BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Abortion

How I abortion any further murder than using birth control or masturbate? Both are hindering the potential life of a human which seems to be the only argument that my opponent had to offer. And I think we've passed the "maybe she will learn her lesson and never have sex."I don't think that a one night fling with a condom that breaks really should be a punishable act with the fine of more than 18 year of commitment, 9 month pregnancy which is a pain already, birth, a complete lack of sleep for the first year or so, having her entire life limited hundredfold, and paying a minimum fine of $241.080: The costs of lego not included.Would you honestly be willing to choose between only having sex when you absolutely are certain you want children (because accidents do happen), something men don't really have to consider since they can sleep with whomever they want and then vanish off the face of the earth for all she knows, and have little or no restrictions. However, making abortion illegal poses serious restrictions to females and gives off the message that women do not have the rights to themselves and to choose. Either they have sex and if an accident does happen they just have to shut up and face the punishment or not be allowed to do what they want to, even if that is just to have a little fun under the starlight. This is a massive step backwards when it comes to female social position and equality: That women do not have a choice, do not have the ability to decide for themselves and should just be there for reproductive purposes. It is either the "murder" of something that never lived against brutally breaking the rights of someone that has been living for q minimum of nearly two decades, give or take a few years. To conclude:In the beginning of my case I asked my opponent a few questions that his entire case hung on, a few questions that he really needed to answer in order for his case to hold up. He did not answer these question; and in hindsight he didn't do much to even protect his case. I showed you, dear readers, how abortion, be it moral or not, is a needed thing and making it illegal is not a steo forward, it isn't saving anyone and there are a lot of cases where it just does not apply. abortions are not going away soon, they'll just change form if we would try and stop them. Abortions would no longer just remove the fetus, but possibly harm the woman and even killing her. This is not a future for us, and thus we conclude that abortion is not the dreaded thing my opponent wishes it was.thank you also for the debate.
Cars with round wheels move more easily on road compared to cars with square wheels.

I reiterate that square wheels are not an inferior technology, but an undeveloped one whose time is now! Round wheels have traditionally been considered more efficient, but with advances in technology, it is becoming obvious that square wheels have more potential than the archaic circular options. I urge the assembled to vote with the future, not the past! _________________ "Square Wheel Car Propels Itself by Shifting Weight - Possible MEMS Locomotion " "The first prototype consisted of a car with 4 square wheels, in the general configuration of a typical car, with all 4 wheels mechanically connected together so they must all turn in unison. Furthermore, the rotational orientation of the wheels are sequentially off-set from one wheel to the next by 22.5" (" of 90"), moving around the vehicle in a CW or CCW direction as viewed from above. "For use in micro-machines or MEMS applications, one of the key benefits is that the motor and gearing moving the shifting weight is all in a plane parallel to the motion surface. No right angle gearboxes are required. " . http://www.prweb.com... _________________ Final Rebuttal to your arguments: "2)You say that cars with square wheel move better on road. If so, why do the 200+ countries, their engineers and the opposition prefer with an incredible majority cars with round wheels. " As I pointed out, square wheels are not currently in use because the technology has yet to be developed. Even now, there are efforts to explore this exciting advancement in technology. "Could square wheels give you a better ride? One new project on Kickstarter is looking to fund the manufacture of sets of weirdly shaped wheels for skateboards. " . http://www.popsci.com... _____________________ "3)If you oppose my view, you are opposing the world's view. " This is an "argumentum ad numerum ("appeal to the number") - thanks wikipedia! .
Cars with round wheels move more easily on road compared to cars with square wheels.

To sum up i will say some simple words. 1)You agreed with my definition of road. Based on this, we must compare between the two. 2)You say that cars with square wheel move better on road. If so, why do the 200+ countries, their engineers and the opposition prefer with an incredible majority cars with round wheels. 3)If you oppose my view, you are opposing the world's view. With those sweet words i leave you and we hope to meet again..... .
Cars with round wheels move more easily on road compared to cars with square wheels.

"Road in this case means a typical flat road as most people would visualise when this word is mentioned.As you put it, "a flat road is just one of many possible roads" shows what i want to say." that was not stated in the original challenge, but it's a reasonable clarification. "Yes, i completely agree but will a car with square wheels do the job?" the premise was tested on an episode of myth busters. They found that a car with square wheels, when it reached a particular speed, had a ride that was not nearly as difficult as one would've imagined. Once they hit their target speed, vibration and shocks to the suspension decreased significantly. I submit that this is a matter of engineering and that given sufficient resources a car can be designed with square wheels and give a similar if not superior ride compared to a car with round wheels. "Yes it is completely true but considering the type of road i intend, i don't accept this. Secondly, the road you propose requires 1) bumps and 2) they must be correctly spaced. I thank you for your attention." your objections are reasonable, however this objection again seems like a matter of engineering. Flat roads that are not constructed entered correctly wind up with potholes over which round wheels to not move easily.
Cars with round wheels move more easily on road compared to cars with square wheels.

