is a significant higher chance of multiple births in comparison to conceiving naturally. Its a average of 16 percent with the use of IVF in comparison to a 1-2 percent chance naturally (oneatatime). And the problem with these multiple births is that the baby's would be weigh less then 5.5 and 65% of them where born premature (LAURIE TARKAN).
IVF Debate

Well the problem with ownership already has multiple possible solution. Well if the couple decides to go to court of this dispute. If the court considers the embryos as people then they would use parens patriae reasoning; a best interests of the child (duhaime) In which it would become a custody dispute, where the embryos would go to the human who would have to best ability to take care for taking them (Donna M. Sheinbach). And if the court deems it as property, making it go with property law, in which the item would go to in general whoever paid for it or who ever gave the most amount of money (britannica). But also they could enact contract law if they decide to determine the documents that the participants agreed on, in which they would decide the validity (Donna M. Sheinbach) These documents validity in these disputes are more valid in some country's then others, such as the U.K which deems the documents much more valid then the U.S (Oxford Journals).
IVF Debate

Yes the embryos are frozen and stored for future use for you, if the first 3 attempts didn't work out or others, Actually there are hundreds of thousands of embryos accumulated in fertility clinics thought the country. Some of those are awaiting transferred, but most of which are frozen in time (Laura Beil). But freezing these potential children does not come free. The storage itself costs a average of $500 and another $5,000 for the thawing and embryo transfer procedure(uscfertility.org). There is also a danger to storing random embryos, since there is a possibility that the embryo has a abnormal amount of chromosomes, even with a genetic screening. Since the test would normally only look at 5 chromosomes out of the 23 leaving large areas of possible chromosome abnormality where the test would say it was normal. And this process leaves a fairly large hole in the embryo's shell since the test requires two cells of a six to ten cell embryo (advancedfertility). Causing potential damage to the embryo itself. Another problem is ownership of the embryos. Since the embryos are joint property of the couple, legal debates are complicated. In the process of signing of IVF papers there is a section involving ownership of embryos due to a accident or divorce. But according too attorney Susan L. Crockin "Nobody agrees on whether these documents are enforceable,". So we have court decisions such as Sofia V Nick where they fought to determine who could keep the embryos (K. ALEISHA FETTERS). Which ended up leading to more problems (telegraph).
IVF Debate

Well sir, there are certainly advantages to analyzing embryos. for instance genetic screening allows for seeking of embryos with abnormality. This could refer to embryos with a abnormal amount of chromosomes. Which would lead to disability and deceases in the child if where fully created (advancedfertility). This is useful since genetic abnormality are more prominent as a female ages, especially around 40 where 50-70 percent of them have a chromosome abnormality(Slate). The older females being a prime contributor towards IVF. The healthy ones are collected and some are stored away. This process allows there to have the greatest chance for the child to become healthy, then there would be if it where a natural birth. This also assists prevent large genetic diseases from being transmitted towards the next generation(Preimplantation Genetic Screening). Also when there is a abundance of healthy eggs, they can be stored and donated to those who need them.
IVF Debate

Well it may be true that the allowance of IVF would increase the job market for that field. It would also decease the availability and need to other jobs. Such as jobs in orphanages, since people with fertility problems or other problems where they cant have one naturally would no longer need or wish to adopt a child, since they would be able to create a child with IVF. There are an average of 120,000 orphans currently in the U.S alone, and they are facing a steady decline of possible family with the influences such as IVF (The Orphan Crisis In America). Also you seem to have failed to mention to input that there is a little over then 25 percent chance that the outcome of an IVF would be a live child (Fertility Solutions). Statically the price for a single child for a unlucky woman would be about $75,00 for having a child on the fourth attempt. Taking account for the rare chance of a health insurance company to cover IVF, since there is a lack of medical necessity (Growing Family Benefits). Meaning that the inability to conceive is not a life threatening condition and it is not a treatment does not result in the cure for a medical condition. But this also opens up the gateway to the thin line that is morality. As IVF technology evolves, it increases the ability to gain more control over the embryos (Tech Insider). With IVF advances, couples would be able to change the outcome of a child. This creating a new level of power and responsibility to mankind, as they swap and replace traits to there liking . This also removes the expression of marriage, removing the symbolic and reinforcement of the essential bonding act for the couples; and replacing it with technology becoming the maker (Creation and Transfer of a Single Embryo in Reproductive Technology).
IVF Debate

