BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Religion brainwashes humanity

Since there is no rubric for debate, no organization at all, and my opponent starts by saying that Religion = the Bible, and generally his whole argument is emotional rant and hate against a certain group, I will be the one to supply reason to this argument. Without religion in this world, Humanity would fall apart. I am not foolish or cocky enough to believe that my religion specifically is what holds the earth together, but simple logic tells us that religion brings stability and peace to the earth. Again, not all religion is perfect, and some can be downright dangerous, but on the whole, stable, intelligent religions preach peace. Christianity, Judaism, Hindu and Buddhism (I acknowledge that these are only half-religions, half-ways of life.), and many factions of Islam provide good standards for life. They command their followers to love each other, and others in the world. They preach against murder, they condemn lying, hatred, abuse, and immorality. It is because so many people of this world follow these morals that our World can stand upright. So far the only arguments that have come out of my opponent have been hateful, ignorant slander that have gotten him nowhere. I am interested to hear if he has any real evidence. I intend to cite sources in the final round.
Religion brainwashes humanity

Religion, oh we all know what that is. That pesky book called the bible. The great figment of imagination. It's why rebublicans exist. It's why there are many ignorant people in this world. OUR GOD IS AN AWESOME GOD, HE RAINS FROM HEAVEN ABOVE WITH WISDOM, POWER AND LOVE, OUR GOD IS AN AWESOME GOD! Truly does love people. BUT NOT GAYS OR TRANS! No way, we hate those people because of... Reasons right? Because they're "evil". Becuase there is not love if it is no between man and women. Because you know if you choose the wrong mate you'll be thrown into the lake of fire, right? Let's be honest, God is nothing but a homophobic, transphobic, narcissistic, insecure, prejudiced and bigoted moron, like many of his followers. God wipes out humanity, kills 2,000,000 people, satan kills 10 and for some reason, LETS WORSHIP A MASS MURDERER. While I do not agree either exists, if I had to choose one it would be satan and they have better music in hell anyways. There is no "freedom" with "religion". You will not love who you want, you will not play with your genetallia that has the urge to ejacualte, the feeling God gave you in the first place, and created. If a women is raped, the rapist just pay 50 gold to her father and she'll be forced to marry her very rapist. Stone people with different opinions. Let's be clear, How can God want so much attention? Imagine how many people who died and are now in "heaven". Gods getting lots of praise. God and heaven, are nothing but a dictatorship. The people see God as a God, but God gives them nothing. The bible is a book of lies, a simple list of broken philosophies that many Christians will deny. And those who do are normally the indoctrinated people who can't grasp the idea of reality, so they instead cling to their bible, afraid of death, so afraid that they comfort themselves thinking YAYYY ILL GO TO HEAVEN! What about let's say, mentally handicapped people? People who cannot grasp the idea of a creator?(for all I know that persons probobly smarter then you, Christians). Shall they burn in hell too, with no option? YEP GOD LOVES YOU SOOOOO VERY MUCH Telling your kids fairy tales don't exist Parent: Hey, you know that Santa claus, the tooth fairy and the easter bunny don't exist right Kid: Yeah I'm smart enough to know that Parent: Okay so you know that things that are supernatural but have no evidence to support the claims of do not exist(a.k.a these things) right? Kid: So you mean God dosen't exist? Parent: HEY DONT TALK ABOUT GOD LIKE THAT!!!
Religion brainwashes humanity

You have demonstrated your hate in the first four rounds. I have not put the hate in your heart. You say that Christians force religion onto you. Having advertisements is not forcing, it is attempts to persuade. There is nothing wrong with that. Never have I suggested that atheists are the scum of the earth, you have overgeneralized, and have assumed that I feel that way. Your homosexuality point has been refuted, and I will speak no further on that topic. God created us with at least some forms of free will. This is why there is evil in the world. God gave us choices, and so often we make the wrong decision. God did not create evil, but he gave us the choice to be good or evil at the beginning. All God's people who die have not lost, they have won, they sit with God in heaven. When a Christian dies, we celebrate. You have proven in this debate that you are no stranger to bullying Christians. "Religion, oh we all know what that is. That pesky book called the bible. The great figment of imagination. It's why rebublicans exist. It's why there are many ignorant people in this world." If that isn't bullying someone based on religion, then I do not know what is. My opponent's arguments have all proven to be fueled by bias, and his own hatred. He cannot possibly win the conduct category because of his pure concentrated hatred. He cannot possibly win this debate because of the lack of discipline. You're right, I will not read those sources, because I do not need to in order to accomplish the purpose of the debate. I provide my own sources that are relevant to the topic: http://religionofpeace.com... http://www.heritage.org... http://exploreworldviews.com... All of these prove that religion is in fact beneficial and rational for society. I remain convinced that even from a secular point of view, religion helps stability and gives hope to human beings.
Religion brainwashes humanity

