BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Abortion

No, these are human rights, one only has to be a human for them to apply, if you were to test a fetus's genetics, you will find that they are humans. And no, this cannot be used to say that women have the right to infanticide, it grants life, liberty, and property, never the right to infanticide. Ad telling women that they, like every other member of soicioty, are not allowed to murder other human beings for pleasure, is not saying that they are inferior. What people need to understand is that it is no skin off the womens constitutional rights to be denied the 'right' to murder their children, it is harmfull toward the child to murder it.
Abortion

Oh when you challenged to a debate on abortion I did not realise you wanted to limit the scope to the US. However that should not effect my response as Harry has given me something to read and ponder though as I have no knowledge of the constitution I may misstep. Fantastic argument, I take it the persons referenced would be alive. Living, breathing, cognitive? That's who it seems to have been written to protect. Without mention of the foetus its impossible to infer much and hard for you to tack it onto abortion then say 'see'. Besides I could use the same amendment as a protection of the woman's right of access to abortion if I were being flippant. If you are advocating a total ban on all abortion no matter what the circumstances and life to be at conception please state it as you have been unclear on the boundaries you are working by and want me to argue against. I state that it is a woman's right to abortion. We can set parameters that are agreed but that right is fundamental. Banning has never stopped abortion and rather than force women to term, which you would have to do to eliminate the procedure, progressive societies protect the rights of the woman first and foremost. To not do so is to tell half of the human race that they are inferior to the other half which is ridiculous.
Abortion

The fifth amendment to the constitution says:"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."According to this clause, the fundamental human rights of life, liberty, and property should not be infringed without due process of law, last I checked, the woman is not Judge, Jury, and executioner, an abortion clinic is not a court of law, and "it's my body" isn't a legitimate violation to constitute the death penalty. Thus, abortion ought to be banned.
PC gaming is better than console gaming

So you think PC gaming is more popular?Is that why every day when I go to school, all I can hear about are consoles and console gaming? Is that why there are only a few in my year who actually PC game? Furthermore, most youtubers play games on consoles, which shows they have a like towards console gaming. Also, most professional gaming is done on console, e.g Cod, with PC only having Dota, LoL and Csgo as its mainstream professionally played games. Yes I have a two year old PC which was good for its time, now I hear i can't run any decent game as my graphics card is too low, if I had a console I wouldn't have this problem as it would last me quite a long time. "PC gaming is a lot more cost effective" No not really. You buy a console, you buy games for it, and you can leave it at that. Playing online is your choice, and has the requirement that you have to pay for it. With PC, you have to pay to upgrade parts to make sure you can run new games, making it a big hassle. You seem to like to overdramatise things by claiming how console gaming costs 900$. That's you deciding to make it sound so extreme when the reality is that it's a lot more cheaper than PC gaming. My graphics card is currently considered outdated and apparently it'll cost me 200$ to get a decent one. Hey 200$? I can get a used good condition console with that can't I. Console gaming also way more comfortable. You get the luxury of being on your sofa, and on a TV making the gaming way more real and exciting than PC which is limited. And don't go telling me you can get screens next to eachover for PCs because then you might as well go bankrupt. The point goes is that console is cheaper, more exciting, more comfortable. You also have a higher chance that your friends play on the console too than on the PC. Even more, everyone famous on YouTube mainly console games, for the reason it's just so much better and has a better feeling, from the controller to the controls itself. I hope the opposition can stop focusing on the money aspect of both aspects, as if you check your sources right and use a bit of logic, PC gaming can be much more expensive
PC gaming is better than console gaming

