BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Sexiest Female Rapist Debate

I'm not sure of how we're supposed to judge the sexiness of my opponents favorite rapists without pictures from them, but all the links I provide have pictures of female rapists. First off here is the video that had difficulty posting last round. http://youtu.be... Here is a link to a video of a young boy being sexually assaulted on a bus, while passengers film and cheer the sexy girl on. Beware, the video contains no nudity, but may be disturbing to some viewers. http://www.avoiceformen.com... The sexy Lauren Cooper, another sexy teacher who likes raping her students. This is a gallery of photos to show her sexiness from several angles. http://www.everyjoe.com... Ashley Zehdner yet another teacher. Wow is there any sexy female teacher who doesn't seduce her students? http://www.ksat.com...
Sexiest Female Rapist Debate

Looks like we have another russian story...In addition to russian black widow from the previous round, we have a russian hairdresser tie down a thief and rape him at gunpoint. Now she can expect more thieves to barge into her shop!http://rt.com...; In the movie Book of Revelations 2006 , a man is tied down as a hostage and raped for weeks by 3 women.http://putlocker.is...In chengdu China, a drunk woman walks by a man on the street and rapes him.http://gbtimes.com...;http://www.bing.com..."And several thousand Chinese netizens have left their comments, with some Chinese men expressing their intention to fly to Chengdu to wait for the good luck (of being raped by lascivious Chengdu women)." http://www.hugchina.com...
Sexiest Female Rapist Debate

Here is the Megan Mahoney picture. http://i.ytimg.com... Pamela Rogers Turner was a former beauty queen and Elementary school teacher, who had a sexual relationship with a 16 year old student. http://lh6.google.com... In the movie 40 days and 40 nights, the star of the movie is raped by his ex girlfriend Erica, while handcuffed to a bed and hallucinating because of being drugged or something. ttp://youtu.be... Lisa Robyn Marinelli, was caught seducing young teenage boys, by promising a chance to sleep with her daughter if they slept with her first. http://www.publicityworkspr.com...
Sexiest Female Rapist Debate

First off Thank You for accepting!:) First off is the russian black widow known as valerie K. She is called black widow because she loves horror and spiders. Here is a quote from a man who was drugged and raped by her. The 10th man is refusing to press charges, saying he remembers bits and pieces of the incident and enjoyed it. He says “like hot women,” and thought the assault “was great.” http://www.inquisitr.com... There is Joyce Mckinny who was on of the first perpetrators of documented reverse rape when she tied down and raped a man. She was so sexy people even made a movie about it called Tabloid. http://scandalouswoman.blogspot.com... In the Movie : It couldn’t happen to a nicer guy: We see sexy Wanda Olivia Wellman rape Harry Walters. http://www.youtube.com...; It seems like in the last round I accidentally posted the same video twice and forgot to post the one when alma wade rapes the player in fear 2. I will post that this round. It seems like my opponent made a similar mistake of posting Hope Jacoby twice and forgot to post Megan Mahoney. If my opponent wishes to post a picture of that female rapist he may do that also this round. This way we don’t have to miss out on some sexy female rapists. I’m aware this violates this resolution of 3 rapists per round but since they were already mentioned in previous rounds, it should be ok.http://www.youtube.com...;
Sexiest Female Rapist Debate

Everybody loves these stories of teachers who commit statutory rape on young male students. Every pubescent boys dream and statutory rape is still technically rape. http://img2.rnkr-static.com... The first image is of Debra Lafave. She was accused of having into purse and oral sex with a 14 year old boy. She is now happily married with twins. This is hope Jacoby, she was charged with rape of a 17 year old and 14 year old boy. http://img3.rnkr-static.com... http://img3.rnkr-static.com... Megan Mahoney, A gym teacher who offered to coach a 16 year old student in basketball, but ended up teaching him the Kama Sutra.
Sexiest Female Rapist Debate

Each round My opponent and I will post up to 3 sexy female rapists. No rounds wasted. Real life female rapists and cannonical characters may be used. No fan art or fanfics allowed. Winner goes to whoever has the sexiest female rapists. It seems like my previous debate got trolled and it seems the solution other people use is to lock down the debate until someone who will seriously debate this topic says so in the comments. Therefore acceptance must be done in comments. Sexy actress Ellen Page rapes an ugly, old, and obese man! That's what I call super rape! http://www.youtube.com...Sexy diva the ancient 100+year old female vampire rapes a little boy. At least he didn't die a virgin!http://www.youtube.com... Sexy zombie ghost psionic psychic chick rapes the player!! That’s an ending I’d play a game for.http://www.youtube.com...
Tests/projects should be the only decisive factors in determining a high school student's grade