Okay, you seem to be misunderstanding the entire topic here, I am not trying to "convert" anyone. I am simply trying to make you question just a little bit how your religion works. You should be more skeptical, Im not trying to convert you, i am simply trying to get you to question your religion a little bit. Another misconception, you say I'm spreading hate and that I hate all chrsitians. No. You're pretty much another christian generalizing all atheists. We all hate Christians so much, no, in fact, nearly all of my family are Christians, do I hate them, no. I love them the same. Same thing with all chrstians. The thing I hate so much is the thoughts in Christians heads, atheists are all bullies. No, it's because of people forcing religion on us all the time, from Jesus billboards to protest signs like from westboro baptist church. Not just that, but people are following all these restrictions like no masturbation or homosexuality, because God that probobly isn't there said you'll burn in a lake of fire if you don't obey him. God created everything right? All the beautiful things right, the birds, humanity, nature, and fish. But why must he include things such as rape, molestation, sexual abuse? Was murder not bad enough? Where was God when the holocaust happened? God abondaned his people. And don't say he works in mysterious was because what kind of Great God would sit and watch his own people die in an act of his, because hitler said "this was an act of God". You say that stuff was created by satan, God created satan and evil, God created EVERYTHING. Evil, war, sexual abuse, murder, everything. You say we bully you, yeah. You demoralize every atheist like they're the scum of the earth. Children become estranged from everyone in their family for being different. You don't find it illogical at all, why, because a 3rd of the population says so. Because the majority says so, you know you're acting like sc cup, oh only 36% of Americans say global warming is a problem so it dosen't exist, I really didn't know we could all vote on the laws of physics. Just because a big group of people says so, doesn't make it fact. Mountains and mountains of evidence to support the Big Bang, evolution, God is basically already is disproven with tons of evidence. It's impossible that so much speculation is put into these things, but no, it's a magical, supernatural God. I've gathered a number of links to websites that I want you to respond to. http://www.patheos.com... http://new.exchristian.net... http://trevorburrus.newsvine.com... But I bet you won't read these, and if you do, you'll be afraid satan is tempting you with facts and evidence, right? A demonic being is attempting to steal your soul from God. Huh, but I'm sure you'll still be chrsitian.
Social Welfare Programs do not work

"all the programs did was help those in poverty. not get them out of it" You just proved my point. Helping people in poverty is synonymous to getting them out of it. It is interesting to note that the USA has the least social programs of any industrialized nation, and yet has among the highest rate of poverty. That in itself proves my point. Also, I refuted your policy proposal, which would lower taxes for the lowest income makers, because they don't pay income tax. You also failed to answer my point that Europe's economy is booming, even with their massive slate of social, and indeed socialist, programs. Also, even your "easy money" term is flawed: no government program in existence or in proposal gives able-bodied, working poor people cash to spend however they like. It's that simple. "the triccle down economics need a lot of time to take effect. the structure needs to grow and adapt which takes time. if we want to be powerful long term we need to think long term." Reagan/Bush had 12 years to implement their policy. They did, on a massive scale, and it sent the country into a recession. Bush has had 8. Same result. If you go back further, than Hoover is the President (before Reagan) that had the most supply side-ish policy, and it sent America into the Great Depression, which only FDR's massive plan of social programs was able to end. In terms of the US being a weak economy, here is some interesting analysis from Forbes magazine, which can hardly be called liberal: "All three pieces of data released on Wednesday--an economic outlook from America's factory purchasing managers, November construction spending and minutes from the Federal Reserve's latest policy-setting meeting--painted a picture of an economy that was at best moribund." This is from a wide sector of the economy, not from just oil/gas. While that does have a lot to do with it, Europe faces the same crises. Their economy is not falling apart under the strain.
Social Welfare Programs do not work

you are correct, free money is a extreme phrase. it should be rephrased as easy money. i must first refute your stance that the US is a week econemy. it is only declining recently as a result of the price on oil. my arguments still stand unrefuted. all the examples that you cited and numbers used none were used to show how using these programs helped people use the programs and then leave the programs because the program helped them make more money. all the programs did was help those in poverty. not help them leave poverty. the triccle down economics need a lot of time to take effect. the structure needs to grow and adapt which takes time. if we want to be powerful long term we need to think long term.
Social Welfare Programs do not work

