BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Gay Marriage Is Absolutely Okay

I haven't really though about this much so maybe I can learn something from this debate. I will keep this concise. [1] I do believe in separation of church and state; However, You're not allowed to eat pork in a mosque, How would you feel if the state legalized that, Only to have a bunch of white males roam into mosques to eat barque pork? Wouldn't that be the state encroaching on a religion? The analogy here seems synonymous with the gay marriage issue. [2] What is the purpose of marriage? It's a vow to God that you will remain faithful to your other half, What weight does such a vow hold, If the one making the vow is not religious? I can't understand why a gay man would want to partake in a religious practice that he knows discourages his practices. I've always been a tolerant individual and would never be willing to deface religious practices no matter how backwards they seem. It therefore follows, That if one wishes to be considered tolerant, One must respect other peoples beliefs and not deface their religion. [3] Being gay is not immoral in my opinion, But I do understand why it was considered a sin. Population growth is an important aspect to maintaining a society, Just look at Japan, Their largest problem is the current population decline which will have dire consequences in the future. Considering population growth is such an important part of society, I understand why ancient peoples outlawed homosexuality. This argument is not relevant to the modern day, But suggests the reason for condemning homosexuality was founded on a noble principle, Rather than, A hateful one. I believe if we want people to be tolerant of gay people, We need to be consistant in our beliefs and be tolerant ourselves.
This Opera House believes that: UtherPenguin is a danker meme master then Jedi4

Amazing memes from Con! 9/11, would recommend! I got some edgy memes for you. But if I upload it to the arguments, I might break the DDO interface (Hence triggering a war with North and South Korea) so here is a link: http://rs1img.memecdn.com... Oh damn that's edgy! Dd you see that?! Here is a skeleton to end my argument: http://36.media.tumblr.com... Oh God that's just 2 sp00ky a way to end an argument. So here is link to the hellish realm of 4chan: http://www.4chan.org... Oh God that's a terrible way to end an argument. Here's a link to 9gag: http://9gag.com... What the flying frick was I just thinking?! That's an even worse way to end an argument. Isn't providing links to 9gag aganist the Terms of Service? In that case I will end this argument in a way that is perfectly relevant to the debate!
This Opera House believes that: UtherPenguin is a danker meme master then Jedi4

It has come to my attention that Jedi4 has claimed to be "A master at Dank memes." Unfortunately, there can be room for only 1 Dank meme master. And I intend to defend my non-existent title. The debate is simple. Pro must present danker memes then Con and con must do vice-versa. Format of debate:1. Acceptance 2. Dank Memes 3. More memes 4. Conclusion (More memes allowed) No Semantics, only memes. Terms: Danker: Of higher quality. memes: A life force that makes .
Rap Battle

Hava crush on you? Haha, that's a good laugh. You jus a kid throwin words as if you ona raff. See, spittin verses ain't my thang, but I sure done try. While you sit there and tryna make someone cry. It's easy to pick up and go on witha way to fly. So don ask me if I can, jus leave me be and stop askin why? Rappin ain'ta style I do at all. But I try with every once to call. It's not like playin a game of basketball. You think you got game, ha, boi, i made you fall. Now that we done with this whack debate. Hopefully you don't run in some who relate. This time there ain't no leasure escape. You trapped in, while I set it off, and I bind des words to correlate!
Rap Battle

you tryin to hate on me cuz u secretly havva crush on me you tryin ur best at spittin but your oppurtunities are gettin p*ssed in cuz ur a failure tryin to make it but ik ur notta rapper, ur bad tryin to fake it You obviously have no talent at this, ur the worlds worst at this, you would rather be kissed you know why ur not good, cuz you havent even cussed andfyi, ur not the first p*ssy ive crushed!
Rap Battle

