BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Chewing gums should be allowed in schools.

While as you say that gum chewing improves test scores for those chewing, but for those beside those chewing it will lower test scores. The student not chewing will be forced to listen to the other chewing the gum, unable to do anything about it because they are taking a test. Therefore, by allowing gum chewing to go on in schools, test scores are neither increasing nor decreasing, but remaining the same. Thus, there is no benefit for it there. When sitting in class students do not usually have the opportunity or, in some cases, the proper manners to ask the student to dispose properly of the gum. And I have never personally heard or heard from others, of teachers calling a student out for chewing gum. As for the placement of gum under and on objects besides trashcans, have you ever stuck your hand in gum? Chances are that you have. Everyone has at one point or another. The fact is that students do not get out of their seat to properly dispose of their gum, they stick it under desks. If gum were not stuck under desks then scrapping the gum off of the desks would not be a form of punishment for students for various reasons. In the country of Singapore Chewing Gum has been banned. This is a true example of how gum can be banned altogether. Below is an article about the punishment for being caught chewing the gum. The article proves that if banning gum in a country is possible then it is most definitely possible in schools. Chewing gum laws in Singapore explained (for you foreigners) Bert '07 (Bert lives in Singapore, (http://indianstallion.blogspot.com...) "You will be prosecuted for chewing gum trafficking if you try to smuggle more than 1 kg of chewing gum through customs. The rationale is that you can't obviously be bringing in 1kg for personal consumption. The punishment for chewing gum trafficking is up to 1 year in prison and/or 5 strokes of the cane. If you are caught dealing chewing gum in Singapore the sentence is similar, and is even harsher if you are caught dealing to minors. However, in most cases, if you co-operate with the authorities and reveal your suppliers you might get off with a significantly lighter sentence. After all, they would rather nab the big syndicates then a small time dealer. You might even have to go assist in covert operations so that they can catch the syndicates in the act. The type of chewing gum you are caught with also determines your sentence, Wrigley's peppermint gum carries the heaviest sentence because it's the hardest to remove from park benches, roads and other public amenities. However, it is also the gum that sells for the most on the black market, so it's the most lucrative as well."
Chewing gums should be allowed in schools.

How can "Chewing gums should be allowed in schools." a very broad topic. It is a very simple topic. I believe that gum being allowed in schools is several things; distractive and unsanitary. Distractive When a student is in class taking a test and the person beside of them is chewing gum, the student taking the test becomes distracted. This is because chances are the gum chewer is not at all chewing, but is smacking their gum. A gum smacker is not only distractive, but is annoying. Therefore, the test taker is now distracted and annoyed, thus their test score is lower. Unsanitary Gum being allowed in school is unsanitary because of the simple fact that people do not know how to throw it in the trashcan when they are finished with it. Instead of using a trashcan to dispose of their gum, they use the underside of their chair, desk, walls, or the floor. The next class period a new student come to sit by that wall at the desk, in the chair. Then they drop their pencil in the gum on the floor. Next they go to scoot their chair back up to the desk and stick their fingers in the gum under the chair. And to bring it all together they lean their head against the wall (now their is gum in their hair) and jump (now their is gum on their knee). I realize that my arguments are based on hypothetical cases, however they can and have happened to real people in real everyday cases. Thus, gum should not be allowed in schools!
"Reality Is Mental" Is A More Rational Proposition Than Its Negation

I would like to first propose a definition or two. "Consciousness is the quality or state of awareness, or, of being aware of an external object or something within oneself. "And I shall essentially be arguing for materialism. "Materialism is a form of philosophical monism which holds that matter is the fundamental substance in nature, and that all phenomena, including mental phenomena andconsciousness, are the result of material interactions. "Back to pro. I'm sure this will be vigorous and enlightening. Good luck! :)[1] . http://en.wikipedia.org...[2] . http://en.wikipedia.org...
"Reality Is Mental" Is A More Rational Proposition Than Its Negation

The burden of proof will be shared. I must show that Monistic Idealism is more rational than the view that there is a non-mental aspect of reality (such as Dualism or Physicalism). My opponent must show that it is more rational to believe in a non-mental aspect of reality than Monistic Idealism. The first round is just for acceptance. Good luck :)
Which is better Halo Combat Evolve(Pro) or CoD Black Ops II(Con)