"All the social programs that this county uses are wasteful. it gives money to people who have shown that they are unable to manage money well for free. It tells people that if you fail at making a living and taking care of yourself and your family that it does not matter because the government will take care of you." First of all, the argument of "the government will take care of you" is a falsity because nobody, democrat or republican, (with the exception of Kucinich and he's not going anywhere) is proposing any programs that would fully support a person or a family. No existing programs fully support a person or a family. So what specific government social programs are you referencing? To look at one successful program, the food stamp program, only nine percent of recipients have no income from jobs, in fact, twenty four percent are employed. The food stamp program requires that any able-bodied adult from 16-60 be actively seeking a job or working. There is no free money, nor will there be under any viable candidate's plan. "the free market system is based on incentive, and in this case incentive to make money and live is removed. the wish to work hard and make the world a better place is nullified to those who are offered free money. it is incredibly easy to get into the welfare system but not many get out. it is a trap that halts progress." Ask the people in Germany, Sweden, Finland, Britain, and the many other countries in the economically booming EU about that; remembering that they have far more extensive social programs than we do. They might have a different answer. "the best way is to lower taxes for those that make less. not raise taxes on the rich to give to the poor who will remain poor." The US's progressive tax system (and the earned-income tax credit) already means that the lowest income families pay no or almost no income tax. Poor people will remain poor if they don't get any assistance. It's not about giving out free money, it's about lending a helping hand to those who want to work, but cannot find a job; or to the growing numbers (60%) of minimum-wage workers who cannot live on their salaries, even as they work two or three jobs. "then that money that would of been used badly can be used to expand the economy and create more jobs and pay better wages allowing people to get out of poverty." The theory of trickledown economics has been disproven every time it has been tried. Reagan tried it, it led to massive depression and a huge deficit which only Clinton, with a major tax hike, was able to get ride of. Bush has tried it, it has lead to another depression. The problem with your argument is that it has been extensively disproven here and around the world. The USA is the industrialized nation with the lowest amount of social programs, and so based on your argument, our economy should be the strongest. It is not. The dollar is plummeting, and as the euro (the currency of almost exclusively socialist democracies) is rising fast. Social programs, like social security and food stamps, are
Social Welfare Programs do not work

All the social programs that this county uses are wasteful. it gives money to people who have shown that they are unable to manage money well for free. It tells people that if you fail at making a living and taking care of yourself and your family that it does not matter because the government will take care of you. the free market system is based on incentive, and in this case incentive to make money and live is removed. the wish to work hard and make the world a better place is nullified to those who are offered free money. it is incredibly easy to get into the welfare system but not many get out. it is a trap that halts progress. i'm not saying that there should be programs that help people in times of emergency but the government should help people get out of poverty and not keep them there and the present system does just that. the best way is to lower taxes for those that make less. not raise taxes on the rich to give to the poor who will remain poor. then that money that would of been used badly can be used to expand the economy and create more jobs and pay better wages allowing people to get out of poverty. please do not think i am a jerk but i think that is the best way to help people.
Church Fathers DID NOT BELIVE in soul immortality OR Hell/heaven instantly after Death.

Let's start with what you just said. "In this debate, i will support that the Church Fathers DID NOT believe in Soul Immortality, and that they DID NOT believe that when someone dies, goes instantly to heaven or hell. Starting with this quote: "God shows shall be taken away from us, when He shall raise all men from the dead, and appoint some to be incorruptible, immortal, and free from sorrow in the everlasting and imperishable kingdom; but shall send others away to the everlasting punishment of fire." What does this even mean? Does it mean that you believe that this "GOD" which does not exist, could make zombies come to life, the bible is illegitimate. You may go on and on about quotes from the bible and prove your point, but that would be egregious and dishonest to prove your point. I would be the millionth person to tell you that zombies do not exist, but doesn't mean that "Church Fathers" which are all dead by now don't believe in "Heaven" or "Hell" Your next argument, if you please.
Church Fathers DID NOT BELIVE in soul immortality OR Hell/heaven instantly after Death.