Yeah, 'disa rappin debate an I ain't even gon' try to win 'dis. I know I'm not a rappa, but I'ma give it a dab cuz all glory is His.Nah, not my opponent tho,... cuz he justa random dude spittin who he is. I'ma brag on my God and King cuz He da One True King of kings! Smh, my hands ain't even filled with them expensive diamond rings. Only thing shinin is His True Beauty of Lights which iz my rawed blings! This ain'ta bout me or some goofin peeps, 'dis bout my God who is so Alive! So we cud' keep goin' on 'dis flow of rhymes 'til we come down to no mo strive. Hmm, yeah, is like goin' to de ocean and takin' a frequent suicide dive. Bro, lemme telll yu bout my God tho... He dat One Holy, Perfect Bein'. He so sick, I ain't even gon' lie, when I see Him, mo o' my sin is seein'.These lyrics ain'ta bout me, isa bout God who I hope you be hearin'! Motionless cuz o' sin, oh my gosh, got me wantin' to cave in Can't breathe, *huuuu* graspin for air. Wherever I be inside is who I be outside. Yo! Take 'dis wicked heart and thrash it into livin art! Yeah.... (2x)Here I go again, Spittin words on my God.. He da judge o' da earth.Without Him is like livin' on a lost state of no birth. Wrath n hell is what I deserve, what chu thank? Yeah, isa sigh of dearth. But, lemme tell yu bout my Jesus, who was and is God's Son! Eryday you wake up to a new livin' day in seein' that blazin' sun. Psh, who you tink yu is? sin have you killed befo yu cud have fun! It wus fo Christ who gave up nuffin' but His flawless life. He claimed da Church as da ONLY sanctifyin' Beautiful Wife! So let da Gospel be heard as I shared jus now, an let it hit dat heart as a piercin knife. I pray this not be taken lightly as some form of cold with a temp of meds. Heed it, live it, bear dat fruit! An befo yu kno' it, yu too be livin' in wed's. Please, don't jus read dis as some words let it get stuck in yo heads! Motionless cuz o' sin, oh my gosh, got me wantin' to cave in Can't breathe, *huuuu* graspin for air. Wherever I be inside is who I be outside. Yo! Take 'dis wicked heart and thrash it into livin art! Yeah.... (2x) (Im out! Peace til next round!)
Rap Battle

Yo, this gonna be a good time and imma spit good rhymes while God over here's gonna keep on tryin but it aint gonna work, cuz I'm too good, I'm the best thing that's ever come outta the 'hood Now come at me bro, cuz you can't face me you be trampled by the ladies trying to chase me I'm like fire, i burn through weak spots Im the best thing thats come since the cure for chicken pox!
The Confederate flag is a social injustice

My opponent has not proven that the Confederate flag causes fear among African Americans or any others, nor have they proven that this is a psychological hate crime. Also, the resolution of this debate states that the Flag itself is a hate crime however the Flag itself is not a racist, the Flag itself did not kill anyone, the flag itself did not have any slaves, the Flag itself did not torture any POW's, and the Flag itself does not want to repeal the 13th, 14th or 15th Amendments. Also, remember, that my opponent accepted the terms about this debate being only about the flag, not what it represents. Vote Con!!!
The Confederate flag is a social injustice

ONLY because I accepted to the terms do I agree with you. Looking back I should not have because I kind already knew where it was headed but oh well. However. .. . If there was flag that just said southern pr, I grantee African Americans wouldn't fear it/ be opposed to it. But if it was the Confederate flag they would fear, so in actually they do fear the flag. . I don't know if that was an argument or not, more of an opinion. Let the people decide who won!
The Confederate flag is a social injustice

Remember, You said that African Americans fear the flag, but they actually fear what the flag represents. Your first round argument says that the Flag itself is a social injustice, and I have proven that the flag itself is not a social injustice. Also remember, the flag itself has not taken away anyone's social security, only what it represents has. So the flag itself is not a social injustice. Remember we are not debating if what the flag represents is a social injustice, only if the cloth and design is a social injustice (You accepted those terms).
The Confederate flag is a social injustice

Being that the flag is an inanimate object I wouldn't expect it to, I respect your answer and I see how I could have worded my debate differently, but saying the Confederate flag isn't an injustice is saying the Nazi flag isn't an injustice because it didn't kill the Jews. Does that make it ok? Is it any less painful for those whose suffered through the Holocaust?The flag is more than some cloth that you depict it to be, its a physiological hate crime because it inflicts fear amongst African Americans (and many more) who come into contact with it. If someone has a legitimate fear from the flag, I don't see how that's not an injustice because it unfair (Injustice definition from round 1) to take someone's personal security away from them.I make my point.
The Confederate flag is a social injustice

The Flag itself is not a racist The Flag itself did not kill anyone The flag itself did not have any slaves The Flag itself did not torture any POW's The Flag itself does not want to repeal the 13th, 14th or 15th Amendments The title says the flag is a social injustice, however the flag has never committed a social injustice. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org... Vote Con!!!!
The Confederate flag is a social injustice

I accept your terms although I don't see how you can debate the design. Either way I thank you for accepting and look forward to your argument.Terms used:Injustice: Lack of fairness or justice[1]Confederacy: A league or alliance, esp. of confederate states The Confederate flag is a social injustice because it is the emblem/design/pattern of the Confederacy, 13 states (or 11 depending on what sources you refer to) that seceded from the United States of America in 1861. The Confederate party still remains today, although not as prominent, and its philosophy's include amendments that repeal the 14th & 15th amendments (slave rights), racial segregation, and POW torture. Segregation and slavery are without a doubt injustices of there own because they break the 1st amendment (freedom of speech, religion, and being). By waving the Confederate flag, one is displaying his/her faith in the Confederacy much as wearing a cross displays ones faith in Christianity. The flag, in any light, is a symbol of injustice and should be waved no more.Those who wave the flag do it because they believe in the Confederacy (segregation, POW torture, slavery) or there just plain ignorant and feel the flag represents there rebellious traits or there southern pride. I have no problem if someone who truly believes in the Confederacy waves the flag, but any other purpose other than educational and historical reference is just wrong. http://www.confederateamericanpride.com... http://blackhistory.com...
Democracy without constraint eventually leads to more socialism. We are well on our way.