=>"It depends on the type of road. easily means "without difficulty or effort.". a flat road is just one of many possible roads. a round wheel on a bumpy road may not always be best." =>Road in this case means a typical flat road as most people would visualise when this word is mentioned.As you put it, "a flat road is just one of many possible roads" shows what i want to say. Building on this premise, I assert that a car with round wheels moves with less difficulty or effort (as you put it) on road compared to a car with square wheels. "a round wheel on a bumpy road may not always be best." Yes, i completely agree but will a car with square wheels do the job? =>"A square wheel can roll smoothly, keeping its axle moving in a straight line and at a constant velocity, if it travels over evenly spaced bumps of just the right shape. This special shape is called an inverted catenary." Yes it is completely true but considering the type of road i intend, i don't accept this. Secondly, the road you propose requires 1) bumps and 2) they must be correctly spaced. I thank you for your attention.
Cars with round wheels move more easily on road compared to cars with square wheels.

It depends on the type of road. easily means "without difficulty or effort.". a flat road is just one of many possible roads. a round wheel on a bumpy road may not always be best. http://mathtourist.blogspot.com... "A square wheel can roll smoothly, keeping its axle moving in a straight line and at a constant velocity, if it travels over evenly spaced bumps of just the right shape. This special shape is called an inverted catenary."
Same sex marriage.

Burden of proof will be upon Con, my opponent 51%. This is due to the nature of morals, actions are considered moral until proven otherwise. Just as a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty.StructureRound one Acceptance and definitionsRound two arguments, don't respond to opponent's argument yet.Round three rebuttals respond directly to opponent's round two.Round four defense respond directly to opponent's round three.Definitions, use common definitions unless otherwise agreed upon.Sex"2.a. Either of the two divisions, designated female and male, by which most organisms are classified on the basis of their reproductive organs and functions: How do you determine the sex of a lobster?" [0]Gay "1. Of, relating to, or having a sexual orientation to persons of the same sex." [1]Marriage "1.a. A legal union between two persons that confers certain privileges and entails certain obligations of each person to the other, formerly restricted in the United States to a union between a woman and a man." [2]Thanks in advance for accepting the debate. Previous debate for reference. [3]Sources.0. http://www.thefreedictionary.com...1. http://www.thefreedictionary.com...2. http://www.thefreedictionary.com...3. http://www.debate.org...
Same sex marriage.

OutlineI. Benefits of marriageII. Being Gay is not a choiceIII. Financial gain to governmentIV. Separation of church and stateV. SourcesI. Benefits of marriageThe first question, is why would someone want to get married? The answer is there are 1,138 benefits, rights, and protections available for married couples by federal law. Therefore, there are many logical reasons why people would seek to reap these benefits. "There are 1,138 benefits, rights and protections available to married couples in federal law alone" [4]II. Being gay is not a choiceThis might sound silly, but you can't just will yourself to be straight or gay. "Most scientists would disagree. Years of research suggest that people can't change their sexual orientation because they want to, and that trying can cause mental anguish. What's more, some studies suggest that being gay may have a genetic or biological basis. " [5]"Gay conversion therapy, as it is known, supposedly helps gay people overcome same-sex attractions. But mainstream psychologists say the therapy is ineffective, unethical and often harmful, exacerbating anxiety and self-hatred among those treated for what is not a mental disorder." [6]That means by denying gays marriage we are practicing discrimination. Discrimination is unjust. III. Financial gain to governmentMarriages licenses are a source of revenue. This relieves tax burdens off of straights. Therefore, straight people gain a financial advantage from gay marriages.IV. Separation of church and stateAlmost all arguments against gays seem to originate from religion. Yet, the separation of church and state disallows religion to interfere with government affairs. Banning gay marriages on religious grounds would be a violation of the first amendment. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" [7]By banning gay marriages based upon a religion, congress would be respecting an establishment of religion. V. Sources4. http://gaymarriage.procon.org...5. http://www.livescience.com...6. http://www.livescience.com...7. https://www.law.cornell.edu...
Is the law about intellectual property necessary for people? Why or Why not.

