BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
God wants me to lick children

God is on my side, And he wants me to lick children. Licking children is perfectly normal and acceptable. Licking improves child's well being and health. Children who are licked young usually get used to it easily, And are eager to lick other adults and children. Children who are never licked are dead and aren't worth anything. So lick your children. Lick them to save them. God wants you to lick your children. I think about licking children all the time. Over and over I am thinking about people who don't lick their children. I feel so sorry for those poor children who will never know the joy of a lick. We live in a time of great evil, And only with persistent licking can we fight against the forces that have rallied to defeat us. Remember, Lick a child for a day and child will feel good for a day. Teach a child to lick others, And you have created a lot of good days. Licking children teaches them to lick others, Especially if the lick is done on a cheek. Remember, God wants you to do this. He has written so in the Bible. Those who read the bible but don't understand it are called Christians. Those who understand the Bible are called child lovers. Poor 4 year-old girl. There is no one to lick her. No one to kiss her. No one to give her love. She is nothing but a failure now. Don't let children become failures. Lick them. Lick, Tickle, Kiss and love are the commands of our Lord. And so shall be done.
It is more probably that the historical figure Jesus was in fact God than he was not

Based on the resolution, my primary responsibilty in this debate will be to discredit Pro's evidence. We have every reason to assume that the historical Jesus was in fact just a man. The only evidence I can use to support my case is finding charicature discrepancies between Jesus the person and attributes that the bible ascribes to God. I will accept my opponent's request to use this round for acceptance and clarification only, and wish him the best of luck in this debate. Hopefully it will be a thought provoking discussion and not rely on semantics or other tactics. Thanks!
It is more probably that the historical figure Jesus was in fact God than he was not

I will not add any arguments due to my opponents forfeit in their last round. I would just like to close with a few things. I believe we can be confident the 4 names attached to the gospels actually did write the gospels, the writings have been well preserved, Jesus was a historical figure, Jesus claimed to be God, and rose from the dead, which would lead us to conclude that it is more probable that Jesus was God than He was not. However, I by no means, do these debates to win points based on how voters choose to vote. I only do them to prove that Christianity is not anti-intellectual, and I believe I have done that. I also had the great opportunity to talk to people in the comments about Christianity and if anyone has any questions about Christianity please feel free to message me, or if you just want to message me to tell me I'm an idiot for believing Jesus is God you can do that too. Thanks for your time and thanks to Danielle for the debate.
deleting satan

You just said in your very flawed statement that gods are imaginary. Therefore you are that we are or could be god or that we could create them however i exist yet there is not an opposite to me in a parallel universe if that what you were implying remember when you say everything that is a ginormous generalization which is incorrect. Then your argument states 'creation presupposes creator" after you say gods are imaginary now your just contradicting yourself. your argument makes no sense and contradicts itself I have provided clear points on why your wrong and you have refused to refute them.
deleting satan

You claim birth is a transformation. Of what I might ask? and your second statements is just philosophical ramblings and I would like to correct your statement by saying and I quote "we are powerful enough to create any god we can think of." There are two problems how can we create a god and it still be a god it's simply not possible it would be creation, not a god. You have also said "birth is transformation" which is correct we started as simple cells and we were CREATED. Therefore we are not gods. a definition of god is "spirit worshiped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a deity." you sir do not have superpowers nor do you have control over anyone else despite your illusions of grandeur .
Rap battle

Niggas wanna try, niggas wanna lie Then niggas wonder why, niggas wanna die All I know is pain, all I feel is rain How can I maintain, with mad s**t on my brain I resort to violence, my niggas move in silence Like you don't know what our style is New York niggas the wildest My niggas is wit' it You want it, come and get it Took it then we split it You f**kin' right we did it What the f**k you gonna do, when we run up on you F**kin' wit' the wrong crew, don't know what we goin' thru I'mma have ta show niggas how easily we blow niggas When you find out there's somemore niggas, that's runnin with your niggas Nothin' we can't handle, break it up and dismantle, light it up like a candle Just cause I can't stand you Put my s**t on tapes, like you bustin' grapes Think you holdin' weight Then you haven't met the Apes
Rap battle

All the ladies love my SWAG. Boys love Pro 'cause he's a F*G.All the homies jealous of my SWAG.I wear Nikes, Pro wears RAGS.Hoes love me when I SWAG.Pro stays on his computer and cries 'bout LAG.All the sexy MILFs be lovin' my SWAG,but I don't talk to Pro's mum 'cause she's a HAG.This battle is over, yo. Victory feels good.
Rap battle

