BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
The Resurrection of Jesus

I accept.Definitions:I believe it is always important to ensure that both parties in a debate are using the same meanings of words. Since my opponent did not provide any definitions, I have provided some here. The dictionary I have used is thefreedictionary.com. Anyway, the definitions:Jesus- A teacher and prophet whose life and teachings form the basis of Christianity. Christians believe Jesus to be Son of God and the Christ. Resurrection- a supposed act or instance of a dead person coming back to life.Dead- Having lost life; no longer aliveHistorical events can be broken down to History- A usually chronological record of events, as of the life or development of a people or institution, often including an explanation of or commentary on those events.andEvents- Something that takes place; an occurrence.I look forward to an enjoyable debate.
The Resurrection of Jesus

I will take the position that the hypothesis that Jesus rose from the dead is the most likely hypothesis concerning the historical events pertaining to that time period. I bear the burden to support the above. Con will bear the burden to support that Jesus' resurrection is not the best hypothesis or that it did not happen. Both of us bear the burden of responding to each's claims. Round 1 is for acceptance only. Round 5 is for summarizing why each believes their position to be the most correct. No new arguments are allowed. Responses to Round 4 is allowed.
Pit bulls are too dangerous to be pets and need to be banned to protect children.

Pit bull attacks have exploded in the USA and across the world. Severe injuries to children, elderly, and other animals happens on a daily basis. Pit bulls are the most dangerous breed of dog in the world and need too be banned so our society will be safe. Children deserve a community where they can play on their street with out having too worry about being attacked by a land shark. We need to protect people from pit bulls, and the people who choose too put others at risk.
Should Minecraft be allowed in schools

This is my final post. hope you like it. http://www.dogonews.com... Sweden has to be one of the coolest places for a kid to grow up in - First, they introduced the concept of schools with no grades or classrooms, then came Monstrum's amazing playgrounds and now, the coolest idea of all - 'Forcing' 13-year-olds to play Minecraft as part of the classroom curriculum. The seed for this rather radical idea was planted when the government of Sweden organized a national school competition called 'Future City' for which classrooms were asked to submit their ideas about the kind of structures they envisioned in the Sweden of the future. It was such a success that educators at Stockholm's Viktor Rydberg school decided to continue this 'out of the box' thinking by incorporating Minecraft into the class curriculum for 13-year-students. According to the teachers, the game which challenges kids to use their imagination by building virtual worlds complete with electricity grids, water supply pumps and anything else they would like to see in their future, allows students to think beyond the classroom frontiers. This they believe, will help them make better decisions as adults, especially about things like the environmental impact of their actions. And while it may sound radical to most people they liken it to teaching a woodcraft class - except in this case, all the construction is being conducted in a virtual world. So far, 180, 13-year girls and boys, have participated in this mandatory unit, which not surprisingly has been such a huge hit that the school is planning to make it a permanent addition to their curriculum. It of course augments, not replaces, core subjects like math and science. The educators say that even parents who were a little apprehensive about their kids playing video games at school, are now on board and fully support this decision. We wonder if any school in the US would even consider such a drastic curriculum addition - And how parents would react.
Should Minecraft be allowed in schools

Sorry if you guys think this is long , I'm getting the juicy info here: http://theedublogger.com... What is MinecraftEdu? According to the MinecraftEdu website: MinecraftEdu is the collaboration of a small team of educators and programmers from the United States and Finland. We are working with Mojang AB of Sweden, the creators of Minecraft, to make the game affordable and accessible to schools everywhere. We have also created a suite of tools that make it easy to unlock the power of Minecraft in YOUR classroom. The Big Question" Could MinecraftEdu represent the start of a new approach to learning, mixing something the students enjoy, and perhaps already use outside of school, with an educational environment to teach via gaming? (That"s a long question, feel free to comment on any part of it!) With a following of over 12.5 million registered Minecraft players, it"s no surprise that many of the student blogs on the Edublogs network see regular traffic to their posts about the game. But, as an example of the impact the game is having on youngsters on our network, and how MinecraftEdu is already being used by many, I thought it would be good to highlight some of the Minecraft related posts from our network of teacher blogs who are already using the MinecraftEdu package http://learningstarts.org... Minecraft edu can be used to study: Geology: Students used Minecraft"s "survival mode" to dig for rocks and minerals (identifying types and uses along the way). They also created virtual worlds with landforms studied in their class curriculum. Plants and Animals: Students planted melon and wheat seeds for food and used bone meal (from skeletons!) as fertilizer--something some kids didn"t know about in real life. Engineering: Projects like "Ancient Metropolis" and the "Bedrock Dome" took players well beyond building basic survival shelters, teaching them elaborate architectural and civil engineering concepts. Math: Students used Minecraft to determine volume, area, perimeter, patterns, and more. For example: they calculated angles for characters shooting arrows at targets
Should Minecraft be allowed in schools