In this debate, i will support that the Church Fathers DID NOT believe in Soul Immortality, and that they DID NOT believe that when someone dies, goes instantly to heaven or hell.Starting with this quote:"God shows shall be taken away from us, when He shall raise all men from the dead, and appoint some to be incorruptible, immortal, and free from sorrow in the everlasting and imperishable kingdom; but shall send others away to the everlasting punishment of fire." [1]Note that Justin said that the wicked people will go to eternal fire, however:[i] - It will happen AFTER the resurrection![ii] - They (wicked people) will not be immortal, for "immortals" Justin says that only the righteous will be!Justin's vision of the "eternal fire" was not an immortalist view, but he believed that the wicked would be thrown into the fire only after they resurrect, and this torment in the fire could not be eternal, because both incorruptibility as to freedom from pain are attributes exclusive to the righteous. Immortalists do not observe it, because they, unfortunately, think that the expression "eternal fire" is enough for considering Justin as an immortalist.Notes:[1] Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 117
Should People Drop the Term "Retarded"

Although the term "retarded" was initially intended as a medical term for mentally disabled people, the meanings of words can change over time, due to other uses. The word retarded, obviously is a form of the word "retard", which is defined: a. a mentally retarded person. b. a person who is stupid, obtuse, or ineffective in some way: a hopeless social retard. Although the first definition matches your viewpoint, it is not the sole definition, the latter of which can be used to accurately describe someone who has made a mistake, or a faulty decision, and as such the action itself can be referred to as "retarded" I await your response. sources: dictionary.reference.com
Should People Drop the Term "Retarded"

The first point I will like to make is that the kids and adults that are mentally challenged are officially called retarded. The doctors use that term to describe the patients behavior. My problem is that I see more kids using that term out of context. I feel that using the word retarded is a big offense to the people that actually are. As I stated in the first round, kids use the term more frequently when their friend does something stupid. I'm wondering that why does the term retarded have to get brought into the conversation. There are many different types of phrases they could use to express their feelings, such as idiot, or stupid, or dumb. Retarded is really offensive and makes sick to my stomach whenever I hear it used that why. Retarded should be a term only to describe patients that are diagnosed with being mentally challenged.
Should People Drop the Term "Retarded"

My side on this is that people should drop the term retarded while talking and fooling around with friends. People call this one another does something stupid or doesn't understand something, and it is highly offensive to the people who are actually mentally retarded. The first round will be for accepting and your view, as I did. The middle rounds will be for arguing our case, and the last round will basically be closing arguments during a trial, reviewing points and trying to get the voters on your side. Thank you to the Con in advance and I look forward to debating this topic with you!
Deism vs Atheism

Welcome! This will be my second attempt to get a full debate on the topic of Deism vs Atheism. I hope this time I will get the full debate I desire, with someone who is knowledgable on the topic. I will be taking the position that Deism is more reasonable than Atheism. My opponent will contest my Deistic beliefs and support his own.Deism will be defined as this: The belief in an impersonal creator of the universe. The debate will be 4 rounds, with an 8000 character limit. The standard DDO rules apply. First round acceptance only. I made this debate acceptable for Magic8000. Please do not accept if you aren't him. I hope for a great debate!
Establishing a perfect society

True Communism looks good on paper. Yet, no matter where it has been implemented, it always fails. The problem with Communism is that it gives all control to a select governing body. By allowing one entity to control food, money, and social class the system will become exactly what we see in Russia today. Russia is basically an American dictatorship. America is becoming more like a Communist country as you brought up the one percent. The one percent is essentially the ruling class which is exactly what happens in Communist countries. The problem is not Capitalism. Nor is it Communism. The problem is that people in America and Russia fear the government. If you look at countries that use a pseudo Capitalist/Socialist government they have none of the issues that you stated. In addition, the Governments of these countries fear the people which is the way it should be. France is my favorite country to site because the system used there has worked. They have a ridiculously low homeless population and very few people live in poverty. As you know the French are also very active if the Government makes any decision that is disliked by the majority. When people protest in France the Government listens. That is the way society should work and under global communism we would wind up much worse than we currently are.
Establishing a perfect society

In today's society, the majority of all people are under the reign of the top one percent. While this might be okay in a capitalist society, we really ought to look into establishing communism universally. Instead of a select minority having steak and potatoes every night, every family could be issued a single piece of bread and a water bottle to share. Less people would die of hunger world wide. If all the governments in the world combined into one huge mega-power, fueled of course, by communism, we could promise bread, land, and peace to everyone. The only requirement to creating this theoretical mega-power would be for the poor proletariat to overthrow the bourgeoisie by seizing the means of production. Now you might say that communism has been tried before, but leaders such as Mao and Stalin just did it wrong. Instead of giving every family a piece of bread and a water bottle to share, they just took all the bread and water. True communism has never been tried.