BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
This house believes that Capitalism is better than Socialism

The Western democratic capitalist system protects individual's rights and liberties through freedom from of interference by other people. Mature adult citizens are believed to have the capacity to choose what kind of life they want to lead and create their own future without paternalistic coercion from the state (Berlin, 1958). The capitalist society's ideals could perhaps be best exemplified with the American dream where everyone has an initial equal opportunity to reach their full potential, each individual being choosing their own path free from external coercion,. James Truslow Adams defines the American Dream as the following in 1931 "life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement" (1). The current President of United Stated Barack Obama is a typical example of a person who has achieved the American dream. Barack Obama did not start his life with a traditional "fortunate circumstance" previous presidents had enjoyed (e.g. George Bush). Nevertheless he succeeded in transcending his social class, his race etc. and became the president of United States. (2). Thus capitalism provides everyone with a fair chance to reach great achievements in their life if they seize the opportunities. (1) James Truslow Adams papers, 1918-1949. (n.d.). Columbia University Library. Retrieved June 7, 2011 (2) Barack Obama is the American Dream writ large. (2008). Mirror. Retrieved June 7, 2011
Abortion

As my opponent did not reply, I will reply to Cello242's comment. Yes, I am well aware of the sort of depression that can occur after an abortion and in some cases can occur annually during the time of the abortion. It does happen and it is a terrible thing, But I do believe that only a certain number of mothers who abort suffer from that side effect and that doesn't compare to the amount of almost guaranteed pain the mother would feel. The mothers who are more likely to commit suicide after an abortion is likely due to the lack of government funds or funds in general that companies like Planned Parenthood need to help a mother cope with the aftermath of an abortion. Also, Mothers who do regret getting an abortion are likely not rape victims. If the child was made on accident and the mother and father aren't prepared for parenthood, An abortion is a good choice but not the cause. I do not believe that they regret the choice of getting an abortion, I believe that most people whom you speak of regret not being careful enough or not prepared enough to be a parent.
Abortion

Abortion should always be an option for a soon to be mother. The mother's life should always be given priority, No matter what. A person living their life opposed the fetus who is not yet conscious, The person holds more importance. In the case of rape, I agree with the rapist suffering the full consequence of the law but for the mother to give birth to the rapist's child is forcing the mother to relive the memories of the rape over and over. The sight of the child would likely cause psychological problems and to give the child up for adoption would further the mother's pain. The most ethical option for all conscious parties involved would be to abort the child. For a mother who planned a child with HER partner of HER choosing, I agree she should receive all the support she needs. Yes, The child of a rapist may not come out to be terrible, But nonetheless, Psychological problems can hold back the mother from moving on from the unpleasant chapter in her life. If the child is given up for adoption, The child could grow to believe they are a monster similar to their father or grow up alone and isolated never fully living life having lacked the necessary tools to succeed in life. Government funding for Planned Parenthood does not actually pay for abortions, As explicitly stated by the company. All Government funding is forwarded towards helping mothers through pregnancies. Abortions give you a second chance to be prepared for when you want to be a child. It doesn't make you a killer, It makes you a person who thinks for both the child and yourself. Having a child when you aren't ready can ruin the lives of all parties involved. Abortions are far from violent acts as it a humane way of ending a pregnancy without following through the entire pregnancy.
Abortion

I don't believe abortion is ethical under any circumstance, Exclusive of when the mother's life is in danger, Because of course the mother comes first in that particular scenario. However, For example, In the case of rape, I don't believe that the child in the womb should receive the death penalty for the crimes of the father. The rapist should be tracked down and held at the full extent of the law, For his abhorrent crime. As for the mother, She should be given all the support that she can possibly be given, To help her throughout her pregnancy, By the way of state funded services and charities, Not Planned Parenthood! If you had ever encountered the child of a rape victim or a woman who carried through with her pregnancy after suffering the horrific transgression: rape, You would become cognisant of the fact that having the child is not as awful as it is made out to be, That actually your very own unique child might help you through the pain of the past. All governments should stop funding baby genocidal organisations, Like Planned Parenthood and start funding services to actually support women through pregnancies and make their difficult situations pleasant and make them feel like they are cared about. Abortion does not unrape you or make you unpregnant, It just makes you the parent of a deceased child. You cannot solve one violent act by another one.
There is only one human disease