Dude you say I'm dumb but you copy my ryhme Man you the dumb@ss for calling me dumb And using my rhymes at the same time Seriously what type of person are you I'm sorry this is what is has to come to But let's be honest, this is something you won't get through Maybe after this you won't be a complete dumb@ss which will be a break through And why do you say swag if you don't have any You read captain underpants but your twenty And you say my rap is junk but you copy it you dumb@ss fuk
Rap battle

Man was that supposed to be a strike Dude if that's how you tap this isn't even a fight And I'm not a fucing f@ggot But I bet you are you fucing maggot And why would you talk about god like that I though you were Jewish You probably don't know anything about god your clueless I bet your nothing and in life your useless Your suck at rapping cause your soft This hasn't even began and I already finished you off
Rap battle

Yo, yo, yo. Check one... Check one, two... Check mate.You're a homosexual,I'm an intellectual.Swag.You're a hog,I'm a dog.Swag.You're pathetic,I'm athletic.Swag.Jesus can kiss my a*s,And no, I don't mean your Latino a*s.Swag. Peace. Big stunnin' 2013, goin' into the '14.Word.
Rap battle

Telling me to go first Man that just proves that your scared You shouldn't have even accepted this challenge Because its pretty clear that your unprepared But it's too late and when I'm done you won't be able to be repaired Man you shouldn't have dared, you'll be left visually impaired You shouldn't even try because you won't win So please don't make this more painful than it has already has been But if you think your up to it then give it your be shot, but man Give a lot of thought, cause this is a life threatening situation you might be left in eternal damnation Cause I own and this isn't even a battle It's just a guy trying to control his cattle
Should cigarettes be banned

The fact that cigarettes are harmful and kill people is not something which is up for debate. It is a well know fact there is propaganda and advertising that is in fact harmful. However the fact that they harm you is no reason as to why they should be ban. Someone who commits suicide and is successful can't be charged. Some one who survives is given treatment. So wouldn't it seem more reasonable to provide help?ï¿½ Cigarettes do not kill immediately in the way of suicide, the cause illness that do.ï¿½ The fact that they are addictive is also irrelevant as to reason why they should be ban because it goes hand in and with the fact that there harmful. If they where addictive but not harmful then it wouldn't matter. To much of anything would kill you.ï¿½ Then my opponent sated that the government did something to try and lower obesity. In their acknowledgement that it is wrong however it was not ban. Limiting food size can be looked upon the same way the government taxes cigarettes. This in no way helps the argument that cigarettes should be illegal. ï¿½One in 8 Americans is obese, which cause a number of ï¿½illnesses related to death http://www.surgeongeneral.gov...
Should cigarettes be banned

Being my arguments was not augured we have to assume my opponent agrees with my prior argument He then goes on and give more reason why cigarettes should not be banned. He talks about liberty and how the government cannot control your action this is false because suicide is unlawful so in a since they can control what you do or put limitation on what you can do. He then states cigarettes tell you they are harmful however they are additive therefore people who smoke are not contemplating whether it is good for them or not they just need that cigarette because of the chemicals in it. My challenger then talks about cigarettes in regards to obesity stating fried food is bad for the body just as cigarettes my response to that is the government understand obesity is a problem and made certain restaurants like McDonald's cut there portion size to try an address that issue. Hence obesity does not kill as many people as tobacco does once again cigarettes kill more people than cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and all other illegal drugs combined. Cigarettes should be banned because they kill millions of people they are harmful to the body they get tossed around the street and last and not least second hand smoke kills meaning you can die from cigarettes and not smoke them
Should cigarettes be banned

Another reason why cigarettes should not be ban as a matter of liberty, the Government shouldn't be telling anybody what they can and can't put into their bodies, even if it is toxic/harmful. ï¿½You have to be an adult to purchase cigarettes and it is a Personal choice to smoke. These are supposed to be your rights as a free american citizen. ï¿½The packaging on the cigarettes does state that it is harmful and there are health risks to it however it is ones choice wether or not they wish to put the substance into there body at the cost of its health risk.ï¿½ If cigarettes where ban under the single arguement that they are harmful then what would be next step,what someone can eat? The same would also hold true with saying that the government should put a ban fried greasy foods because the truth is obesity is also a health risk claiming the lives of all those who CHOOSE to eat foods harmful to the body.
Should cigarettes be banned

