BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
There is evidence for creationism.

For the elves to be responsible for the beauty in the world, music, the stars, etc, they would have to have created it. They would be intelligent being, and therefore, my opponent's hypothetical affirms creationism. Whatever being you claim responsible, you will be affirming creationism. My opponent and I seem to have a disagreement on what evidence is. As my opponent suggested, we will be taking ignorant stances, so please, disregard any scientific theories that explain the 'phenomena' we're talking about. Evidence, as defined in the Oxford dictionary, simply needs to indicate that something is true. Indicate: http://www.askoxford.com... be a sign or symptom of. Therefore, something nearly needs to be a sign that would lead one to think that there was indeed an intelligent creator. Evidence does not need to be proof, and usually isn't. It simply needs to be a piece of information that is a sign of an intelligent designer. My opponent once again confuses what we're trying to prove here. He says that perhaps pretty girls were the creators. However, this is still creationism. While creationism is often used to indicate a strict belief in some religious creation story, it is more broadly defined as the notion that what we see around us was created by an intelligence, not by natural processes. Also, I hardly see how your parallel is valid here. When we see a light in the sky, we have more than just evidence that there is a light in the sky. We know something caused it. And something caused that. And something caused that. We know there must somewhere down the line be an ultimate cause we can draw it back to. However, everything natural requires a cause. Therefore, it must have been something supernatural, and since the only supernatural explanation we have is a god figure, it would seem to indicate the existence of one. Therefore, even my opponent's parallel is evidence that a 'god' (read: supernatural being) exists and it is the ultimate cause of the universe. Ergo, it created the universe. I have provided evidence, therefore I have disproved my opponent's side of the resolution.
There is evidence for creationism.

An intelligent designer may be a possibility but what evidence is there for the proposition? The stars? Beauty in the world? Music? All of those are caused to happen by elves. I don't actually believe that but as, elves is an acceptable suggestion, we see those things cannot be evidence for an intelligent designer anymore than they are evidence of elves. I know that intelligent design is simply lipstick on the pig of creationism, however you are to argue evidence latter specifically. Though the points are both equally baseless. Beauty isn't inherent in the universe. Beauty is, as they say, in the eye of the beholder. We view things as beautiful. This would be acceptable evidence that we exist but no evidence at all that anything we behold is created in the sense we are arguing. An argument from ignorance does not make for evidence of the proposition you must provide evidence in favor of. I'm more than happy to, for the sake of the debate, ignore the amazingly profound theories of evolution and the big bang. Let us declare ourselves completely ignorant origins! There is still NO EVIDENCE! Beem0r, I respect you greatly and understand your argument is best won by pretending that you have a case and bamboozling people. So I'm going to point this out clearly for the readers. Do not be fooled. Evidence is evidence. The beauty of the stars is no more evidence that pretty girls built them than omnipotent deities. Litanies of things we do not know are not evidences for specific claims. Suggesting 'things are hard' or 'beyond your knowledge' or 'open to debate' is not evidence for a very specific claim that they were created by an omnipotent deity! As arguments from ignorance are necessarily the mainstay of the pro argument, let me give you an parallel to keep in mind: I see a light in the sky. It floats there for a moment, then streaks across the sky and is gone! I don't have one flipping clue what it could be. Is this evidence of extraterrestrial visitors from another planet spying on Earth, abducting people and performing odd experiments on them? -- No. It's evidence for a light in the sky! Keep this in mind. Evidence is evidence, and my opponent has none!
There is evidence for creationism.

Devil's advocate here, contending that there is evidence for creationism. Look around you. Look outside your window. Look up at the stars tonight. This world we live in is so beautiful. While this could be explained by other things, an intelligent designer is also a possible explanation. Evidence: http://www.askoxford.com... information or signs indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid. Well, the belief that there is an intelligent creator is certainly valid. This beauty inherent in the universe is clearly a sign that would indicate a creator. Also, let us consider the intense complexity of life. It's true that life as become more and more complex, but there is currently no rock solid explanation for how life came about. Abiogenesis, while there are some theories out there, is still a matter that, to my knowledge, is open to debate. Thus, the existence of life could indicate that there is an intelligent creator, who crafted the first steps of life. Also, let's think of the big bang. What caused it? To say that something naturalistic was the cause of it simply begs the same question. What caused the cause of the big bang? Ad infinitum. However, there could be a first cause. But anything natural would require a cause. Therefore, the logical existence of this first cause is evidence of a supernatural creator. I'll let my opponent respond now.
Should gay/lesbian couples be able to get married

