BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Sit Ups VS Planks VS Leg Raises

Sometimes referred to as curlups, the standard sit-up involves lying on your back on a mat with feet restrained, either by a partner or by hooking them under a stable object. With your hands cradling your head and neck, you then lift your torso all the way up to your legs and lower back down to complete one repetition. Multiple variations of the move exist. Cross the arms over your chest, perform the move without anchoring your feet, curl up and down on an incline bench or hold a weight at your chest or behind your head as you execute the sit-up. You may also perform sit-ups on an unstable surface, such as a stability ball or half-ball. Research published in a 2008 issue of Perceptual Motor Skills showed that the most muscle activation occurs when you do a full sit-up on a firm surface, such as the floor, however.The primary muscle activated during a sit-up is the rectus abdominis, the sheath of muscle fibers that cover the front of your torso. If you do a sit-up without anchoring the feet, you'll activate this muscle more so than you do with the feet anchored, showed a study published in the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research in 2013. The obliques at the sides of your waist also activate during a sit-up. They assist the action and aren't the primary movers. In real life, these muscles bend your torso side to side and rotate you left and right. They also work to stabilize your spine. If you really want strong obliques, add moves such as side planks and seated, weighted twists to your routine. Hip Flexors Tighten The hip flexors, also known as the illiopsoas, assist you when you flex and extend your torso, as happens when you rise and lower during a sit-up. The hip flexors are a group of muscles that connect the femur, or thigh bone, to the pelvis. They're activated when you sit, stand, run, walk or squat. Sit-ups contribute to short and tight hip flexors. Chronicially tight hip flexors, which plague much of the population, can cause low back pain. Leg Engagement Although you think of sit-ups as an ab-specific move, you may feel the fronts of your thighs fatigue after you've performed a number of reps. This is because the muscles of your quadriceps, including the sartorius and rectus femoris, are engaged as you do a sit-up. Another thigh muscle, the tensor fasciae latae, located at the outer upper thigh also works during a sit-up. The anterior tibialis at the front of your shins stabilizes the lower legs when your feet are hooked under a brace. What Sit-Ups Don't Work Sit-ups aren't a comprehensive core exercise. They fail to work the internal abdominal muscles, including the transverse abdominis, which are critical to good posture and stabilization. It's OK to include sit-ups as part of your core routine, but also do a variety of other exercises to also work muscles that support your spine and that directly target your oblique
Homosexuality is not wrong, philosophically

ChosenWolff, you state "My opponent will go next round. " Considering this is still Round 1, I shall simply offer some definitions, and show you the same generosity you have shown me. Secular POV: Oxford Dictionaries defines "secular" as "not connected to religious or spiritual matters" [1] (in World English) and "denoting attitudes, activities, or other things that have no religious or spiritual basis" [2] (in American English). I include both definitions to ensure that we are on the same page. We start from a naturalistic base (spirits, souls, gods, etc. are non-existent) and build our case from there, proving the necessary components of our moral system as we move forward. Homosexuality: I doubt this is in reference to the mental and emotional state of being attracted to members of the same sex, as to argue that certain thought processes are immoral seems an inappropriate endeavor. Given that we can think without acting, just as we can act without thinking, I am sure this debate will be focused upon Homosexual Acts. You state "Everything that is natural is not wrong. People that commit natural acts, can not be blamed for going off artificial paths", which seems to me to be referring to acts which are born of homosexual attraction. Philosophy: "Philosophy is an academic discipline that exercises reason and logic in an attempt to understand reality and answer fundamental questions about knowledge, life, morality and human nature. " Ethics is "the study of right and wrong and how people should live", and is included within the umbrella of "Philosophy". [3] Right: morally good, justified, or acceptable [4]"Wrong" can be understood as either "not-right" (the opposite of right, defined above) or as a synonym for "Immoral" which is defined as "Not conforming to accepted standards of morality". [5] So, we have some key terms for this debate. I intend to utilize Evolutionary Ethics as a crux of my arguments. Good luck to you, ChosenWolff. [1] . http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...;[2] . http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...;[3] . http://www.whatisphilosophy.net...;[4] . http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...;[5] . http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...;
Homosexuality is not wrong, philosophically