I accept, Lets state what Intellectual property is. It has to deal with copyrights with music, works of art, poetry, and even trade logos.(http://www.alllaw.com...) The reason that this is important is because without them you would see an increase of plagerism like no other. The reason for this is because the law is here to protect us from us, stupidity, and others. Without this I could go copy this whole album and use it as my own, but with my own singing. http://www.youtube.com... This shows a problem because there wouldn't be any way to make money (the music artists). Doing so would collapse the whole American Music making industry and you'd see sites like youtube and metrolyrics crash. You may think that this my not be a problem but this has a snow ball affect. Once it's music then it's products, then the Stock Market, then the world economy would crash.
All drugs should be legal to sell, produce, distribute, and to be consumed by consenting adults.

My opponent concedes that he does not want other drugs, like alcohol or tobacco to be made illegal. Alcohol kills many people every year. While some hard drugs may in fact sometimes cause violence, alcohol causes many accidental deaths- especially when driving. It is hypocritical of him to say that alcohol should be legalized but other drugs that cause less death shouldn't. People should be responsible for their actions when they commit a crime, if a person on drugs commits violence they have actually harmed somebody else and should be punished. However, arresting people for the potential to commit crime is not just, be it the potential to commit crimes while on drugs, or simply the potential for committing crimes for having a certian race, or class.
All drugs should be legal to sell, produce, distribute, and to be consumed by consenting adults.

This is a topic that was started by DucoNihilum in a previous debate but then completely dropped by the con. I would like to take this opportunity to pick this debate back up and keep it going. For my opening statement I would like to reiterate that I am against Full Drug Legalization. I also believe that a change of the status quo should be supported by benefits and or a NEED for change.
Jesus Sinned!

It has been said numerous times that Jesus lived a sinless life; however, that is far from the truth. Jesus did sin, and I believe that I can prove it. Burden of ProofFor me to win, I need to show just one instance in which Jesus sinned, for my opponent to win, he needs to show that Jesus did not sin in the instance that I brought up. DefinitionsSin: Breaking any of the 613 commandments as defined in the Torah (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy), and also the Oral Law (Talmud).
Jesus Sinned!

Thank you for this opportunity I have to debate with you. Thank you for your quick response. Sorry for the delay, and if I do not get to respond to every last argument."Before I go any further, let me ask my opponent on a serious note, have you changed your mind regarding weather Jesus was a king? Or are you willing to defend contradictory positions just to win a debate? I don't want to impute bad motives to my opponent, so I'll just have to let him clear up this apparent discrepancy between his positions taken in these two debates regarding Jesus' kingship. If he now admits Jesus became a king, then he can't maintain in the Messiah debate that Jesus can't fulfill Isaiah 9:6 because he never was a king. I therefore invite redears to vote Pro in the debate "Jesus is Messiah." http://www.debate.org...... Now, on to his arguments for this debate."No. Jesus was no King. When I refer to "King" as messiah, I refer to the fact that it will be an earthly king with an earthly kingdom. What I used here is a figure of speech. Jeremiah 3:16; 31:31-34 does NOT foretell a removal of the old covenant, but rather a renewal of it. We can particularly do this debate later, but just to point out, the Jews NEVER understood it as such as the old covenant and old laws are completely gone. Notice the phrase "Eternal" in referring to God's law.2. Disrespect for ParentsThe word hate is used as literal. 3. Harvesting on Sabbath Deuteronomy 5:21 states that on the sabbath, "in earing time and in harvest thou shalt rest." Jews were prohibited from harvesting crops or preparing a meal on the Sabbath; observant Jews still are. Exodus 35:2 states: ...but on the seventh day there shall be to you an holy day, a Sabbath of rest to the LORD: whosoever doeth work therein shall be put to death. Numbers 15:32-36 described a man who was executed because he gathered wood on Saturday -- perhaps to keep his family from freezing from the cold.The Oral law constitutes what "Work" is. One of those things is "Harvesting" which Jesus did.I will respond to the rest later.
The Crusades were justified

As Con, I will be arguing that the Crusades were terrible wars that caused mindless bloodshed and desecration for no good reason at all. Pro must argue, at the very least, that they were carried out for a just cause.Definitions:The Crusades - The wars fought between the forces of western Christendom and Islam from approximately the 11th to 13th centuries ADjustified - having been done for a good or legitimate reasonRounds:Round 1 - acceptanceRound 2 - opening argumentsRound 3 - defense and rebuttalRound 4 - final defense and conclusionGood luck to whoever accepts! (If anyone does; I won't hold my breath.)
Humans will be the cause of the end of living things on earth