First off those were not my opinions they were facts. Me as a Christian I completely believe in God and he clearly states Galatians 4:18 all men/people should be equal so if two men want to marry they should be able to do want they want. It also states that all men are equal in the Constitution and Gettysburg Address. So if they are equal they should have the freedom of who they want to marry.wiki.answers.com/Q/Where_in_the_Bible_is_the_phrase_all_men_are_created_equal_located
Should gay/lesbian couples be able to get married

You believe that homosexual couples should just be able to get married, but, I disagree. Anyone who loves another person should be able to do more than just possibly marry, they should be able to get married publicly and legally. They shouldn't have to bribe a priest and make an underground operation to. While u sir, you believe in giving the littlest of all mercies to the homosexuals: possibility, I blve n frdom!
Stormcloaks' Goals Are Right

Note: This is a serious debate Whoever wants to argue against me has to have adept knowledge over Skyrim lore. Okay, this is something I've wanted to debate. As you may know, in Skyrim, Stormcloaks are the rebels. They fight for the right of worshipping Talos, which is banned by the Thalmor and have their leader as the High King of Skyrim. They fight the Imperial Legion, who is forced by the White-Gold Concordat to outlaw Talos. Con must argue against this, and explain why the Imperial Legion is right. Round-Acceptance Round-Opening arguments (Con may refute in this round) Round-Rebuttals and defending one's arguments. New arguments, if there are any, may be posed here. Round-Rebuttals and defending one's arguments. Game quotes or similar things do not need to be sourced, but it is preferable. . http://www.uesp.net... or . http://elderscrolls.wikia.com... are good sites for this (especially the first one).
Stormcloaks' Goals Are Right

"My opponent contradicts himself at this point. First he says the Empire would be rushed by Thalmor should they make Talos worship legal. Then, later, he says that they did good by not attacking the Empire since they could be crushed. Thus, I do not know which side does Con take. The solely purpose of my argument on this point was to say why his sentence "The Empire probably wishes that Talos would be legal, but if they make it legal they will get crushed by the Thalmor" is not true, which he presented in the second round." Actually there was no contradicting here. How the Thalmor will crush the Empire is simple. What they can do is wait for the time to come because sometimes patience is key. They are waiting for the Empire to get weaker to they (the Thalmor) can be stronger against them (the Empire) in the war. It is not a totally different opinion, I am just explaining how the Thalmor can tactically win and why they are not attacking immediately. Comparing this to our history lets look at the Battle of Austerlitz in the Napoleonic Wars. Napoleon was waiting for his enemies to attack him to he can win. I have explained why Thalmor find the Civil War beneficial as it remains a stalemate. I understand about all the forts as well as the conquering of the capital cities in the war, but we cannot say that the Empire will just simply pull back out of Skyrim and give up. The Empire would want those forts and resources back and thus it would send troops to get them back. "Khajits and Argonians are treated everywhere equally, with only Dunmer being especially discriminated (only in Windhelm)." This what he said this round, now lets see what my opponent said last round: "It is noted by numerous Khajits that they aren't allowed in cities, and that they have to stay outside of the cities. Although to a lesser extent, Argonians are under a similar situation." In case my opponent completely changed what he said this round. You are not treated equal if you are not allowed in a town. If the Stormcloaks do take control of Skyrim more people will discriminate because the Stormcloaks will rule more than Skyrim and that is why the Khajits, Argonians, and Dumner would rebel. Numbers do make a difference in terms of the size of your army. Then the rebels would help those small bands of imperials out. http://www.uesp.net... http://www.uesp.net... http://www.uesp.net...
Stormcloaks' Goals Are Right