This is a philosophy debate. Which means that all arguments should start from a secular POV. That doesn't mean religious arguments can't be used, but it does mean you must prove god exists before they can be made. That's why I reccomend that people just keep god out of this argument.Fair warning, I will base my argument on stoic philosophy. Everything that is natural is not wrong. People that commit natural acts, can not be blamed for going off artificial paths. I state this now, so my opponent knows what to refute. My opponent will go next round.
Abortion

If nothing existed inside the womb, what would be the point of an abortion? Women need to make the right choices in life but it takes two to tango. The main issue here is men who fail to step up to the plate when women are pregnant, their all time favorite excuse is that the child is not theirs. Examples like this cause women to make irrational decisions and abortion is at the top of the list. Life is hard but taking another life is even harder, the decision alone will change your life forever. Many abortions occur for no real reason. Coming from a poor class should not be the underlying reason why you choose the abortion route. If women are so concerned with not being parents then they should not get pregnant or have sex. Most people who are for abortion are in the present to speak about it. The aborted individuals will never get to state their peace. There is another alternative that begins with an "a" and does not injure the unborn child whatsoever and that's called adoption.
Abortion

The possibilities of children being born with defects is strong in many cases. However, a baby should not come into this world unwanted. About 49% of all pregnancies among American women are unintentional. Having a child is an important and lifelong decision that requires responsible consideration, preparation, and planning. It has been addressed that abortion lowers crime; some of the estimates claim that legalizing abortion did in fact account for as much as a 50% of drop in murder, property crime, and violent crime between the years 1973 and 2001. Teenage girls, unmarried women and women who are financially unstable are likely to have unintentional pregnancies. Those pregnancies that lead to unwanted babies result in the child being born into a poor class, the chances of those unwanted children leading criminal lives in adulthood is increased.
Abortion

Handicapped people can live very fulfilling lives. Allowing abortion is offensive to disabled people because it implies that they, and their lives, are less worthwhile than the lives of 'normal' people. Having a disability is not the end of the world. Disabled people are still human beings and should not be discriminated because of their disability. Not all people have feet, hands, can walk, and speak. They are humans because of their nature, their essence, not because of physical abilities or disabilities. Nobody is perfect in nature we all in essence have some flaw or defect that we do not like about ourselves. Abortion also emanates various medical complications for woman. Some general complications arising in women due to abortions are blocked fallopian tubes, weakened cervix, uterine scarring, and damage to the woman's reproductive system, which may make her unable to conceive in the future. Apart from these common problems, there is also an increase in the probability of miscarriages, stillbirths, and premature births. Abortion is also related to the increase in chances of breast, uterine and cervical cancer in women. These health risks are crucial and could be avoided if abortions were not an option.
Abortion

Abortion gives couples the option to choose not to birth babies with severe and life-threatening medical conditions. There is a possibility of babies being born with Fragile X syndrome, which is the most common genetic form of mental retardation. This affects 1 in every 4,000 males and 1 in every 8,000 females. As well as Down Syndrome, 1 in every 800 babies are born with Down Syndrome and 1 in every 3,500 babies are born with Cystic Fibrosis. Bringing a child into the world should not be about sentencing him/her to a handicap life.
Abortion

Unwanted babies could be adopted. Many childless couples are yearning to adopt. There is a lack of adoptable babies because abortion is legal. Over two million couples are waiting to adopt babies, and only 134,000 US children are available to be adopted as of June 2002. [28] [29] The percentage of infants given up for adoption has declined from 9% of those born before 1973 to 1% of those born between 1996 and 2002 (447 KB) . [53] Instead of having the option to abort, women should give their unwanted babies to people who can not biologically conceive. A human life is precious and Unborn babies are innocent human beings from the moment of conception. They have a fundamental right to life, which must be protected.
Abortion

A woman's right to choose abortion is a "fundamental right" recognized by the US Supreme Court in the Jan. 22, 1973 case Roe v. Wade. The fetus is not a human being. Abortion is in fact terminating a pregnancy, but not a baby. Personhood at conception is not a proven biological fact. Personhood begins at birth. According to Stuart W. G. Derbyshire, PhD, Senior Lecturer at the University of Birmingham, when an abortion is being performed, the fetuses are incapable of feeling pain. The fact that abortion is legal and professionally performed, reduces the risk of injury and death that are caused by illegal abortions. The modern procedures of abortion are safe, the risk of women dying from an abortion are in fact less than one in 100,000. As opposed to women who die from giving birth is 13.3 deaths per pregnancies.
Abortion