Hey Thanks for the debate. I will argue that all grades that my oppenent stated in his first speech ought to be used to evalute a students grade/performance. First, a couple questions. 1. What age we talking about? K-12? 6-college? Pls specify 2. When will these "almighty tests" that determine someone grade and ultiminently future be administered? And how frequently? Ok so I accept my oppenent definitions and will now state me case. contention 1) Tests can be inaccurate and misleading. A whole Year of studying and working should not come down to 1 test. This can stress students and proves nothing. Life doesn't reflect this idea. Work involves daily work and constant participation. Schools should prepare kids for reallife so they have an obligation to do so. contention 2) Teachers can be biased and subjective when grading projects. Also some students might not have the resources of others, this leads to discrimination. A) teachers determine a kids future. Not their brains. If a teacher/student relationship were to be flawed a unethical choice of grading can occur. It is only in human nature to be flawed. B) some studets are poor, or not as well off as others. Therfore if out-of-school projects required them to obtain resources the teacher provides can lead to more discrimnation and unfair judging among children. Contention 3) if students knew that the only grade they would get in class would occur on one day, there would be no point of daily school, instead kids would only come to school the week before the test, hear the review, and somewhat attempt to pass the test. This is a practice common in college. A) school attendance would plumment. This leads to drop-outs. If kids knew that once a year try HAD to go to school to obtain their grade, typically they will only go around the day of the test b) if te grade only matters on the test it is highly likely kids will spend more time trying to find a way to cheat on the test than studying for it. This also kills education. Contention 4) daily grades/class preticipation encourages kid to stay active and maintain interest in school. Kids dislike when teachers "teach to a test" or base their whole ciriculum on a test kills education because it doesn't apply real life instances and excludes communication activities. A) class activities and daily grades are good and encourage educational integration every day. This will allow students to really learn, while having fun. More kids would rather come If they knew the work they were doing actually mattered b) attendance and daily work are applicable in real life. Since school is the gateway to this it should at least reflect this. Kids won't have to go to work once a yer and do a "job test" or "pick up an expensive client on a contract" but instead build up daily work while working with others. I would refute my oppenent case but he hasn't(or has vaguely) stated his. I will answer his CX questions along with his case in the next speech. Goodluck
Tests/projects should be the only decisive factors in determining a high school student's grade

Grades- are standardized measurements of varying levels of comprehension within a subject area. Grades can be assigned in letters (for example, A, B, C, D, or F), as a range (for example 4.0 - 1.0), as descriptors (excellent, great, satisfactory, needs improvement), in percentages, or, as is common in some post-secondary institutions in some countries, as a Grade Point Average (GPA) Tests/Quiz- examine someone's knowledge of something Pro side will be arguing that a teacher should only base a student's grade from their tests and individual projects only. Homework, Attendance, Class Participation, Classwork, group work, etc should not have any percentile factor towards a student's grade. (if you find any other criteria in maybe your teacher's rubric you can use that to argue too)
'cookie cutter' ideologies are a huge problem n politics and religion

you said martin luther believe the eucharist is figurative. actually, he believed in contransubstantiation, which is a hybrid between literal and figurative. more literal than anything. it's not the ideology that is cookie cutter. it's the idea of belieing something because that is what it takes to be a consevative or liberal or fundamentalist. martin luther was an original thinker. he defined much of what it meant, a lot of cookie cutter ideas, but he wasn't believing those things to be a fundamentalist.
'cookie cutter' ideologies are a huge problem n politics and religion

Okay, so it may have been fair to characterize the second round as a rant. I believe there is an explanation, especially related to Martin Luther and the explanation comes from Pro’s statement in the opening round: “salvation by faith. faith along. bible alone. eucharist is figurative.” Each of these ideas is attributable to Martin Luther the sixteenth century Augustinian Monk and later Protestant rebel. So the above-mentioned led statement provided by Pro lead me to take on the idea that this ideology could be considered cookie-cutter. However, Pro refutes my reasoning is irrelevant. Given that the full Burden of Proof is on Pro, it is incumbent on me to ask for a clarification on what he means by cookie-cutter. Why is it irrelevant to use the example of Martin Luther, if prove believes the origin rest with Luther alone? Pro has thus far not demonstrated that cookie-cutter ideologies are a huge problem. What are the huge problems. So let me create an argument structured in a manner similar to the one debated Anti-Semitism has been a huge problem in politics and religion [claim] Because they have faced hostility, discrimination, and irrational violence historically in Europe and elsewhere [reason] Then I would cite Ferdinand and Isabella’s expulsion of the Jews from Spain during the early modern era; then note the restrictions placed on their profession in Italy during the Renaissance; and then cite the various attitudes leading up to the Third Reich and delve into the ideology of Nazi Anti-Semitism; moreover I would link that anti-Semitism to the development of the Catholic Church in the Holy Roman Empire, as well as anti-Semitic strands in Lutheranism [Evidence] This would lead to the obvious questions: But what about the “huge problem” [warrant] While I would answer the warrant if this was an actual proposition, I do not feel particularly obliged to here recite a recent history of mass atrocities. Pro states that Con has made irrelevant points. Therefore, in the interest of not making a similar mistake, I would ask Pro delineate the meaning of “cookie-cutter.” Based on the second round statement, it is clear that I am unable to discern the underlying meaning of cookie-cutter. Cookie-Cutter is a designation used by Pro and requires clarification. Because political scientists do not use the word in any academic capacity I have found, nor do theologians or religious philosophers. Con’s obligation: Since Con is on the “opposing side” Con only has “to disprove the evidence presented or explain why it may not be adequate.”[1] So far, Pro has not provide any evidence to support his claims. However, I expect Pro will provide that in the next round. [1] "Burden of Proof." Rational Wiki. July 24, 2014. Accessed August 20, 2014. http://rationalwiki.org....
'cookie cutter' ideologies are a huge problem n politics and religion