OK now I will being my arguments. The Issue of the Worship of Talos While things maybe better in Skyrim if Talos was legalized the Imperial Legion is simply honoring their commitments. The Empire probably wishes that Talos would be legal, but if they make it legal they will get crushed by the Thalmor. If Thalmor crush the Empire then practically the Dark Ages of the Elder Scrolls will begin. To relate this to history the Dark Ages are considered what happen in Europe for centuries after the fall of the Roman Empire which united the most of Europe at the time. Like the Roman Empire, Skyrim's Empire would be shattered into many pieces each being held by a possible warlord dictator who wanted to collect them all. Ever heard the phrase "United we stand, divided we fall." That is what would happen if the Stormcloaks win in Skyrim. How Ulfric is Bad Ulfric is bad in the sense that he would represent the "....divided we fall" part of the phrase while the Empire stands for "united we stand". The Thalmor would love if Ulfric could win the war and cause division because that would make it easier for them to conquer Skyrim. Ulfric basically causes the Dark Ages if he wins, in the Elder Scrolls. Also, while it may not be true, it is possible that Ulfric could not just be in the war for the Nords, but also for personal gain (rule all of Skyrim) many rebel leaders wish that in the modern world. In end the Thalmor want Tamriel can use Ulfric to get what they want. The Stormcloaks are Racist Especially in Windhelm the Nords have segregated two groups within the city. These two groups are the Dumner (Dark Elves) and the Argonians who are both segregated into two sections in Windhelm. It is only said through Viola Giordano that the Dumner are more heavily taxed than the Nords are at the Jarl's wish. The Dumner are forced to live in the infamous slum below Windhelm called the "Grey Quarter" because of the Dumner skin color and Ulfric turns a blind eye to their pleads. The Argonians on the other hand are forced to live outside the city walls and live at the Argonian Assemblage and work at the city docks. If the Stormcloaks come to power this racism and segregation could spread through all of Skyrim and engulfing it into a rage of fire and blood on the Dumber and the Argonians. In many ways, Ulfric is like Governor George Wallace of Alabama who was pro-segregation of whites and other races in the south and ran for president in 1968 winning Georgia, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Arkansas. Luckily, Richard Nixon won the presidency. http://www.uesp.net... http://www.uesp.net... http://www.uesp.net... http://www.uesp.net... http://elderscrolls.wikia.com... http://elderscrolls.wikia.com... http://elderscrolls.wikia.com... http://elderscrolls.wikia.com... http://elderscrolls.wikia.com... http://elderscrolls.wikia.com... http://elderscrolls.wikia.com...(Skyrim) http://elderscrolls.wikia.com...(Skyrim) http://elderscrolls.wikia.com... http://en.wikipedia.org... http://answers.yahoo.com...
Stormcloaks' Goals Are Right

I'm as well sorry for the late post (while I'm writing this I merely have an hour and 40 minutes left. So, yeah. Now, I will proceed to explaining why are Stomcloaks right in their goals. I will base most of my argument on one point. Worship of TalosTalos was one of the most worshipped Gods of all deities in Skyrim, as the player finds out while he plays the game. However, this worship was forbidden by the White-Gold Concordat between the Empire and the Aldmeri Dominion to result in piece. Skyrim never decided or was even asked about this. The Empire only uses this as a valid rule since it doesn't want war with the Dominion (Hence the quote from Imperial Soldiers "What the Stormcloaks like to forget is that the Empire is what is keeping the Dominion from Skyrim"). This is obviously not very nice of them. Talos was one of Skyrim's national symbols, essentially. Imagine if you forbid Christianity in America. What would happen? Rants, rebellion since Christanity is so common in America. All Stormcloaks are asking is to get back the fredoom of worship, which, I believe, many would consider normal. People wish to worship whoever they want. The Thalmor don't have any place in saying people what do to, and their reason is not necessarily strong. The position of Talos as a deity is somewhat implied in the game. The player can get his blessing, which improves his stats, essentially proving Talos exists. Normal people can't give blessings through ther shrines, now, can they? So, to conclude, Talos is a very important part of the Nordic culture. However, Imperials forbid it without even consulting with them. Thus, the Stormcloaks have the right to rebell and fight for their rights. __________________________On another note, hoping to evade Con's possible argument, I'm going to explain why Ulfric isn't a murderer or a bad person. First, I want to note he is a highly trained soldier, a very good leader (seeing how he named a whole army of his name and how loyal it is to him). As for the murderer part, it is heavily implied that, he, in fact, had a fair duel according to the Nordic customs. He didn't use his voice to kill the High King of Skyrim, but his sword. The voice was merely a tool to get him on ground. Thus, he cannot be called a murderer. If Con asks how do I know that Ulfric is this honorous Nord, I have two proofs. Not only Ulfric tells this story his way about the duel, but Sybille Stentor as well, the very court wizard of Solitude. She claims she was there when the duel happened. Ulfric challenged the High King and he had no choice but to accept, due to the customs of the Nords. Therefore, this murder wasn't a cold blooded assassination. (Con can check, if he wants to. Just go to Sybille. She will say this, he just has to choose the right dialogue) If Ulfric is killed during the civil war quest, and then the player continued to the main quest, he will see Ulfric in Sovngarde, the Nordic afterlife. And Sovngarde is a place for valiant, courageous Nords. [3] This obviously means Ulfric wasn't a bad Nord, and fought for good. Sources: 1. . http://www.uesp.net...2. . http://www.uesp.net...3. . http://www.uesp.net...
Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is a church full of copy cats, bounsing ideas off each other.