One of the things on debate is if minecraft, or more specifically minecraftEdu, should be allowed in schools. According to the edublogger, there's a lot of things available -Teach students in a way they will find fun and engaging -Get your students excited about their History class, or their Social Studies class, or virtually any other subject, by hosting the class in a virtual Minecraft World -MinecraftEdu provides great flexibility for customizing the student experience to your subject/course material -MinecraftEdu provides controls to prevent your students running amok and straying off course -Many students will already be familiar with Minecraft, reducing the learning curve -Minecraft worlds and projects created by other teachers are already available to download and use, making implementation easy and cutting down course planning time -Setup and installation is easy, and the load on your IT resources is easily manageable -Did we mention it"s fun and the students will love it? http://theedublogger.com...
Mike Huckabee is an egoist

Your argument hinges on the fact that the religious right would become disenfranshised by Huckabee's dropping out. Everyone voting for Huckabee is, or should be, well and aware of the mathematical impossiblity of him winning. The party is well aware of the religious right as evidenced by McCain's floundering for their support and the constant focus of party nominees to appeal to religous and social conservatives. Huckabee staying in further contrasts him as the religious candidate to McCain. This makes McCain less and less appealing to the religious sect of the party. Transitively, he loses support in the general, which he needs desperately. I realize that Huckabee's delegates need to be sent to the convention, but them not going has little ramification in the face of further drawing the party divide, which Huckabee staying in does. The religious right is a main part of the party. That is undeniable. Showing how McCain isn't appealing to them is all Huckabee is doing by drawing distinctions. Finally, why Huckabee? Why don't all candidates with decent delegate numbers do this if it is so critical? Romney had more delegates and had larger conservative support than Huck when he dropped out. If delegates were more critical than advancing the party in the election, why don't all candidates do what Huckabee is doing? Edwards for instance, was extremely passionate about his cause. Why not stay in in order to send his delegates? In order to win the election McCain needs to appeal to the religious base. Huckabee standing there in contrast simply points out McCain's flaws and makes winning less likely. Huckabee is trying to keep his name in the press in the hopes of a VP bid, though unlikely. Or, Huckabee is simply using this as a launch for next time or further political career moves.
Mike Huckabee is an egoist

I don't like explaining this, because I've never really considered myself as a party insider, and at the ripe young age of 24 it's a bit early to start thinking that way. My friends are all busy being "activists" and playing X-Box, and people call me to tell me I should run for U.S. House. National conventions decided a whole lot more than your nation's president. It's where the national platform is constructed and ratified. In Iowa we have an open caucus system, which you detest, so I've actually been on platform committees at all levels of our party except for the national level. You'd be amazed at the type of stuff that people try to force off of the platform, or in some cases force onto the platform. Due to the energy that arises from the Presidential race, the national convention years usually bring about a whole lot more involvement than in non-presidential years. So, if you want to change your party, do it in a so called "off year." While it is very unlikely Mike Huckabee will be the President of the United States, the man is turning out a membership of the Republican party that would have no reason to turn out for McCain. By remaining in the race, he's allowing for the "Religious Right" to remain active in the party. He's allowing for his constituencies to remain involved in the party, and to influence the party. This is actually good for your party. The religious right is a large portion of your turnout in several states that are key to a Republican victory. If you choose a candidate that does not reflect their values, then completely minimize their influence in the party, there's really not a whole lot of reason for them to turn out. If the religious right abstains from this election as a point of protest because the national platform isn't strong enough on their issues, the election will be handed to the Democrats and there will be no hope of reestablishing the Reagan Coalition of Conservatives and your party will have to be redefined again. Mike Huckabee staying in the race is not only about himself, its actually good for the Republicans in the long term. Mike Huckabee has to stay in the race because 34% of the delegates to the county conventions in the state of Iowa need to be able to form into a Huckabee preference group and have at least 15% of the county delegates to send delegates to the state. If Huckabee drops out, guess what - those folks don't get to be delegates. He needs to stay in the race until at least July to ensure that the religious right that backed him can send their delegates to the national convention to ensure that they don't feel ignored by the party, and that their leadership doesn't decide to prove a point by not supporting the Republican nominee in the election to show how vital they are to the party. What Mike Huckabee is doing is actually quite noble, and serves the Republican interests much more than people shouting for him to drop out. If you want to win this election, if you want to win any election, you need him to stay in the race.
Mike Huckabee is an egoist