The original point, which has not been contested successfully in any way, is that people in a democracy will vote for more taxes, more services, and less control (over their money) as time goes by. It is inevitable human nature. And not because they want less control of their money, but because they want control over other people's money- who they obviously think have more of it to spare. That is the natural course of things in a democracy. None of your points successfully disproved my original claim, so there was no need to address them. My pointing to how this country has devolved more and more toward socialism over time is a nasty fact you are unable to explain away. Your lengthy worn out aguments simply distract from that fact and threaten to bore the reader. You discredit my argument that human nature leads one to pursue the path of least resistance by simply renaming that tenancy as the will to survive. That argument is just another distraction, and if true, does not excuse or change the resulting behavior. Socialism is inevitable with a democratic society because the majority can, does and will continue to impose its will regardless of virtue. There is no mechanism in our laws to stop it.
Democracy without constraint eventually leads to more socialism. We are well on our way.

I could have replied to you with two words, "You're wrong", however I realized that I was posting at debate.org, and not idisagreewithyou.com The point of the whole exercise is to support your position. I read through your "argument", which consisted of a poorly constructed paragraph and lifted some of the points you made, and came up with a position counter to those points. In the second round, you've elected to respond with another paragraph which restates some of the same things you claimed in your first paragraph without expanding your argument in any fashion, or actually responding to any of my claims. While I expect that you have a great amount of admiration for pundits that treat debates in the same fashion, all that you've managed to prove to me is that I ought to question your level of literacy and reading comprehension. I am not a proponent of socialism. I am a pragmatist. If you support a government that is going to have no polices that feed the hungry, they had better have polices to kill the hungry. Starving people have an amazing ability to cause political upheaval and disability. So, if you're going to insist on letting people starve, I hope that you will be mature enough to have them eliminated. Pragmatism is concerned with getting the job done. If feeding the hungry stops a problem, or prevents a problem it's a good solution. Even the Roman Republic and later the Roman Empire was clever enough to provide a grain dole for all citizens to avoid riots, and they had no problem defining ownership. Your opinion of what the founding fathers intended for this country likely doesn't include the fact that you would have never been able to vote for a Senator or for a President. I also suspect that you have failed to consider that most of the men who played a crucial role in developing our country were able to read Latin, and that's why they used the word "Republic", which is derived from the latin "Res Publica" which literally translated means "The Public Thing." They wrote a lovely little preamble to the Constitution which reflected the thoughts and feelings of the framers of the Constitution as to why they were creating the government that they created. However, I will accept any references that you can provide from their writings. I suspect you are confused by the Declaration of Independence, a document that was plagiarized in the first place, and has no actual baring on the impact or interpretation of the Constitution? I also have no reason to assume that the United States will be around in a hundred years. We've done nothing as a nation to ensure prosperity for our posterity. In round three, I would appreciate it if you could support yourself instead of hurtling personal attacks from your den of ignorance.
Democracy without constraint eventually leads to more socialism. We are well on our way.

Wow! I hope you cut an pasted most of that. Let's see if I can respond in 100 words or less. You are a proponent of socialism, so don't bother masking it or calling by any other name. And please don't use the constitution to defend it. A socialist society is the last thing the founding fathers had in mind when they started this once-great country. But, hey, don't be embarrased about the fact they you're a socialist. Socialism, in theory, sounds like a wonderful idea. Unfortunately its effects are counterintuitive. Socialism rewards laziness, and that concept can only grow in its appeal over time. Do you honestly think this country is going to be less socialist in 100 years?
Democracy without constraint eventually leads to more socialism. We are well on our way.

Since a literal interpretation of the constitution has gone out the window, there is no concrete protection against the have-nots (or work-nots as I call them) voting in large numbers to confiscate property from its rightful owners and redistibute it in the name of public welfare. As the spoils(welfare, free healthcare, government housing, etc.) from voting democrat (or even republican these days) become more apparent, more and more will be tempted to try and vote their way to prosperity rather than earn it. It's only human nature to take the path of least resistance, even if the reward is not as great as that produced by hard work. It's just a matter of time before our system will resemble that of your average socialist European county. Look back over the last 200 years, and you will see how the government's roll has devolved from protector to provider.
Evolution is the only scientific theory and the best theory out there