Rebuttals: "Console gaming is by far the most popular way of gaming in this day and age." But that's where you're wrong. Combined PS4 and Xbox sales is about 60,000,000, but steam, the most popular PC gaming software, has about 125,000,000 active users. So console gaming isn't more popular. "PC ages and grows older." I currently have a 500 dollar 2 year old Toshiba Satellite C50-A that has about 4 gigs of ram and 1.91 ghz. I can run Life is Strange, Tomb Raider, Dragon Age, Mass Effect, Smite and Skyrim on high graphics without a hitch. You don't need to update your graphics card every day. That's a choice by people who like to run their stuff on Ultra (which you can't do on a console). Arguments: PC gaming is a lot more cost effective. When you get let's say an Xbox One not only do you have to pay for the price of the console, but you also have to pay for the online features plus ridiculous price of games. Using steam as an example again there is no extra cost the only things you pay for are the games. The price difference between games is also unreal. If you wait for a Steam sale which is 4 times a year or you catch a mid-week or weekend sale you're likely to get your game for under 10 dollars. I payed 6 dollars for Skyrim and 8 dollars for Mass Effect 1 and 2 together during midweek sales. Even during big sales like Black Friday I only saw Skyrim only dip a little in price with a usual cost of 60 dollars. PC gaming has a lot more variety. A lot of console gamers bring up exclusives during any argument about PC vs Console, but the fact is we have exclusives too. World of Warcraft, League of Legends, DOTA, Smite, Undertale, Team Fortress, Firewatch, and most indie games. With things like Steam Greenlight it enables so many indies devs to create games without having ins with Microsoft or Sony meaning a lot of indie games i.e. Undertale that become really famous originate from PC. Thus we have a lot more stuff. Whereas with consoles you go to the store and you just see a bunch of mainstream stuff you've already played before and a new title here and there with Steam you have millions of things to choose from 1. 274 billion to be exact. You will never not have a game to play. Console Exclusives Basically the above argument cont. The fact is if you're involved in the console wars or don't have the money to put in 900+ dollars for consoles you only have the games from your specific console. This means when they're are exclusives on the other parties side you miss out. Whereas with Origin(EA), PSN and the Xbox app in Win 10 (and PirateBay if you're down). You can play games from all mediums with only one device. No limits.
PC gaming is better than console gaming

Console gaming is by far the most popular way of gaming in this day and age. It has many aspects that make it easy to use and an ideal buy and I'm going to start with the flexibility of it. A console can go on YouTube, bbc I player and various other apps and surf the Internet. One might be thinking, but hey a PC can do that too can't it? And yes it can, but for every game that comes out daily, your PC ages and grows older. How? Well, as we all know technology is always growing, and games are always looking to get the best graphics possible. This means the better graphics a game gets, the higher specs your PC needs in order to run it. Now you are probably thinking, is this guy mad just upgrade your PC. Well, graphics cards come out on a regular basis and are extremely expensive. I buy a graphics card now, in two years that graphics card can only run the oldest of games and is considered trash. So a PC is expensive to have for gaming in the long run. A console however, is built in such a unique way it can run essentially any game, yet it is so much cheaper than a custom gaming PC that goes to the price tag of 2K+$. The PS3 and Xbox360 can still even now run the newest of games without any trouble. Thanks for listening. In the second round I will be clashing the opposition's points and be talking about the more gamer's perspective of both sides.
PC gaming is better than console gaming

Oh how amusing , you didn't forfeit. Rebuttals: Your assumption point is extremely far fetched because your assuming way too much. This a site where people accept debates of all sorts whether they may agree with it or not. "That is the first time you actually said anything that I can legitimately cannot rebut. Slow clap. " You have nothing to say but you attempt to merge with some sarcasm just so it doesn't go down too hard on your end, nice try. Your argument about how Xbox and ps4 are counted as one is extremely dumb. Unless your rich or you have a legitimate reason, you only buy one console, either Ps or Xbox. That yet again, is like me saying I have to pay 2000$ on PCs, 1500$ for my gaming PC and 500$ for my Casual PC, it's not logical and it doesn't work right? So your idea of merging Xbox and ps into one and claiming its 900$ is manipulating the whole idea of purchasing a console because NO ONE BUYS TWO CONSOLES unless they have a proper reason. Damn, most youtubers even don't have two consoles. Never once in your opening debate did you mention anything about not talking about 'used' items so therefore I can and will use the point of used consoles. And you keep bringing on the prices of Xbox one and ps4 not the Xbox 360 or ps4 which is evidently because you want to boast about how apparently expensive console gaming is. If you just want to use the prices of the most newest and expensive consoles, fine I'll do it too. Fun fact: If you want to buy a PC with the newest parts it will cost you 3000$. The rest of your rebuttals are off topic so I won't bother wasting my time on those. Ladies and gentleman, I thank you for listening to my first debate. I would also thank the opposition, but they got salty so I won't congratulate him/her.
PC gaming is better than console gaming