A virus is an illogical entity. You can't be dead one minute and alive the next. It just doesn't make any sense. How do viruses organise themselves to attack humans when they have no legs, Brains, Eyes or senses of any description. Thus, The logic of viral attacks on humans is not logical process and hasn't been thought through sufficiently. Whereas, Vitamin deficiency is logical and has a much simpler explanation with all the evidence to prove it. You can test the theory yourself by going on a Paleo diet and you will notice that your nose will immediately become clear and unblocked. Humans are generally allergic to grass and grass related products. Thus, Grain, Sugar, Dairy and alcohol are all produced from grass seeds and grass. Note - How did the first person discover the first virus without and reference photo of what one looks like? Again, This proves that viruses couldn't be found even if they did exist. Having worked in an electron microscope lab I know that an electron microscope wouldn't be able to locate something as small as a virus. The electron microscope has its limitations. You can only scan the surface of known objects in known locations using an electron microscope. If you see any photos of viruses they are usually digital creations of what they think a virus looks like. Sometimes they photo thyroid gland tissue and try to pass off thyroid hormones as viruses. I am not fooled. Viruses were 'discovered' (invented) as a means of filling in the gap when it was discovered that bacteria are harmless to humans so they had to find something else to justify making money out of people using drugs and vaccines. Note - When money and profit are involved, Logic and commonsense are thrown out the window. Old saying - You can sell cure by the pound and prevention only by the ounce. Thus, Antoine Bechamp's theory was abandoned in favour of Luis Pasteur's germ theory. Note - Luis Pasteur married the rector's daughter, Thus he had authority over Antoine Bechamp. Interview with Stephan Lanka Virologist. If the link doesn't work then search for - Interview with virologist - Viruses don't exist https://www. Youtube. Com/watch? V=NU9f3Vc67oE Quote - "Vitamin deficiency has many types" Reply - You can sub-divide anything from its original context. Vitamin deficiency is a general concept which covers all vitamin deficiencies. Including all 13 vitamins A, B x 8, C, D, E and K. Modern technology, Dietary science and commonsense has confirmed that Antoine Bechamp was right and that Luis Pasteur was wrong. Studies of Crohn's disease and leaky gut syndrome confirm the real cause of disease is an interior problem and not caused by germs invading from exterior sources. https://www. Youtube. Com/watch? V=T6RdJYYb6iU
There is only one human disease

There is actually such thing as a virus, And it is made up of a core of genetic material, Either DNA or RNA, Surrounded by a protective coat called a capsid which is made up of protein. Sometimes the capsid is surrounded by an additional spikey coat called the envelope. Viruses are capable of latching onto host cells and getting inside them. You said that you will never get influenza if you eat the right diet, Which makes no sense because the flu is contagious. If you would like to explain it to make things clear, Please go ahead. "If you eat the right foods which is a paleo based diet, Then you will never get a disease in your lifetime. " This isn't true. Sure, It might prevent you from getting certain diseases like heart disease, But what about contagious diseases? What about genetic diseases? What about infectious diseases? It can't stop you from getting STD's, Colds (which enters the body through the mouth), Etc. Also, You said ANY disease, Which completely contradicts your claim in the first place. If you can support your claim that there is no such thing as a virus, I will take it seriously. Right now, I can't, Because I have no evidence that it's true. You said the only disease was vitamin deficiency disease, But how can you say that when there are several types of that disease itself? Vitamin D deficiency, Vitamin B12 deficiency, And Folate deficiency are just a few examples. About Antoine Bechamp. His theory was just that, A theory. In reality infection/diseases occur when bacteria, Viruses or other microbes that cause disease enter your body and begin to multiply. Disease occurs when the cells in your body are damaged
There is only one human disease

My opponent has come up with HIV and Influenza as examples of two different diseases. Well, For a start nobody has ever seen a HIV virus. Its just a theoretical hypothesis or an assumption of virus. Most diseases are tested using a symptom based formula for determining which disease that you have. HIV uses viral loading. The way they determine viral loading is by taking a blood sample and putting it through a blender and then filter the result. Particles of a certain size are then said to be 'viruses'. Having worked in an electron microscope lab myself, I personally know that there are no such things as viruses. Just because a particle of matter is a certain size doesn't make it a virus. HIV testing is just a scam. Influenza is said to be a virus also but this is just a scam. If you avoid dairy, Grain, Sugar, Alcohol and fat you will never get a 'cold', 'flu' or 'influenza virus'. That's because there are no viruses and never have been any viruses. Viruses are just an invention of the medical system which were discovered at the same time that they discovered that bacteria doesn't cause disease. If you eat the right foods which is a Paleo based diet, Then you will never have any disease during your life time. Antoine Bechamp discovered 200 years ago that germs are the result of a disease and are not the cause of a disease. The bacteria in the gut can leak into the blood stream by a problem called leaky gut syndrome which is caused by an inappropriate diet. This is the cause of disease. Thus, There is only one disease which is vitamin deficiency disease.
There is only one human disease