"What if life came on Earth by means that we do not know of yet? What if life was made by other life like aliens?" Evolution is not the explanation by which life originated. It explains how life changed to what it is today. These questions are therefore invalid as they do not pertain to the argument and are relevant to a separate discussion. If you understood evolution you would understand why "Macroevolution" hasn't been observed yet. Macroevolution is just evolution with time. There is evidence of evolution creating a new species through transitional fossils. "How?" If you expect the science community to analyze all species to prove evolution than all species must be observed for ID as well. Yes exactly. Secularism doesn't allow god to be taught in school. You verified that ID/Creationism are religious through this statement. The fact that ID/Creationism need a god/higher power to be true makes them unscientific. As scientists don't say "Well we don't have an explanation for this phenomenon. How about we say its the doing of some higher power that no one can prove or disprove?" There are absolutely no scientific theories that require a god to explain how it occurs. I have provided many examples that support the theory of evolution you have just chosen to ignore them. You have yet to prove that ID/Creationism are scientific and that they are better explanations for the origin of species. Therefore you still have proven nothing.
Evolution is the only scientific theory and the best theory out there

R1) Evolution and scientific framework "The only other theories out there are intelligent design and creationism which are the same thing. As determined by the Kitzmiller v. Dover court case. This court case also determined that evolution is science and ID is not." What if life came on Earth by means that we do not know of yet? What if life was made by other life like aliens? R2) Empirical evidence for evolution "We have seen it occur today with bacteria, elephants, and humans. " No this simply has not been observed yet. Macroevolution has not been observed yet. No scientists has ever claimed to see or document an organism turning into another organism (like ape turning into man) "One argument against evolution is that not all transitional fossils have been found and not every species has been analyzed. This same argument can be used against ID so it should remain invalid." How? R3) Miscellaneous "Lastly I would like to point out that a lot of people in the religious community have worked day and night to get ID/Creationism into the school system. Why haven't they been able to do so?" Because secularism does not allow God into the school system even if God is true. "Evolution is very scientific and can even explain the process of how it happens. " What is the evidence? You provide no evidence for evolution. My opponent provides no evidence for evolution and does not meet his burden.
Evolution is the only scientific theory and the best theory out there

So I said its the only scientific theory. Why did I say this? Well science in the basic sense is using evidence, experimentation, and facts to back up a hypothesis. I already stated examples evolution has for this. The only other theories out there are intelligent design and creationism which are the same thing. As determined by the Kitzmiller v. Dover court case. This court case also determined that evolution is science and ID is not. Evolution is like the water cycle. In nature you see the water cycle occur but what proof is there that it occurred in the past? Well we know it occurred in the past because we understand why It occurs now. Maybe it happened in a different fashion and in a different amount of time but none the less it occurred. Evolution is the same. We have seen it occur today with bacteria, elephants, and humans. Therefore we understand that it occurred in the past. This is solidified with transitional fossils, vestigial structures, DNA, embryology, and homologous structures. One argument against evolution is that not all transitional fossils have been found and not every species has been analyzed. This same argument can be used against ID so it should remain invalid. Lastly I would like to point out that a lot of people in the religious community have worked day and night to get ID/Creationism into the school system. Why haven't they been able to do so? This is because ID is not scientific but rather religious. The establishment clause calls for the separation of church and state. So ID remains away from public education. Evolution is very scientific and can even explain the process of how it happens. Therefore its being taught in schools and not ID. This supports both arguments of why its both the only scientific theory and the best theory.
Word Debate!!

My word: Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis long word said to mean a lung disease caused by inhaling very fine ash and sand dust. source: http://oxforddictionaries.com... FYI its the longest word in the dictionary. http://en.wikipedia.org... Use in a sentence: My god, your Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis is getting worse!
Trump

Here is the source I will be using: - http://todaysinfo.net... This website lists 13 reasons why Trump will make a great president. I am only going to copy and comment on two of them. 12. "Trump is planning to build a great, great wall (yes"two "greats") on our southern border between the U.S. and Mexico. The best part? He"s planning to have Mexico pay for that wall, and mark his words, "" I will immediately terminate President Obama"s illegal executive order on immigration."" "Plus, with less authentic delicious Mexican food here in the U.S., obesity rates will probably drop." -regardless of of Trump's racist bigotry used to appeal to an old, racist crowd, Immigration IS a problem here in the US and he plans to put an end to it. 1. "Why would Trump make the best president of all time? Because he said so. "I will be the greatest jobs president that God ever created, I tell you that. I"ll bring back our jobs from China, from Japan, from Mexico and from so many places. I"ll bring back our money. " Sadly, the American dream is dead. But if I get elected president, I will bring it back bigger and better and stronger than ever before, and we will make America great again."" By building a wall, fighting ISIS, and strengthening the Christian religion, Trump will make the greatest president of all time. That is my argument. Thankyou