Rebuttals: "your points are really repetitive" My points are repetitive because your points are repetitive. I'm here rebutting your same three points over and over again. "nearly all subjects (including English)" Same here. "console peasant but that's the immature behaviour that starts these silly arguments, I used to own a console and that was 5 years ago, I only have a PC steam. " That was an assumption because that's what any person with a brain would think considering you accepted a debate in which you were defending console over PC. I am actually appalled you said this because the way you argue it seems you haven't even looked at a computer before. "PC being uncomfortable I simply stated that being on a sofa is evidently more comforTable." That is the first time you actually said anything that I can legitimately cannot rebut. Slow clap. "you claim it takes 900$ to buy a console which is absolutely wrong, PS3 used would cost 100$ probably, and ps4 would cost 300." All of my statements are if you are going to buy or make it brand new not with used items. Also I am using PS4 and Xbox one in my arguments. I saw a website which said an Xbox One was 500 and a PS4 was 400 it was from three years ago sorry about that. Currently according to Walmart.ca you can get an Xbox one for 319.96 and a PS4 for 499.96 added up equals 819.92 which can be rounded off to 800 dollars so I'm about 100 off, but that is still significantly more than if you were to build a gaming PC that can run GTA 5 for roughly $500. http://www.forbes.com... In which you can play PS4 games and Xbox games without having to buy both. And I just got The Last of us on PC which proves that yes you can do that. If you can't find it on the Xbox app or PSN that's where Utorrent comes in. "I'm starting to find it difficult to read half the stuff your saying, and you happen to insult my English...tut tut that's hypocritical good sir." I thought you were going to say that. My spell check is going off with basically most of your quotes. In that argument I made before I didn't double check didn't even glance over it. I was seeing red, what do you expect? All my other arguments I personally apologize if you see errors in there because I actually double check those. "I'm meant to be a 14 year old teenager and I happen to have more maturity than them." I'm actually not too far off from you. I actually am normally mature far more than my age, but I can't control anger issues sorry. I also love how you missed all my other points, but if you're willing I'd love a rematch. I have so many points I didn't address and I promise to keep my cool this time. It'd also give you a chance to prove me wrong in anything. No new arguments in the next round please. Just rebuttals.
PC gaming is better than console gaming

As a person who PC games, I have a lot of experience with gaming PCs and steam. Yes I play on steam on a regular basis. At the moment you are being really immature and childish, your points are really repetitive but still incorrect and now you've decided to call me an "idiot" , insulted my English, when I happen to be top of my class for nearly all subjects (including English), I'm in the middle of exams and you don't see me turning into some angry King Kong. You call me console peasant but that's the immature behaviour that starts these silly arguments, I used to own a console and that was 5 years ago, I only have a PC steam. I never said anything about PC being uncomfortable I simply stated that being on a sofa is evidently more comforTable. Again you claim it takes 900$ to buy a console which is absolutely wrong, PS3 used would cost 100$ probably, and ps4 would cost 300. If you buy a whole bunch of games with it we may be pushing the 500 mark but nowhere near going towards 900$. And your comment about "both platforms" was already said before so you are essentially copying and pasting useless points. Also I nearly forgot to mention, please use full grammar and correctly written vocab, I'm starting to find it difficult to read half the stuff your saying, and you happen to insult my English...tut tut that's hypocritical good sir. Overall, I'm keeping my cool even though the opposition is being extremely rude and immature. I'm meant to be a 14 year old teenager and I happen to have more maturity than them. Even with all the ranting the opposition is doing, I'm still making sure to keep my cool and provide valid and logical points unlike him/her. I hope you do forfeit the next rounds as I find your attitude appalling. :)
PC gaming is better than console gaming

I can't even have a formal argument anymore. Screw it. Did you even read half of what said? I said and I quote "Basically the above argument cont. The fact is if you're involved in the console wars or don't have the money to put in 900+ dollars for consoles you only have the games from your specific console. This means when they're are exclusives on the other parties side you miss out. Whereas with Origin(EA), PSN and the Xbox app in Win 10 (and PirateBay if you're down). You can play games from all mediums with only one device. No limits. " Meaning that you can get exclusives from both platforms without having to get both. Read my argument. I spend over an hour making them. For what purpose I don't know. To squabble with an illiterate five year old perhaps. I can run games. . https://postimg.org... This from tomb raider. No it is not a jumbled mass of pixels because PC. Yes 300 dollars I said a little over 200. This is 300 . http://www.toptengamer.com... This is 200 . http://www.toptengamer.com... "Well that's not including the keyboard and mouse. " You shout at the computer te current gaming mouse have right noew cost me 12 dollars on amazon. Is oing into it's 2nd year going on strong. . https://www.amazon.ca... Here is a 12 dollar keyboard because you don't need a beastly keyboard to play games. You can get these cheaper used. Most people already have office chairs as well which are comfortable. Don't use a kitchen chair. I can sit in my chair for hours and be fine. I like how that when I make a statement. I'm "ranting" when you do the same it's just good debating skills. Do you even Steam? Most of the non AAA games I can run. Even half of the AAA games I can run so far I have never had a problem. You act like every game is GTA 5. If you have ever used a computer you would know that is not the case. I can't even with you anymore. Exams are coming I'm already stressed why did I think it was a good idea to paricipate in a debate with a console peasant who fails to rebutt any of my good points and when he does he seems to fall short of anything noteworthy. At this point I'm done. Vote for con, report me, delete my account I'm done. P. S. I said first round is for acceptance yet you put your argument there. Another example of how you fail to understand simple English. I'm actually curious to see how you respond but chances are I'm gonna forfeit the next few rounds.
PC gaming is better than console gaming