Your right, there is a constituency for Mike Huckabee. This doesn't mean that he needs to stay in the race for some arbitrary reason. While I agree that it is unlikely that Huckabee recieves the VP bid from McCain. I do think that either the is disillusioned to this fact or that he is simply continuing to push his own political career. Your point would be valid if there voice wasn't already lost. It is IMPOSSIBLE for Huckabee to win. With Romney backing McCain and encouragin his delegates to do the same, that puts McCain a handful of delegates away from winning outright. The continuation of Huckabee's campaign is damaging to McCain's general election campaign, making it harder for Huckabee's supporters to get their voice out through a less representative median (mccain). While it may seem that Huckabee is sticking it out for his folks, he is damaging their hopes of having even the most terrible of Republicans in office. He is certainly aware that there is NO CHANCE of winning the presidency and that he is injury the party at this point. Thus, Romney attempts to deal the death knell in the hopes of giving at least a republican of some sort a chance. To sum, Huckabee staying in is actually damaging to his constituency. He is aware of this, as it is all over the news and has to routinely refute it. Thus, Huckabee's only motivation is one of personal or professional gain.
Mike Huckabee is an egoist

From our last debate, I gathered the impression that you really don't appreciate Mike Huckabee. I personally do not like Mike Huckabee either, but I don't think he is staying in the race to serve himself. I hope you will excuse this long, and round about way of making the point I want to make. I spent an awful lot of time with a Senator who is near the end of his seventh term during his bid for the Presidency. During both speeches and in private, the man always spoke with candor. His honesty with himself, and his honesty with the public is one of the few reasons why after 35 years in the Senate, he and his wife still bring home an income of less than 300,000 a year while she teaches full time at a University, and he teaches a weekend class at the University of Delaware. In the time he spent with me he did as much as he could to confer one lesson. To the point where he would defend Barack Obama from my own slander. These people mean well. They might be doing things that we judge to be terrible, incompetent, or self serving, but in most of their minds they believe that they are doing good things for good reasons. Governor Huckabee likely thinks that he is doing good things. He is not staying in the race to serve himself, he's staying in the race to serve his supporters. You complained in a past debate that Iowa gave him an unfair advantage, and I remarked that only 34% of Iowan Republicans supported him. He's staying in the race for that 34%. The Coalition that used to define the Republican party is going through some massive upheavals at the moment. McCain does garner the support of a large portion of the coalition. Those that have based their views off of their religion typically find themselves supporting Huckabee. If Huckabee drops out, they'll lose their voice. A funny thing happens to the closest supporters of a Presidential candidate when they drop out. Momentarily they lose hope. Hope in the system, hope in their country, and hope for the future. If someone knows that the candidate that they love and adore is considering dropping out, that supporter will do just about anything to convey how important that the candidate remains a candidate. At this moment in the Republican Party, Mike Huckabee is the candidate of the religious fundamentalists. He is the center of that movement, which is something I'm sure he is aware of. If they wish to have a voice in their party, they need to show their strength. The way to do that is through Mike Huckabee. While it might be mathematically impossible for Huckabee to become the nominee through at the moment, Mike Huckabee can stop John McCain from receiving a majority and force the convention to technically be open, and force the Republican party to give his supporters a voice. Mike Huckabee isn't doing this for himself, he is doing it for his supporters. He is doing what any decent politician tries to do, he is serving his people. I'd be very surprised if he gets a VP nod. If that happens, someone is trying desperately to keep the Republican Coalition together.
Mike Huckabee is an egoist

Mike Huckabee is acting in his own interest by staying in the race. There is now no mathematical chance of him winning the nomination. Huckabee not dropping out proves he is simply staying in the race to either gain a VP bid with McCain, or further his own political career. The concept of a brokered convention is out of the question. Huckabee is nearly as unpopular as McCain and no party will ignore the massively higher amount of delegates that McCain has amassed in comparison. Please, anyone give me a reason that Huckabee is staying in other than to toot his own horn.
TELANGANA State Formation