Whoa--sorry I took so long; my friend needed help on physics. Let's wrap this puppy up, shall we? First, I'd like to talk about a rhetorical technique/fallacy: ad hominem, or translated from Latin, "attack the man. " It's a ploy wherein a debater attacks his opponent's moral character or beliefs, rather than the substance of his argumentation. It's fallacious, because a person's morality has nothing to do with whether what he's saying is true or not. In order to effectively disprove a point, a speaker must demonstrate why the argument a person made is logically flawed. GodSands, unfortunately, committed this fallacy when he stated, "You mock God for what reason? If you were true to yourself, you would not mock what others believe in. But remain yourself. If you took life seriously you would not mock hope. You do not take life seriously, because you do not understand. " (Edited somewhat for punctuation) By accusing me of lying to myself, he attempted to weaken my argumentation. Sadly, it's bad logic. Furthermore, my opponent has committed the cardinal sin of debate: ignoring the resolution. As I've taken pains to reiterate, this resolution is about the plagiaristic tendencies of FSM, not their moral character, their veracity, or their worth as ANYTHING--even a joke. FSM might very well be a meaningless, evil delusion as you claim, but it's not important. In debate, what matters is the resolution. When we stop arguing about that, we lose all common ground, and the round degenerates into meaningless slop. Therefore, topicality will be my primary voting issue of today's debate. While secondary in nature, the next voting issue of the round is the nature of humor. My opponent tells me that, if I understood the Bible, I wouldn't find the Church funny. However, many of my friends who are devoted Christians find attacks on their faith of the same caliber funny, and in turn, I find the same kind of attack on my beliefs funny as well. Some people, such as my opponent, don't respond favorably to belief attacks--but there are those who do, and it is for them that the Church was created. There's naysayers of every truly funny subject, after all; good humor is challenging. GodSands may never find FSM funny, and it's his right not to. For the rest of us, though, the Church is a brilliant work of parody. In waxing righteously furious on the character of the Church of the FSM, making unwarranted attack after another, and questioning my mental stability, GodSands forgot his original gripe with the Church--plagiarism.
Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is a church full of copy cats, bounsing ideas off each other.

"So--you say to me, "Man up." I say unto you, "Lighten up." -- Sooooowa...shall I just work off this then? I think I might. The other information you gave me is meaningless. Like a joke is. I would not ponder over a joke like this you baboon. (Joke) If it was meaningless. You think it is a joke because you do not understand the Bible and therefore do not enjoy or take seriously anything it says. Name me one thing that that you do not understand but really enjoy? If you understood the Bible you would not find the FSM fun but just a delusion. Look read my other debate which I have mentioned in my previous argument. All the artist has done is placed that silly picture in frong of God. Great now you are surely delusional. I know God does not look like the original picture of God did but it shows respect. Unlike the FSM. Which mocks God. You still take God as a joke anyway so why do you need the FSM? You pay more attention to that than God. So the FSM is a way that you can get fermiliar with the faith. Like a taster. But a billion times worse than the real thing. If you are even 1 times worse than perfect you will no be granted into heaven. You mock God for what reason. If you were true to your self you would not mock what others believe in. But remain your self. If you take life seriously you would not mock hope. You do not take life seriously, because you do not understand. This is short not because I am being slughtered by his argument, but because he does not get my point. I understand it menat for a joke but it is not funny. In stead serious.
Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is a church full of copy cats, bounsing ideas off each other.

I asure you that you would not find a joke cracking Christian who laughs at most light hearted thing. Laugh at that artists picture. Imagen: A Christian is laughing at a collection of funny and amusing picture and quotaions. He turns the page over once again, laughing and to find that FSM picture. Would he keep laughing? So there is a message behind this. Which is not funny. Its like you laugh you way to the truth. So when you realise endorins you feel happy in what you are doing. It is probably the only way to make you relise the truth but in a stupid and childish fashion. I say to that "Man up!" Take the truth face to face and stop creating your own world of lies and false hood. You just explian the origin of the Church of the FSM. I do not care where it came from. I just want to know why and its real purpose is. Beyond that 2 second laugh you inherit from the picture. If it was just for that then why is it a religion. You are not taking this seriously but acting on it like a joke. You are trying to confort me by explaination of the FSM. And talking about it's detail spin offs. I want the real reason of it. And I think you need to respond to by previous argumant. I know that people think its a joke but with out them knowing they are believeing in God. In a mocking fastion. Mockery of God will not grant you heaven and the devil has used the FSM to fool people that this belief is ok and acceptable. You are losing out. The devil gets at people in so many ways. Read my debate called: The very fact that God exists is denied by the devil says through men, is true. You would be a dar if you did that. Do your self a favour and step back and picture my points.