Women need to think about their unborn babies who are not responsible for this situation. These unborn babies should have the privilege to live and grow into a normal person. Women need to be more humanitarian and less egoistic with these babies. On the other hand, the baby doesn't know how or why he is here. It is not necessary to kill a life; there are many other solutions to resolve this problem short of abortion. Women should not abort is related to the conscience. When a woman has an abortion, she will always think about the baby she might have had. She will always think about the future that could have happened with her baby which will always remind her that she killed it. Because she has had an abortion, she will never have a good life, and her conscience will remind her of what she had done. Because a woman who has an abortion can't forget about what she has done, these thoughts will always be with her, and the results can be calamitous. Women have many options including refraining from having any sexual relations and using condoms.
Abortion

Although abortion may in fact be the killing of the fetus, there are several reasons why abortion should be an option for wome. Every woman's situation is never the same as the previous one. There may be reasons why a woman cannot have a child because of income issues, as well as not having the father of the child present, in some cases there is a possibility that a woman may have been victim of rape. If a woman who is a rape victim, as a result ends up pregnant, she may already be traumatized with the fact that the she was raped by a stranger or someone who may be close to her family. For a woman to follow through with the pregnancy might not be best for her. The option should always be present. Doctors may also be life savers, and taken oath precicley for that reason, however they cannot force a woman to follow through with a pregnancy she does not want to proceed with.
Abortion

Abortion cannot be justified because it involves the killing of an innocent human being. The fetus is a developing to be a distinct human being in its own right. Every child is a precious and unique gift from God. We have no right to destroy this whatsoever. The rights of the unborn child are equal to those of the mother. The embryo is human from its conception and has its own DNA. When the embryo is left alone it woll develop into a person. The fetus can feel the pain and has intelligence. Doctors and nurses promise to save the lives of all human beings and are not obliged to destroy it. Abortion breaks the Hippocratic Oath.
Abortion

Abortion is a medical procedure that involves terminating a pregnancy by the removing or expelling of a fetus or embryo from the uterus. Women all over the world have the right to choose what they want to do with their bodies. Pregnancy causes major changes in a females body, and these changes occur because of the child they are expecting. The majority of women who choose to have an abortion, mainly have one because they have the desire to delay childbearing or because they themselves are too young to have a child. Other reasons include not wanting to stop work or schooling, even because of financial or relationship instability. Although, there are several other reasons why women should be allowed to have abortions based on their choice. In some cases, some women may become pregnant because they were victims of rape. When a female has been raped, the psychological damage remains with them for their entire lives. Abortion should also be allowed in such instances because allowing a female, who has been victim of an abortion, to have the child of her rapist must be the most horrific experience ever. Abortion should be allowed, women have the right to do what they would like with their bodies.
Homosexuality is wrong

Well, Pro has forfeited so I have nothing to argue against except the one sentence they typed in Round 1. "Homosexuality is wrong, it is not natural to the earth"Natural - "Present in or produced by nature" (http://www.thefreedictionary.com...)Just because something is unnatural does not mean it is immoral. If this is true, then using the internet to debate is immoral because it is not natural. I think I'm done here...
Homosexuality is wrong

I would like to make a few clarifications though. The way the resolution is worded, it's safe to say we will be having a moral debate. In that sense, the words "wrong" and "immoral" can be used interchangeably. Thus, the burden on Pro in this debate will be to argue that homosexuality is immoral. I will argue that homosexuality is amoral. Amoral is defined as, "being neither moral nor immoral. " (. http://www.merriam-webster.com...)Please state your case, Pro.
DDO OT Semifinals: Jury Nullification

Resolved: In the United States, the principle of jury nullification is a just check on government. Imabench is the pro for this debate, which is part of the DDO Official Tournament. Imabench must present his case in the first round, but may not present any arguments in the final round in order to maintain round balance. Imabench also must present definitions in the first round, but I reserve the right to challenge them in my first speech, which will be presented in the second round. Rules 1. No semantics 2. No trolling 3. No exploiting the character limit 4. Dropped arguments are concessions.
Schools should be co-ed