"The fourth quarter of 2012 spans October, November, and December, with a multitude of AAA titles releasing during those three months. In anticipation of the busy season, Nielsen did a survey from September 9th " October 6th to see just which games were the most anticipated. They polled over 4,800 men and women gamers from ages 7 " 54, using different metrics such as awareness, purchase interest, and more. Once the study was completed, Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 came out on top, with Assassin"s Creed 3 and Resident Evil 6 a very close second. Seeing Black Ops 2 in first place isn"t too much of a surprise since it will be the top-selling game of the year, but perhaps the biggest shock on this list is that 007 Legends beat out Medal of Honor: Warfighter." -http://www.playstationlifestyle.net... "Jetpacks with rigid wings. Gloves that can adhere to any surface and support your body weight. Advertisements that feature your face when you walk by. The campaign in Call of Duty: Black Ops II has some interesting ideas about the future of technology, but what about the future of this massively popular shooter series? On the one hand, Black Ops II introduces new mission types and dramatic decision points that liven up the campaign, as well as a league play option that represents a fundamental shift in the franchise's hallowed multiplayer mode. On the other hand, the campaign hits the same satisfying rhythms, the multiplayer captures the same frenetic intensity, and the cooperative zombies mode delivers the same stale undead-massacring action. Caught between striving for the future and remaining rooted in the past, Black Ops II finds solid footing, providing another great ride on the Call of Duty rollercoaster.' -http://www.gamespot.com... Black ops 2 had ratings that went above and beyond Combat Evolved. In many reviews it was the most anticipated game of 2012.It also has a good 10 years on the original, and yes the anniversary edition has more up to date graphics, BO2 still has a good year on it or so. Black ops 2 put a spin on the entire call of duty series and was the highest rated game out of all. It also features different enemies seeing as how you have humans and zombies unlike halo where the enemy is spartans (aliens).
Which is better Halo Combat Evolve(Pro) or CoD Black Ops II(Con)

Halo was a huge success it's story was different than all other's in it's time. The story of Sierra 117, John a Spartan, Genetically engineered super soldier. He fight's against the alien nemesis the Covenant for over 20 years. The Story Takes place on the Ring World Halo A large Structure built by the Forerunners to house the Deadly parasitic race; The Flood. John is Tasked to To Destroy the Ring World before it can be activated and launch a deadly pulse with a range of 10,000 light years that kills every living thing that have enough biomass to house the deadly parasite. All while also fighting the Covenant a collection of races hell-bent on destroying all of humanity. It's multiplayer allows 4 people to play split screen or 16 over Live in 13 maps with many weapons and vehicles to add to the mix Plus it's AI was quite sophisticated for it's era, the AI allowed for better more realistic actions such as panicking when a superior is killed diving out the way from vehicles and taking cover from explosives. It's vehicles in the game were a distinct break from normal first-person shooters of it's time allowing players more options for game-play and was widely welcomed and praised http://www.halopedia.org... http://halo.wikia.com...
Which is better Halo Combat Evolve(Pro) or CoD Black Ops II(Con)

Halo Combat Evolve was an amazing game, It was praised by many people as an amazing game "Halo was the main launch title for Xbox and is said to be the game that made the Xbox what it is today. It was widely renowned for saving the fledgling Xbox platform, as the Xbox lacked any titles to compete with Sony's PlayStation 2 or Nintendo's GameCube. Halo became an overnight success and managed to drive the platform from the brink of an early death. It went on to sell 6.43 million copies; in other words, 26% of all Xbox owners also owned Halo.[20][21] It was also critically acclaimed. IGN gave the game a 9.7 out of 10 and stated it to be the best Xbox game of all time. X-Play gave it a perfect 5 out of 5. The game got a perfect ten from EGM, and was 2002 Game of the Year for IGN, EGM, OXM, and AIAS. It got a 9.5 out of 10 from Game Informer, and an average meta-score of 97 out of 100, making it the most highly rated Xbox game of all time. It Also got a score of 9.0 for the PC version and 9.7 for the Xbox version from Gamespot. It was also called the game that reinvented a genre. OXM rated Halo: CE Number 1 in a list of the 100 best games of recent memory, saying "The Xbox did not create Halo, Halo made the Xbox". Everything about the Game was amazing The Audio was praised "Halo's soundtrack was created by Bungie Studios' audio director, Martin O'Donnell, and received a large amount of praise from many critics"
Which is better Halo Combat Evolve(Pro) or CoD Black Ops II(Con)

I believe that Black Ops 2 is better than Halo: Combat Evolved because 1. It is more up to date in graphics. Now Combat Evolved did come out with an anniversary edition in November of 2011 with updated graphics and was expected better than the first release in 2001. Black Ops 2 was released in November of 2012. I feel as though both the Halo and COD series have way too many games in them and are very overhyped, but Black Ops 2 was a twist on the normal call of duty story line. It has better weapons and more of an unpredictable plot than CE and there aren't 5 other games just like it. It is a whole new approach and has more privileges than CE. In my personal opinion, the maps are also quite larger and have more depth to them than the regular ones in CE.
pedophilia (sex)