I disagree. There are many, Many diseases, Not just one. You can tell they are different because of the different viruses that cause them, The different symptoms, And how deadly each one of them is. For example, I will compare HIV and influenza. They are 2 completely different diseases. HIV weakens a person's immune system by destroying important cells that fight disease and infection. No effective cure exists for HIV. But with proper medical care, It can be controlled. Influenza is a contagious respiratory illness caused by viruses that infect the nose, Throat, And sometimes the lungs. It can cause mild to severe illness, And at times can lead to death. There is a vaccination for the flu, But it only works for one specific type of the virus. If there was only one human disease, Then wouldn't there be one cure? There obviously isn't one clue for all diseases, Which means there isn't just one disease.
Random

You should make it more clear in your debating then. That's why they say be proper it counts. There's many different ways to out look your argument genius. So something to look at. Why do you think that this brought up the idea of a multi-universe or even what I debated. You wasn't clear enough in the original statement. So everything else is implied. This is a site for debating, if you do not take it seriously enough to actually debate and be clear when starting a challenge then you shouldn't be here in the first place. Is it suppose to be fun? Yes, in the art of competition.
Random

One quotation on own doesn't really make make a difference towards the statement. A mother doesn't own a child nor "owns" a child. owns 3rd person singular present of own (Verb) Verb Have (something) as one's own; possess: "his father owns a restaurant". Admit or acknowledge that something is the case or that one feels a certain way: "she owned to a feeling of jealousy". A. You didn't describe thoroughly which of the to you were describing. In the sense of the second the first one owning it by domination of it, in a way he/she owns it. Refers to a dictatorship government. http://dictionary.reference.com... Quote from http://depts.alverno.edu... "5. Dictatorship A dictatorship consists of rule by one person or a group of people. Very few dictators admit they are dictators; they almost always claim to be leaders of democracies. The dictator may be one person, such as Castro in Cuba or Hitler in Germany, or a group of people, such as the Communist Party in China." So one person dominates the universe via military support although the other person rightfully owns the same universe then the one that overthrows the second person. Then the first person owns it. Prime example of a movie that relates to history of Kings overthrowing others. "Black Knight" http://www.imdb.com... Which is a story about a King that took over dominance in the society and establishes him King. Although the rightful Queen of the land lived outside that community. Yes she rightfully "owns" it as he rules as King but he owns it. In cases like this she doesn't own anything until she takes back control because she was overthrown by someone else that had more power and declared themselves the King. Which doesn't happen until the "black knight" (Martin Lawrence) B. In the original statement you never said the first person owned the second person. Nor was it implied.
Children should be lied to

My opponent has based his entire argument solely on statement the lying to children causes distrust between the child and parents. After rereading the previous arguments I would like to end this debate with the argument that follows: By not giving a single shred of evidence to support his claim that lying to children causes distrust, Britt Waller has failed to prove his point that he made at the beginning of this argument. He has given nothing. No references No studies No definitions, essays. .. .nothing. . .. .nothing but his own opinion. And as I have met no child with the issues he claims exist. .. .. . he has no evidence whatsoever. He has failed to prove his point and has therefore failed in this debate. The choise is clear.
Children should be lied to

Resolved children should not be lied to Definitions- Lie-a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood. Children- a person between birth and full growth; a boy or girl Santa clause, easter bunny, tooth fairy when i think of santa clause i think of christmas and fun. the last thing i think of is "my parents lied to me." when i think of the easter bunny i think of eggs and chocolate. when i think of the tooth fairy i think of how happy i was when i would find that dollar under my pillow.All these things make children happy. they dont "confuse" them or cause "cynicism." also how could you explain the real meanings of christmas or easter to a young child? they cant understand those concepts yet. and last i would liketo point out that if telling these things to your kids is lying and bad for society than i would argue that so are all childrens books such as cinderella or goldilocks. you could even argue the same with cartoons like scooby doo or looney toons Sex, death, etc. : If im getting this straight you're completely ok with telling your 5 year old how to have sex. telling them what death is is alright with me. they have to learn that to cope with certain inevitable things. but sex is atleast something they dont need to know about. i would say i probably would want to make sure my child did NOT know those things. even if i did though how would i explain that. no child could ever understand the seriousness of something like sex. they would be tempted to start making jokes about it and shrug it off as not a big deal. if a child doesnt understand it how woul he/ she know why theyshouldnt do it when they're only like 14? I look forward to a good debate.
Children should be lied to