Rebuttal my opponent said smokers being inconsiderate is not a relevant reason why smoking should be illegal however second hand smoke kills thousands of people yearly this is a relevant reason because innocent lives are being taken due to this highly addicting product. Second hand smoke comes from both the smoke that smokers exhale (called mainstream smoke) and the smoke floating from the end of the cigarette, cigar, or pipe (called side stream smoke). It may seem pretty harmless, but second hand smoke actually contains thousands of chemicals — from arsenic and ammonia to hydrogen cyanide — many of which have been proven to be toxic or to cause cancer (called carcinogens). High concentrations of many of these chemicals are found in second hand smoke. In fact, secondhand smoke significantly increases a person's risk for: respiratory infections (like bronchitis and pneumonia) asthma (secondhand smoke is a risk factor for the development of asthma and can trigger attacks in those who already have it) coughing, sore throats, sniffling, and sneezing cancer heart disease So secondhand smoke doesn't just impact a person in the future. It can cause problems right now, like affecting someone's sports performance or ability to be physically active. http://kidshealth.org... my opponent says people have the right to smoke however they do not have the right to pollute the air and potentially causing illness to others. Just because it is legalized does not mean its rights. for example abortion is legal however that does not mean its right. my opponent then says if banned it will cause people to par take in illegal activity however this is why we pay axes for our police to stop this activity. Once again cigarettes should be illegal because it causes death, people throw there buds all over the place and it is a health hazard.
Should cigarettes be banned

Saying smokers can be inconsiderate is irrelevant to why they smoking should be illegal. It is ones opinion if the act of ones ï¿½smoking is consider indecent. As well as the fact that it causing harm to the body because fact of the matter it is no secret that cigarettes cause harm to the body.ï¿½ Much of what my opponent has said can be simply argued with the simple fact that it is ones right to smoke.ï¿½ Purchasing tobacco is not something that any old child may go out and do. While they may not be 100% effective in insuring that they are not picked up by children; Purchasing tobacco already has a legalized age in place ment to prevent children from walking into a store and buying it.ï¿½ I don't believe it should be banned from public places, or someones private property. I understand not smoking inside restaurants, bars or whatever, but outside 25 feet from the front door that should continue to be allowed. The idea of completely banning cigarettes seems highly implausible. Very Simlar to the Prohibition it will simply cause people to go out and smoke illegally. It is pretty much impossible to tell someone the have free will however they are unable to smoke. If in fact tomorrow it is stated that cigarettes are in fact illegal. It will simply cause the cost to go up to those who are addicted to smoking and will become similar to current illegal drugs such as heroine, cocaine, or methamphetamine in the respect that it would open the door to new crime.
Should cigarettes be banned

Smokers can be the most inconsiderate people in the world is a reason why cigarettes should be illegal. Truthfully, this bothers me severely when smokers don't have the courtesy to take their habit elsewhere, which most non-smokers, the majority of the population, find to be offensive. Most of people who smoke started when we were much younger, as a result of peer pressure (smoking parents, smoking friends, etc.),and not mature enough to understand the possible future consequences, or not convinced of how powerful the addiction would become. When smokers must stray away from smoking, it brings on the withdrawal symptoms, including but not limited to anxiety, irritability, nervousness, and depression; these symptoms can be very intense and unforgiving in nature. which can possibly lead to suicide one may ask why not just take the steps and quit? it because of the "good" feeling it leaves behind. In less than ten seconds upon the first inhalation, nicotine passes into the bloodstream, crosses the blood brain barrier and begins acting on the brain cells. The nicotine just ingested will begin to mimic one of the most important neurotransmitters, Acelytcholine. This action provokes the body's excitation chemicals that include adrenaline and noradrenalin, which causes an immediate rush of stimulation by increasing the blood flow to the brain. This leaves smokers feeling energized and alert. Within 20 to 30 minutes after the last cigarette, however, a smoker's energy level becomes sharply reduced. That "charged up" feeling the smoker had minutes before begins fading away and the craving for nicotine quickly returns. Psychological dependence is a major factor that can prohibit a well-intentioned person from quitting smoking because nicotine has such amazingly powerful, reinforcing qualities. this is why it should be banned all together because in a since the body becomes dependent on it and smoking to much becomes a hazard to the body The most important reason cigarettes should be banned illegal because it kills people millions of people. more than HIV and aids and not only does it kills Cigarette butts discarded by smokers constitute the overwhelming majority of litter on beaches, as well as in many other public places like parks, playgrounds, and sidewalks. Smoking bans have been shown to substantially reduce the litter and therefore the costs of cleaning up beaches and other outdoor areas, as well as to improve the overall appearance and attractiveness of the area
Mohammed (PBUH) the greatest man to walk the earth