Please state your definitions with sources. But here is my counter argument. Pedophilia is sexual desire as an adult for children. (Source: http://www.dictionary.com... ) Abuse is to commit sexual assault upon. (Source: http://www.dictionary.com... ) The reason that Pedophilia is illegal is simply that it encourages illegal sex with a victim that cannot fight back in anyway. (A child) Sexual abuse of a child simply because it's one's kink is morally incorrect. As an adult one should be a bit selfless and think of the minor before themselves. Also, say this said child is a girl. If a man were to assault her by vaginal sex, they could potentially harm the child. Children's bodies are still developing, both post and pre-puberty, you could damage her seriously not only mentally but physically. Another important thing to note is that if the girl was able to become pregnant (menstruation) She could become pregnant and during birth could potentially die because she is still growing and developing herself.
pedophilia (sex)

The government has no control on sex and who people can or can not have sex with. Sex has nothing to do with politics. Sex is an natural action that is shown between two or more people. Not a political agenda. So it would not matter what government says, they have no right to control the personal lives of the people. The people are smart enough to think for themselves and the personal lives of the people is not the responsibility of the government nor is it something to be exploited and judged. Anybody can have sex and be perfectly fine. Anybody can have complications. That has nothing to do with age, age does not exist. It has to do with the condition of the person in that time frame. Everybody should have sex and should stop using politics as a excuse to enforce censorship and conservatism on the people.
There are no compelling reasons for the state to legislate in favor of same-sex marriage

Topic: There are no compelling reasons for the state to legislate in favor of same-sex marriage. Same-sex marriage will be understood as the union of two individuals of the same gender in a legally recognized ceremony with all the benefits found in heterosexual marriage. Time: 3 days between posts. If either side needs extra time, he may ask his opponent to wait out his time. Burden of Proof: Both sides share the BOP. Pro must show that there are no compelling reasons for the state to legislate in favor of same-sex marriage, and Con must show that there are. Rounds:1. Terms/acceptance2. Opening Arguments3. Rebuttals4. Rebuttals5. Final rebuttals/conclusionWhat This Debate is NOT Over:1. This is NOT about whether homosexual acts are morally permissible.2. This is NOT about what a religion understands marriage to be.
There are no compelling reasons for the state to legislate in favor of same-sex marriage

Seeing how my opponent has both closed his account and posted forty-five minutes of video in place of his own argument, I see absolutely no need to respond. However, I did watch the last video, and its arguments (Actually, the infertile couple analogy) have been largely addressed in my previous responses. Rauch confuses what marriage is (Conjugal union) with its effects (Children). The traditional conception of marriage is grounded not in procreative type effects, but in procreative type acts as I have previously specified. Rauch's argument therefore fails. Let me thus repeat what I said about sterile couples in my opening argument: Sterile couples are excluded This objection fails to understand the argument. Marriage is not based on the ability of the individual couple to procreate, but on a type of relationship in which procreation is inherently possible to begin with. Males are meant for coupling with females, even if it does not result in procreation all of the time. By contrast, homosexual relationships are such that procreation is impossible in principle. Thus, such relationships cannot qualify as marriages. What matters is thus that an act is procreative in type, not whether it is procreative in effect.
Abortion

Sex isn"t used as just a reproductive process, it"s a way to express love, affection, and loyalty to your significant other. Sometimes a baby is accidentally conceived, in which a woman will have to decide what to do. If abortion is made illegal, then it will be taking away an option. Women should have as much freedom on this topic as they can, as pregnancy is a powerful event in a woman"s life. Abortion doesn"t have to be the only option, adoption or raising the child are still safe paths to go down. But abortion should be made a possibility for those who choose it.
Abortion

Thanks, Pro.Rebuttal"it is unclear whether a fetus is alive or not."This is a common but mistaken line that many pro-choice advocates take. Fetuses are very clearly "alive". I can't imagine something that can grow (as a fetus does) without being alive. Moreover, fetuses are made up of living cells, just as newborns, toddlers, and adult human beings are. There is no fundamental difference in the "life" of a fetus as compared to the "life" of you or I aside from geographic location and developmental stage, neither of which provide justification for the slaughter of innocent human life."Also, crimes such as sexual assault and rape can occur. After these events women may not choose to birth the child, which means that she may need to choose abortion."Does being the victim of one crime provide justification for being the culprit of another? If a stranger came to my house and beat me unconscious, would that then give me the right to go to my neighbor's house, who had nothing to do with the situation, and beat their child unconscious? Certainly not. In the same way, if a woman is raped it does not provide her with justification for killing another innocent human. Furthermore, you again cite abortion as the preferable alternative to the raising of a child whom is a result of rape. Firstly, there are many instances of courageous women who have chosen life for their children after being raped and raise their children to the best of their ability. Second, there is a much healthier alternative to abortion if the women does not wish to raise her child, namely adoption.Argument Against AbortionRecall the argument that I presented in the first round:Premise 1: Murder is wrongPremise 2: The killing of an innocent human is murderPremise 3: A fetus is an innocent humanConclusion: The killing of a fetus is wrongMy opponent has thus far failed to knock down any of the argument's premises. As it stands, then, the argument against abortion is sound.SummaryMy opponent has failed to provide any sort of sound argument or evidence in favor of abortion. Furthermore, my opponent has yet to knock down the argument against abortion that I have presented. I invite my opponent to address my argument and attempt to refute at least one of its premises. Thank you.Sourceshttp://www.tandfonline.com...http://www.merriam-webster.com...http://www.plannedparenthood.org...
There has been no greater fictional contrast of brothers morally than that of the Uchihas.