Kay, The first argument will prove is that humans developed technology such as Nuclear bombs and weapons of war. Have you seen the news. North Korea, Afghanistan, And Russia all have hidden nuclear weapons and not to mention USA. If there were to be an world war among many nations, And they were to use their secret weapons, We all know it's gone for society. There are a lot of ideas of aggression around the globe among the nations. Another if war don't get us. Pollution will. Let me tell you why. I don't mean just the smoke that come from factories that produce items. Yeah that's bad, But I mean garbage. Even though we're doing recycling and reusing, But there are still things that can not be recycled that are harmful to the every man such as cigarettes, Strophe, And Plastic bags that produce toxins in to the ground and make it harmful to the every man. It's now making animals such as birds and sea animals endangered and Soon we won't find places to put the garbage, That we use and it will be filled everywhere.
PCs are better than consoles.

Thanks for the reply George! I have really enjoyed this friendly debate with you. As you mentioned there are multiple games like GTA V and Titanfall which are console exclusive (Until Jan 2015) but I think how much PC exclusive games far out-weight the amount of console exclusive games. There is also something I forgot to bring up in my previous comments, programs. There are multiple programs that make PCs more enjoyable such as Steam, Skype or Flash. If there is one thing that consoles need it is Flash support. There are multiple great flash games on the internet such as Super House of Dead Ninjas (http://games.adultswim.com...) or Mario 63 (http://www.a10.com...) That's about it for my argument, thanks for debating me. I really enjoyed it Looking forward to your reply.
PCs are better than consoles.

Thank you for getting back to me, some fantastic points made there. It is very true that you can get very affordable computers at a fraction of the price of a console, however something like a Chromebook does not have the graphics processor or RAM capable of playing games to console standards - I suppose what I was getting at was comparing consoles and PCs for video games only. In the case of a sub $500 laptop, you wouldn't be able to play anything like the console graphics. However if you built your own tower PC I suppose you might be able to source parts cheap enough. It's definitely worth it if you have the time, money and know-how to set up a PC but for a lot of people they aren't able to go to the lengths of choosing and setting up a PC, especially when they may not know completely how. There are services that can create one for you but this comes at a price. I would like to point out that for $400 for a console + $300 for a low end laptop capable of word processing and web browsing but not high end gaming, you are able to play video games and still benefit from the ease of use and power that a console can offer without spending over $700 as a start-up cost. It is true that there are many, many PC only games however there are also a fair few console only games. Examples such as Titanfall (http://en.wikipedia.org...), Infamous (http://en.wikipedia.org...) and Killzone (http://en.wikipedia.org...) spring to mind. Due to the difficulty in developing PC games, a lot of video games are release post the console release. This means that currently you can only get GTA V on a console, although it is coming out in January 2015 (http://uk.ign.com...). Mods are fantastic and add a whole new dimension to video games however they do generally make games less stable and often require a slightly better processing power. This means that a lot of people can't access the mods that they'd like to access and a lot of mods can create problems within user's games. This said, they are a fantastic, community based concept that I strongly support. I believe that the future in consoles and PCs will be very interesting. With the rise of cloud-hosted gaming, more people with worse computers can get access to high-end games, however this will open up consoles to the power that only a PC can offer. Looking forward to your reply.
PCs are better than consoles.

Hello George!You bring up quite good points, thought I would like to argue about the price of computers. You can buy a pretty decent PC for under $500 dollars, for instance the HP Chromebook 11 (Priced at $279) which you can find here: https://www.google.com...PCs have more customization such as changing how much RAM and other computer parts. I admit that PCs can take some time to set up, but I think the wait is well worth it. I think PCs are a really good development tool for Indie developers who don't have enough money to get the game on the Xbox market or the Playstation store. Also the PC game library contains a lot of free games made by great developers such as Team Fortress 2 (http://store.steampowered.com...), Warframe (http://store.steampowered.com...) and Path of Exile (http://store.steampowered.com...). Also there is quite a bit of good pc-exclusive paid games such as Gone Home (http://store.steampowered.com...), Garry's Mod (http://store.steampowered.com...) and Sid Meier's Civilization V (http://store.steampowered.com...)You also bring up another good point of PCs at the end of you comment, mods. There are multiple great mods there spruce up the gameplay of games that are on PC and consoles like the mod Falskaar for Skyrim (http://www.nexusmods.com...?) or the mod Midas Magic Spells of Aurum for Oblivion (http://www.nexusmods.com...?).Thanks for taking the time to write a reply.