Thank you for posting your next argument. What I have been arguing the whole time has been that you made an absolute statement. In your first argument all you said was, "Even if TELANGANA STATE forms, its government collapses within a year and will want to hookup with HYDERABAD REGION & ANDHRA STATE to survive POLITICALLY AND FINANCIALLY" That was your opinion; you gave me nothing to debate off of. It was, and still is, a little hard to understand what your resolution is. You should have said, ‘The Telangana State Formation is a bad idea.' Or, ‘If the Telangana State Formation happens, then the government will most likely collapse within a year.' Realizing that you did not clarify where you stood and what you meant, I had to find something I could debate off of. I have already said my argument, though I shall say it again. The point of a debate is to negate the other persons resolution. So here is your resolution, "If Telangana State forms, its government collapses within a year and …WILL… want to hookup with Hyderabad Region & Andhra State to survive politically and financially." You made an absolute statement. That means you know 100% that the government will collapse within a year and join the Hyderabad region & Andhra State. You do not know for sure that this will happen, there are so many things that could happen that would prevent this. You, being a human, can not know everything there is to know in the world. Your resolution has already been negated. Thank you. Sources: (1). http://dictionary.reference.com...
TELANGANA State Formation

Thank you for posting your next argument. There is not much that I need say, so my argument will be brief. My opponent has so far based his argument off of what has happened in the past. This is very wrong. It is like saying that since the United States voted Republican last time that there will be a Republican voted next time. My Opponent has also said, "However, arguing that 'it wont be that way in the future' has no Solid Proof." No where in my argument did I say that it won't be. I am not trying to prove that. My argument is that you have no proof that it will be, thereby negating your resolution. Concerning what I said about comments, my argument still stands on that matter. If there were comments I could post one of me saying why it would not happen. You should remember to check the websites that you are using as a source. As of this moment you have still failed to provide any real proof. Even with all the things that you listed, you are still not 100% sure that if Telangana State forms its government will want to hook up with Hyderabad region & Andhra State to survive politically and financially. You have failed to provide me with any sources. For all I know, the Hyderabad region could not exist. For example, I could make a debate like this, "Resolved, Fillterian, and The Snosh Empire will start a war with the Belltors if the Belltor villagers continue to dig on Fillterrian property." I could then list reasons why, "1. In 1837 The Snosh agreed to The Belltors peace treaty if the Belltors would stay off the Snosh's land. 2. The Fillterians are allies with the Snosh. 3. The Snosh would greatly profit from the Belltors treasures if the Belltors were overthrown. 4. Fillterians have an agreement with the Snosh that they will split what ever land is conquered. (This treaty is similar to the Fillterian's and Sletic's treaty.) " I could then give a link that does not work "If you want to see how everything will play out, here is the site: http://www.Fillterianswarzone.com.... " I am not saying that everything you say is a lie, but what I am saying is that you need to provide me with some proof of everything you are saying. Thank you, I look forward to your next argument. Sources: (1). http://dictionary.reference.com...
TELANGANA State Formation

Thank you for starting this... debate. My opponent has failed to say exactly where he stands. I am assuming he is against the Telangana State Formation. My opponent claims that if Telangana State forms its government will want to "hook up" with Hyderabad region & Andhra State to survive politically and financially. My opponent has made an absolute statement when he said "will." He has absolutely no solid proof that the government will want to do this, yet he still says they do. He invites people to read other's video comments. There are two things wrong with that, 1.Comment can be made by anyone. Someone who knows what is happening, and someone who knows nothing on the matter. 2.His link is to an empty domain that says nothing on the matter of The Telangana State Formation. My opponent's argument is weak and poorly structured. Thank you. Sources: (1). http://www.telangana.org... (2). http://www.chompchomp.com...
the electoral college should be abolished

It is the parties responsibility to gain the support of the people. People choose the party that bests fits there views. To say that Republicans are having an unfair advantage is 1) an assumption that all rural voters vote republican which you have presented no evidence saying this and actually in 2012 democrats won 8 million rural votes while republicans won 12 million, while 4 million is a lot we can see that democrats can win rural voters. in 2008 democrats won 10.5 million while republicans won 13 million. THis shows that if the democratic party does its job and appeals to voters it can get votes in rural america. 2) saying that the electoral college is flawed because of this, when actually the democratic party does not support policies that rural voters like. It is up to the parties to gain support and the democratic party has to work to gain support of rural voters. Also everything previous has gone uncountered so extend those arguments and evidence http://www.dailyyonder.com...