Rebuttal: "My settings are way below the minimum requirements yet I still play all of them with no lag" So you will be willing to go through all that de-graphitising, to play a game which now has no quality to it. With console you don't have this annoyance, you buy a game and you can play it, there is no worry about whether or not you can run it. "talking about if you got both a Playstation AND an Xbox" Who the hell gets two consoles if they are on a budget? If you are going to use silly examples like this and then manipulate it , I'm going to say PCs cost 2000$ alone, one for casual, and one for gaming. It doesn't work does it? So stop using snidy examples like that. "And for a bit more than 200 dollars you can make a PC for scratch much longer than that used console will last you and way after it's irrelevant." I'm a bit speechless, how on earth can you make a PC with 200$ and expect it to run decent stuff? Yes maybe it will run csgo on the lowest graphics possible, just maybe. With a used console you can run the best of games no trouble with lag or whatnot. You then rant on about how apparently you will have to buy furniture to sit on for 500$. By sofa, I think you and I both know I mean things we sit on daily and use on a daily basis. I'm sure my parents didn't buy a sofa just to game on, they bought it to relax and be a part of their normal living room. You also claim there are more options with PC. This is overwhelming however, when you buy a console, you know it will work on any game, new or old. You don't know this for PC however, so people underpay and get a trashy PC that doesn't work on many games, or they really overpay just to make sure they get a PC that can run stuff. I'm going to leave this and this, as I believe a lot of my points have been merged with my rebuttle.
Contender chooses topic

Umm... I don't know what this has to do with video games... Nevertheless I will debate it. Since my opponent has refused to argue in the first round he will be able to argue in round 5. 1. Learning Homework is a great tool for learning. It lets the student learn at home and get ready for the next day. Some people think "just teach it at school!" Remember that teachers are humans too. Teachers are already burdened with meetings and classes. They have to teach what they can in the short time period in class. How are they supposed to know that the kid understood what they were teaching? Homework. When the kids bring it home they need to use the tools they learned in class to answer. If the kids were listening and paying attention it should be easy, nothing to complain about. However, if the kid was goofing off or spacing out during the class, the homework would be quite the challenge. Homework can also make sure that the kids learn and know the material. 2. Judging Teachers, while giving lectures, cannot tell if their students are paying attention or if they are understanding the material. So They need to use that class time to teach the kids, then afterwards, they can give a quiz to work on at home, also known as homework. So what does this have to do with judging? The good kids will return their homework done and well done. And the kids who are not listening will return it not done, or get a lot of them wrong. This lets the teacher know who can get their work done, and who doesn't. So the teacher knows what to do next, or what kids to help. 3. Time Teachers have a schedule and they have to follow it. They only have so much class time. They have so much to teach, but they have to spread it out throughout the year, otherwise they might get overworked. The last thing they need is a quiz cutting into their precious class time, which they could be using to teach something else. Tests are ok, since those are for grades and they are required. But quizzes are for the teacher to see how people are doing. Instead, they give quizzes to do at home, also known as homework. This give the teacher more time to teach, so they don't get over worked. Plus, the kids learn more in class, since a lot of the quizzes are done at home.
Armed Force War: United States vs Any Country

Unfortunately this is not an "Armed Force" war between armies because as you said yourself in your very first line: "This is an armed force war debate, in which any country of your choice fights my nation (the United States) in a war." Therefore -according to rules- this debate never intended to be a war fought solely between armies; by implying "nation vs nation," and not "armies vs armies" directly, you unintentionally invoked gross national powers into this debate: including economic and diplomatic power. I have won this debate. Saudi Arabia remains sovereign and the US has ceased armed hostilities. Please vote Con. And as a kind future reference to Pro: please title future debates as: My Army vs Your Army and NOT My Country vs Your Country.
Armed Force War: United States vs Any Country

This is technically a "Chess match" situation; it is an ARMED FORCE war, nothing else. I expect military responsiveness. An ARMED FORCE war, not a NATION war; therefore, these economic arguments are void. I will re-challenge you to a CHESS MATCH situation in the next debate, followed by a proper WAR discussion with economic standpoints. Thus, let this debate be void for lack of proper argument.