So first, thanks for the debate. So, for the next round I want to clarify some of Pro’s key terms. Pro mentions “cookie cutter ideologies are a huge problem in politics and religion.” “Cookie Cutter” simply means bland, unoriginal. However, to the process is a retroactive distinction though, right? A person accepts bland, trite, hackneyed arguments in the realm of politics and religious arguments [AND THEN] they are cookie cutter? And to be clear, Pro’s position is “Cookie Cutter” ideologies aren’t simply a problem, but rather are a “huge problem.” Huge defined[1] 1. Extraordinarily large in bulk [unlikely we are talking about bulk], quantity, or extent.2. Of unbounded extent, scope, or character; limitless Relevant synonyms: Mammoth, gigantic, colossal, enormous, immense, tremendous I will save the cookie cutter political argument aside for the moment. The example mentioned of a “cookie-cutter” religious ideology. I am not a religious believe but I am incredible familiar with the works of Martin Luther. And I don't think the dissolution of the Roman Catholic Church, several decades of regional wars beginning with the Peasants’ War of 1525, and a fundamental division of European states up until the enlightenment. However, this seems to be the implication based on the “salvation by faith alone.” The Protestant Reformation and the notion of “salvation by faith alone” is credibly original and novel today, if argued from the writing of Luther. Personally, Con is not religious but has at times found the writing of Martin Luther fascinating. However, I should not be too quick to conclude you meant Luther the only Protestant Reformer. I am aware that Huldrych Zwingli in 1523 while living Zurich Switzerland drew similar conclusions, which set up the Reformed Protestant sects in Northern Europe. Or the Calvinist version of “salvation by faith alone.” I could go on but Brad S. Gregory academic at Princeton recently wrote a book arguing that the protestant reformation, well specifically the theological as well as literal battle over notions such as sola fida, sola scriptura, priesthood of all believers help create the conditions later on for a modern secular society, enlightenment, et cetera.[2] However, I will wait until some clarification terms and key arguments from Pro. Good forward to the debate. [1] Dictionary.com: http://dictionary.reference.com... [2] Brad S. Gregory, The Unintended Reformation: How a Religious Revolution Secularized Society (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2012).
'cookie cutter' ideologies are a huge problem n politics and religion

a cookie cutter conservative or liberal is someone who believes things because that's what they are suppose to believe to be liberal or conservative. all social issues, all economic issues, down to the party line. the problem, is that truth is not a party line thing. historically, we have two random parties that exist with an arbitrary array on how the issues are sorted. there's all kinds of historical and ideological ways to create a party, yet people want to adhere to what the current infrastructure is politically. they often don't put much thought into it. it's pamphlet material. it's sad when you can tell about someone by just by reading propaganda and a pamphlet. and they hardly ever defend the opposing candidates even when merited. no politician is perfect, but no politicians is completely without merit too. yet, the cookie cutter can't find it in themselves to speak favorably of an opposing candidate of their ideology. for example take a random event like the benghazi scandal. there is no ideology here, either a mistake was made or it wasn't. and not to get into the politics of that scandal specifically, but you will never hear the cookie cutter say things to defend the opposing candidate even if they are favorable. in religion, the problem is cookie cutter fundamentalists who are usually only fundamental only to things that modern fundamentalism has socially been said to espouse. bible is the word of god. non christians can't be saved. salvation by faith. faith along. bible alone. eucharist is figurative. etc etc. the problem is that there's more than one way to be a fundamentalist, even on arrays of issues, but they believe what they are suppose to to fall in line with a preexisting social order.
Movie censorship

I don't know about those ratings, but A rated is basically movies that only adults(18 plus) are allowed to watch, no exceptions. These days the Indian censor board declares movies A-rated even due to slight bad language and blood and gore. I watched some movies on Torrent, they had nothing that could make them A-rated. Just some hard action stunts and foul language, and they make it A-rated. In India we have only 3 ratings, U, UA, and A. And other bollywood movies have been fully banned in Pakistan. Movies are an art, they should not be banned and censored to such an extent.
Big pharmaceutical companies don't want cannabis legalized.