Let me first go through how deep the difference between Sasuke and Iticha (I am guessing the one on the left is Sasuke, so correct me if I am wrong. Also, I can't spell Diatsu, so I'm just going to change into funny words every time I need to mention him by name):Firstly, Sasuke is an atheist and Hitachi is the complete opposite as he's an atheist. The difference is astounding. It seems more like my opponent is going "look! My guys are religiously opposed as well!" rather than anything. No, theistically Sasuke and his brother are not just unopposed, but are apathetic. The quotations highlight this especially: the Sasuke quotation has no relevance at all to theism, except arguably that he believes nothing truly exists (making him gnostic atheist). Honda by contrast simply doesn't like the title "master". Extrapolating from that a gnostic atheism is absurd extrapolation.Secondly, how can you be a nihilist (not believing in morals) and utilitarian (believing in morals)? Either these brothers have no consistency in characterisation making them some of the worst characters in history, or much more likely he is simply nihilist. Moreover, Mitsubishi is also nihilist, which makes them, again, the same.Finally, the dichotomy of sadist/masochist has no relation to a moral disposition (though a utilitarian maximising unhappiness might as well be an oxymoron). However, calling Sasuke a moral masochist from the information given seems like a leap. He seems determined to extract revenge rather than masochist. Also, I hold, even if you side with all of these to my opponent, and deny my objections, that my characters' moral differences are many times more important and more diametrically opposed. Thank you.
There has been no greater fictional contrast of brothers morally than that of the Uchihas.

I accept. Though I haven't watched any of the Naruto shows, mangas, etc. (nor do I plan to, if I am perfectly honest), I shall attempt to show how the greatest two brothers in terms of their opposition philosophically with one another is The Brothers Karamazov, by Dostoevsky. The most obvious choice, of course, but obvious for a reason. I shall attempt to show a number of things. Firstly, both on not just the core difference but on sheer numbers that the Karamazov have irreconcilable and huge differences of moral character. Secondly, I shall attempt to show that externally these differences are greater to us as readers as well as the fiction itself: in other words, that the moral contrast of Dmitri and Alexei against Ivan. With that, I'll await my opponent's opening round.
There has been no greater fictional contrast of brothers morally than that of the Uchihas.

Anime references only, manga-only references are banned.Deriving from what I have seen in the anime and my vast knowledge of philosophy I can not possibly imagine that throughout history there has ever been a greater contrast between the values of two brother than that of Sasuke and Itachi.I will not present my case yet.Round one is for acceptance and your proposed set of brothers.The primary burden of proof is on me, however it is up to you to also prove that your set of brothers have an equal, if not greater, contrast in morals.If you haven't seen Naruto then I suggest you read their story in detail... I will philosophically tear you to shreds if you are unprepared in the slightest.Round one: State your pair of brothers.Round two: Opening debates, rebuttals allowed for con. Round three: Conflict.Round four: Conclusion. NO NEW POINTS IN LAST ROUND OR FORFEITURE.
God of War vs. Gears of War. Gears of War is way more badass.

I've played game really similar I don't see how its any better than any of those games don't get me wrong id still play it but its a dude with a gun that has a chainsaw taped to the end of it. While God of War is a Spartan fighting Greek mythology and taking everything from the Undead Barbarian's hammer to a weapon forged from the Olympian metal and even some of the god's weapons like the Blade of Olympus on top of this the graphics are just wow.
Donald Trump's "Muslim Ban" is unconstitutional.

Please note, the quotes from the previous article. "Put a commission together, show me the right way to do it legally." - Donald J. Trump "it" in referral to the 'Muslim Ban' which he is quoted as calling it. Please note, that the 14th amendment was originally for African-American citizens, but this can be applied to anyone. ISIS claimed to have infiltrated the population, but just as you are unwilling to "risk the lives" of American people I am unwilling to risk the lives of any innocent people. It comes down to a lack of compassion.