Round one: opening statement and main argument Round 2: rebuttals Round 3: conclusion I do not care how experienced or old you may be i would like a clean polite arguement. Although it may seem contrary to popular belief, co-ed schools are much better than schools with separated girls and boys. Co-ed schools prepare students for real life. In single sex schools the students may be left out of important teaching methods, and they may not develop needed social cues. Students will see the opposite gender out of school and it will be socially awkward. The students do not learn the social skills needed for the real world, that is dealing with the opposite gender. Long story short, co-ed schools are much more productive, and beneficial than single sex schools. Co-ed schools are better than single-sex schools because in single sex school the students might feel left out. Imagine a sensitive boy who just messed up a problem, and the teacher starts yelling and getting up in his face. Of course, that is what the teacher thinks that is the good method of teaching a group of boys. The same thing goes for a hardcore girl in an all girls school. It can be clearly seen, that there are detrimental flaws to single-sex schooling. When students are put through single-sex schooling they do not learn any of the social cues that students learn in co-ed schools. In real life, students need to know how to have friends that aren't the same gender. If they don't, they would be extremely awkward which would make the student sad. Also it is proven that boys work better when girls are near. If 3-7 years of contact with the opposite gender are eliminated, the students will have a lot of catching up to do I know that test scores are higher in single-sex schools. Even if the test scores are higher, you are not going to get a job when you are older because you can't do well in the interview because you are socially awkward in the interview.Co-ed schools also promote equality. Single-sex schools are promoting gender stereotyping. Students that go to single-sex schools end up doing much worse in the real world than student that go to co-ed schools. It has now been clearly stated that Co-ed students end up doing better long term that single-sex educated students. There are flaws with single-sex schools like, students not learning social cues, the fact that not all students fit the stereotypical method of teaching one gender, and that single-sex schools promote gender stereotyping. Create a better generation of children make sure that kids go to co-ed schools.
Schools should be co-ed

So, although my opponent has forfeited this round, I will post a brief rebuttal: 1. Pro concludes that harsh teachers might make students feel left out. I'm not sure what the connection with gender is, though, since the Pro proposes that this condition could exist in either an all-male or an all-female school. It's possible that the Pro meant to argue that it's wrong to assume that all boys or all girls benefit from the same learning style as the rest of their gender. While that may be true, it doesn't demonstrate anything about whether a co-ed classroom is preferable, because that just means there are potentially more individuals with different learning styles all in the same room. This might exacerbate the consequences of having a one-dimensional approach to teaching, but Pro hasn't offered any reason why it would help resolve that problem. 2. Pro claims that without co-ed schooling, students cannot learn ANY social cues. However, it's unclear why that is true, except with regard to gender-interactions, and it's further unclear why there would be no other contexts in which students learned gender-related social cues. Similarly, it's unclear why students wouldn't make friends outside of school. 3. Pro claims that it is proven that boys learn better around girls, but this says nothing of whether girls learn better around boys. As such, the claim is flawed and gender-biased in favor of what is good for males. Additionally, as referenced in my position, Pro's claim is not entirely proven. Also, "learn better" doesn't mean "learn more." 4. Pro claims that social awkwardness will be a problem for job-seekers, but does not explain why gender separation in the classroom will diminish interviewing skills in the workplace. 5. Pro claims that co-ed schools promote equality, Simple research demonstrates that co-education has been present in the U.S. for over 200 years, but equality has not followed until recent years. Access to education is part of gender equality, but it is unclear that simply having co-ed schools promotes equality alone. 6. Gender stereotyping is rampant in co-ed schools and in our culture in general, in particular social, sexual, and intellectual stereotypes based on gender. Pro has not offered any argument why a gender-separated classroom would make matters worse. 7. Pro claims that gender-segregated students fare worse than co-ed students. This assumes causation from correlation, which is a fallacy. The studies I cited indicated use of gender-segregated classrooms in situations where students tend to be at-risk, so outcomes of gender-segregated schooling may not be easily compared to co-ed students who already had advantages. This is like saying that crutches make it hard for a person to run. Pro's arguments were not solidly established, and, contrary to Pro's conclusion, nothing "clearly" follows his arguments.