Big pharmaceutical companies don't want cannabis legalized and are the reason that many federal and state legislators are against it as well. These legislators have received millions in kickbacks / campaign contributions from big pharma lobbyists and are committed to keeping it illegal. They resist even rescheduling it as a substance with medicinal value. Yet the evidence is there that cannabis is a miracle drug for many with ailments that get no relief from pharmaceuticals.
Hillary Clinton is a criminal

No worries about late arguments :)I will start off my opening argument with this statement: Hillary Clinton has not done anything worthy of earning her the title "criminal". Hillary has been involved in countless scandals and has been accused of lying dozens of times. How can she possibly be clean of any wrongdoing? I take a two-pronged approach to this question:1. Despite being accused of these "scandalous" activities, Hillary has never been arrested, indicted, or charged with any crime. Each one of the media-enhanced scandals have been investigated - and each one has been found to be crap, with no fault or broken laws by Hillary. The "Hillary for Prison" movement is just silly, because if she had done anything worthy of imprisonment. .. one of the many scandals would've stuck, and she would've been imprisoned by now. But she hasn't. Which leads into my second point:2. Each of the scandals were driven out of proportion by media hype and conservative-driven efforts to damage her reputation. Hillary may have been responsible for minor mistakes, but the media makes almost every controversy seem far worse than it was. They make it seem like she's broken laws, when in reality it was a small mistake, oversight, or more often nothing at all. Let's take her two most recent controversies:Benghazi. While the deaths of the Americans in this incident was tragic, Hillary played little to no direct role in those deaths. She does not micromanage everything that goes on in every US embassy and had no way of knowing that more security ought to have been in place in that specific compound. At the very worst, Hillary could be blamed for no more than a slight lack of oversight- which is ultimately far from incriminating. Her private email server. Laughable- the FBI is turning up without any evidence of any laws broken, and no confidential information that was marked confidential at the time of sending. There were no laws in place specifically preventing her from using a private server - and although she is now admitting she shouldn't have used her own server, you still wind up with no laws broken, and no harm done. I close my opening argument by reiterating the statement that Hillary, despite being involved in lots of controversy and many scandals, is unfairly referred to as a criminal because said controversies are completely media-driven, and aren't in any way legitimate proof of her supposedly being corrupt, untrustworthy or deserving of the title "criminal".
Hillary Clinton is a criminal

"Criminal" is a term frequently used to define the Democratic front-runner. In this debate, I will argue AGAINST the statement that Hillary Clinton is technically, or ought to be, a "criminal". My opponent will argue that Clinton is, or should be, labelled as a criminal. I will define these two terms: criminal: "a person who has committed a crime" crime: "an action or omission that constitutes an offense that may be prosecuted by the state and is punishable by law" First round will be acceptance, the following rounds will just be plain ol' debating.
Gay Marriage Should Continue Be Legal

Thank you for making this debate and as con, I will be against gay marriage. Points: My point is based on rights. So despite what most people supporting gay marriage say, the point of a gay person having rights isn't as good as it seems. The fact that gays are already considered an insult to their religion and even their existence cannot be denied as the majority has already demonstrated that by refusing to associate or mix with anyone connected to the gay including the gay himself. If the government gives them more rights the majority will take this as an attack to their religion and they will do the natural thing. Retaliate. There will be more attacks on the streets and the gays will be shamed for a really long time. Maybe forever. The only reason why gays haven't been wiped out from the face of the earth (that was an expression for the record) is that they have been living in hiding and security and no one has any idea whether they are gay or not. However, marriage is public. The moment you hear that a guy married another guy, bam. He gets attacked. Soon gays will be too scared and once again will go into hiding and the right to marry will soon be useless. You don't need to be a fortune teller to figure out this will happen. So in conclusion, a right requires a platform and this right doesn't have one. Just to clairify my stance, I am not saying I am against gays, I am saying THIS right will do more harm than good to them. Rebuttals: My point has already destroyed yours and I will explain how. As I have said, the majority consider gay marriage as an attack to their religion such as, as you said, the marriage of Adam and Eve. By the fact that gay marriage is unpopular, when made legal, they will take it as an attack to them and they will attack back. The gays are living in hiding and it is incredibly rare to find a gay marriage as it will be taking a toll on their lives and they know it. Face it, unless we can do something to change the majority's opinion (which we currently cant) there will be no platform for the law to stand. By illegalizing gay marriage, we could neutralize the hate by a little bit and gays would be a little safer out there. Besides, there is certainly no point of holding the law up so why bother? With that, I conclude my speech and pass the debate to my opponent.