Yes Darwinism, leaving those that can adapt and evolve shall live. Well with the advances of IVF we would be able to select the best specimens, the ability to remove possible birth defects/ unwanted traits from being passed on from the mother or father, his could be made by using donors (Create health). Also the allowance of IVF would not drastically increase to a significant degree. Since the procedure would cost a average $20,000 dollars per chance of fertility (advancedfertility), so only people who would make of the upper-middle class and above which is %16 percent of the population of the U.S (house hold income). And as the IVF became more popular it would increase the job market, according to (LifeScienceIndustryResearch.com) the market would increase by a average of 11 percent.
Abortion

Con's only argument is that bringing a child to term should be done to punish the mother for irresponsible behavior. Con did not argue that abortion was immoral or undesirable, only that forcing the mother to bear the child is always just punishment. It's fair that if a young woman has behaved irresponsibly, then she and her male partner should both be punished appropriately. However, in cases of rape the girl is not responsible and ought not be punished at all. Frequently (up to 70%), the mother has suffered abuse, and that may have led to bad judgment in emotional relationships. Young people in general have difficulty matching actions with consequences. Forcing the birth may also punish the mother's family, and punish society with welfare costs. An abortion is much cheaper than raising a child. What is appropriate justice should be determined in each case. In some cases abortion will be the best option.
Abortion

I should have said thanks to "Con" for the debate. Research shows young brains do not reliably make the correction between actions and consequences. That applies to the high accident rates of young drivers as well as to reckless sexual behavior. Emotional problems from child abuse (up to 70% are abused) contribute to irresponsible sexual behavior. In 10-20% of cases the pregnancy is a result of rape and not the girl's fault at all. If the girl has been irresponsible punishment is appropriate, but being forced to have an unwanted child will rarely be the right type of punishment; it's often too harsh. The burden of the unwanted child punish the girl's family and also the society that must often pay for the upbringing. The cost of medical abortion procedures is trivial compared to the $222,360 cost of raising a child. Government should not rule out abortion as an option. The girl and her family should make the decision.
Abortion

But if she knew she couldn't handle it why would she have sex.... Exactly you have to think about your actions before you make the action. There have been over 23deaths a year from abortion and that was in 1992-1993 (abortion facts.com). I just think that if you have sex you have to deal with good old mother nature and also some people are forced to have babies because they can afford abortion it costs At least $400.00& up ( yahoo answers.com)
Abortion

Thanks to Pro for proposing this 1000-character-limited debate. I am rarely concise! A girl may or may not be able to deal with experiencing pregnancy and raising a child. The girl may have been raped, (10 -20%) or emotionally damaged by earlier sexual abuse (up to 70%). http://en.wikipedia.org... Hidden drug use or medical problems make the medical risks of early teen pregnancy greater. The emotional wreckage and life disruption may be severe and unwarranted. In poor countries, adoption may not be an option, and, sadly, in the US unwanted children are often kept and poorly raised. Families should have the right to come to their own resolution that is best for circumstances, and the abortion option should be open to them. Abortion pills http://www.plannedparenthood.org... may be the least traumatic. It shouldn't be a government decision.
Christianity is a false Religion

I thank Kohai for this debate. And I thank my Father in heaven for giving us his Word through the prophets and finally through Christ, and for giving his worshipers his Spirit to give us understanding. In this debate I will endeavor to show that:"Failed prayers" do nothing to show the falsity of Christianity.Division amongst Christians does not prove Christianity to be false, and, while lamentable, is to be expected if Christianity is correct.I will endeavor to address the issues of so-called contradictions, failed prophecies, scientific inaccuracies, and historical mistakes.