Mohammad (PBUH) is certainly the greatest man to walk the earth. There are about 1.5 billion muslim in the world, that makes 23% of the worlds population. Do you know of any other man in the history of man kind who had such great following. His followers are spread in almost every part of the world. Of course there are other great leaders, but a century later people hardly remember them, let alone after 1400 years. Don't you see, it's not normal for anyone to be remembered the way Mohammed(PBUH) is remembered or followed the way he is followed. Mohammed(PBUH) used to open his fast with dates, even now muslims open their fast with dates because he used to do so. Mohammed (PBUH) said not to eat meat if its slaughtered without taking the name of Allah, that is the reason you can find meat on which halal is printed or even fast food chain where halal is written, otherwise the muslims won't buy it. Mohammed(PBUH) said do not take interest, that is the reason Islamic banking system are coming up. When muslims say Mohammed we add ( peace and blessing be upon him). Mohammed(PBUH) is the one who said "The best of you are those who are best to the women" in times when women were treated worse then animals. Of course there are some people who kill in the name of Mohammed(PBUH), but that is there fault, they have to be punished for that because Mohammed(PBUH) did not teach this. There are many other great islamic scholars who try to convince people that, what they are following is wrong through reason and logic such as Zakir Naik, he is not killing anyone. So look at the big picture and don't be narrow minded. People kill in the name of christianity, hinduism. In such large communities there are a group of bad people. Bad people are remembered as bad and people do not follow their footsteps, such as Adolf Hitler. Of course Jesus(PBUH) has a larger following, but his followers believe that he is god or son of god. A book written by Michael H Hart known as The 100, which talks about the 100 most influential people in the history of mankind, he gives the first position to Mohammed(PBUH) as the most influential person in the history of mankind. http://wikiislam.net... http://www.usislam.org...
Death Penalty

This is the first time I have been specifically challenged by anyone, and I got a say it makes me feel special :) I’m not sure why I was challenged to be Con to this issue though since I am actually undecided on the issue and if I lean any direction on it right now, it would be for Pro. But since I have been challenged to be Con, and I love accepting challenges, I guess I can use this as an opportunity to argue all my doubts towards Pro Death Penalty that make me undecided on the issue. My opponent asks if I think the Death Penalty should be used in the court of law. Well, if there is a death penalty in your states law, then I would hope a court that upholds the law would not ignore it. But why should the Death Penalty be in any of our laws? What court of mortal judges can we be so sure of there judgment that we rest life and death in the hands of that judgment? http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org...; Besides the fact that we have no system of justice that is good enough to make sure only the guilty are executed, there is also the question of if it is holy to execute the guilty. For though they have done wrong, to end their lives would be to make it impossible for them to repent and seek to redeem themselves. To make right there life or seek help from one who has the power to make right their life when they themselves cannot. mabye they will not seek to do any such thing, but is it for us to decide that for them ahead of time, and if we must decide why choose the pessimistic view of the potential futures? So in short I have 2 contentions. 1) our justice system is to flawed to rest life and death on it 2) If we try to act with love towards others, then we should seek to give others second chances, not send them to their maker.
We should become imperialist once again

I think that there are several key points for why the U.S. cannot revert to imperialism. 1. Russia is having problems with imperialism. When taking the example of Russia I am focusing on the annexation of Crimea and the current fighting that is going on in eastern Ukraine. From a general point of view if any place could be taken over by Russia, Ukraine may be it. The people in both countries have very similar cultures and backgrounds, yet the people in Ukraine are still resisting. I bring this up as an example for how imperialist techniques are not working in the modern era. 2. Countries do not want to be taken over. In Ukraine as well as almost all countries in the world, the people there do not want to be conquered. If the U.S. tried to conquer a country, it would face serious resistance. Many people would die fighting against the U.S. and there would be no guarantee that the U.S. would win. For example in Vietnam the U.S. could not continue fighting the Viet Cong. There is no assurance that we would win a war with another country and the only assured thing is that many people would die. 3. Even if the U.S. successfully conquered a country, there would be a massive increase in terrorism and guerrilla warfare. It would not be easy holding on to a country that wants to be free. A great example of terrorism would be Islamic fundamentalists. Every country has a host of strong nationalists both inside and outside it, who would do anything to protect their country. 4. There would be massive public hatred. I cannot see Imperialism being heavenly supported by the U.S. so we would end up with situations like in Vietnam. There would also be a fallout among the U.S.s' allies, not to mention Russia or other countries supporting those countries being invaded. We could quite possibly end up with a second Cold War. 5. The U.S. is not a Utopian society. You mention that through imperialism we would decrease crime, however this would seem very difficult as there is also a massive amount of crime in the U.S. The U.S. also struggles with many other thing, for example many people living in poverty. 6. Finally, I am interested in hearing which countries you think are good options to invade. I understand that you may be proposing to one take one country and then assimilate it, but I think even this would cause massive problems.
We should become imperialist once again

We should continue our imperialist beliefs. In this day and age we our limited and "contained" by United Nations, international sanctions and other Intra Governmental Organizations. I am aware we fight proxy wars throughout the world but I think full invasion and annexation is necessary to maintain power of the USA. I would say NATO should work together to liberate the world so we can unite the world bringing mutual welfare, eventual economic stability, and order/law (reduce crime). This is not some invade - conquer - move on movement. This is a thorough annexation to unite the world for the betterment of all.