The last time I did this debate I was a little unsatisfied with both the arguments and the results. Lying to children, whether in the form of perpetuating silly myths like the existence of Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the Tooth Fairy, or by withholding factual answers to their questions about subjects such as sex and death, is bad, primarily for the children themselves but also for society as a whole. Lying either directly or by omission is harmful because children eventually find out the truth, and an air of distrust is created. Children hear their parents say "It's wrong to lie" all of the time, but when they find out that Santa Claus doesn't exist, their natural reaction is one of confusion and eventual cynicism - "Why should I not lie like my parents told me to when they obviously lie?" Even more dangerous is withholding information on more substantial issues such as sex, death, and the harshness of the world in general. There is no reason not to answer whatever questions a child asks in a truthful manner. Parents and other adults who lie by omission may think they are protecting children, when in fact full disclosure would be a great deal more helpful to children in their journey through life. I look forward to a good debate.
The best Fnaf game is the first

lets keep it fun as we both respect and like the franchise but I find the second one to ruin the whole point of Fnaf you are a security guard who looks over the cameras looking for monsters and hoping you do not run out of time while Fnaf2 brings a interesting story and a much harder difficulty it was repetive turn on flashlight look at both tunnels and wind the music box over and over if you want to proceed there was now no point in even using the security cameras it was more just used for the marionette
Hats should be banned in high schools

AveRebuttals/ DefenseMy opponent says that we should ban religious head wear also. Yeah, we should ban it. The good things about pencils outweigh the bad things, when there is no reason to wear hats inside, which means there are no benefits. There are bad things, distraction for instance, and it automatically outweighs nothing, so we shouldn't wear hats in schools.Paper outweighs it also. And you need shirts, but you don't neccesarly need hats in school. My opponent says that children should get a job where they don't allow hats, and don't wear hats. In school it isn't allowed also, so we shouldn't wear them, according to my opponent's logic.My opponent says he wants to know why it is disrespecting. You know when you just say like "Hi dude" to a president its rude? Same thing here, it's just rude. My opponent doesn't rebut this argument. I never said that all people will be distracted. I said some people might be distracted. It's not about the *number* of how many people are distracted only if they *are* distracted or not distracted. And some people are, and some people cheat, so we should ban hats.My opponent makes an example of paper, and we should ban paper. As I said, the good things about paper outweigh the bad things. And paper airplanes should be banned, not paper itself. Just because *one* person doesn't get in trouble doesn't mean we shouldn't ban it. It is important if someone *gets* in trouble, or doesn't. I showed that some people do, so we should ban hats. I know quite a few people who were in trouble by hats, so in the next year, the school banned hats.My opponent doesn't refute any of my arguments, and I refute all his. Also, why would you even wear a hat insides? There is no reason. I have shown that hats bad things in schools outweigh the good things, which is *nothing*, so vote for Pro. The resolution is affirmed.Conclusion/ Things to vote forConduct: Both had good conduct, tie.S&G: Both had okay S&G, tied. Convincing arg.: Me, as I refuted all my opponent's arguments, and show that the harms outweigh the benefits, and my opponent doesn't rebut any of my argumentsSources: Goes to me, as I am the only one who made sources.The winner is easily me, as I refuted my opponent's arguments, and I was the only one with sources. Therefore, please vote for PRO. Thank you for the debate, and please vote for affirmative, or Pro.Two choices to vote1. Affirmative2. ProThat decides the clear winner.Vale
Hats should be banned in high schools

Before I continue I wanted to make one thing clear: I agree that hats should be removed during the playing of a national anthem and where else appropriate. However I'd like to know what exactly it is I'm disrespecting when I wear my hat in school. It is allowed in my school and I passed all my classes and didn't get in to any fights. In fact a lot of my friends wear their hats at my school and we all get along and pass our courses. As I've stated before: in reality anything can be distracting yes even hats but pencils can be distracting too. One time in science my friend who happened to be wearing a hat was playing with paper and making paper airplanes out of it, he got in trouble and almost failed the course but it wasn't because of his hat but rather paper. Does that mean we should ban paper? I know a lot of people that wear hats in school but one thing they all have in common is that they don't get distracted by their hats. In Conclusion: Banning hats will not end bullying. I find this very similar in ways to the gun argument. We need to have more discipline on the bullies, not hats. They will just find other means to torture the kid they're bullying that could be even worse. In my experience in high school I found the people that get bullied is often based on appearance or the way they act not what they wear. Vote against the banning! Who knows what will be banned next!