BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
The word "homophobic" should be banned

Homophobia is a blend word coined in the 1960"s consisting of "Homosexual" and "Phobia". A Phobia is described as "an extreme or irrational fear of or aversion to something". One may be tricked into thinking that Homophobia is and irrational or extreme fear of the Homosexual. This, unfortunately, is not true, and Homophobia is actually defined as "dislike of or prejudice against homosexual people". Firstly, I will approach this from a logical point of view. If one was to go about banning a word, how would you do it? In what way is it possible to ban the use of a particular word entirely? You can ban the use of it in newspapers, music, T.V and other media through censorship, you can make it an offense to use the word, and you can provide the next generation with education on how not to use that word. Except, you can"t. In order to do all three, and effectively "ban" the word, you would need to have a fully autocratic society and make yourself the supreme ruler. Even then, you could only control usage of this word within the confines of your country"s borders. The only way to completely ban a word then, is to become the autocratic dictator of the entire world. But even that won"t cut it. You would have to ban every derivative, synonym and Poecilonym that people can come up with. Even if you are somehow able to do that, how do you enforce it? Come on. As mentioned in the Oxford Dictionary definition for the word "Homophobia", it doesn"t imply anyone has to exhibit unmasculine traits. It means you dislike gay people. Define "Normal Straight Man" Define the Responsibilities of the Male Gender Define "Derogatory Term" Define "Sound, Sane and Natural"
Only a few Muslims are terrorists.

Sure the percentage is low, but that doesn't mean that it's only a few. In fact, 106,000 Muslims are estimated to be terrorists or associate with those organizations. https://www.quora.com... If I said I had a few apples, would you assume I have say 4 or 5, or over 100,000? The fact that it's not a large percent is irrelevant, it's not a "small number" as few is defined as.
We should ban "God bless America" from being printed on money

The United States of America was founded on a Christian principle... a principle that is infringed upon time and time again. We have repeadly taken God out of our school systems. So why must we take him out of our monitary systems too? (I apologize, I wrote it wrong. It really says In God we trust.. sorry!!)This saying "In God we Trust (again, wrote it wrong, sorry!) first appeared on coins in 1864 and on paper money in 1957. It was chosen as our national motto in 1956. Why? Because it was by the grace of God that we defeated the British and gained our independance. It was by the grace of God that we made it across the ocean without wrecking. We trusted God, and forever we shall. Many have tried to abolish the use of the phrase in money, saying that it offends nonChristians. The thing is, no matter if we put it in or not, someone is still going to be offened. U.S. District Judge Harold Baer, Jr stated, "the Supreme Court has repeatedly assumed the motto's secular purpose and effect, however have found no constitutional violation in the motto's inclusion on currency." There is no good reason why we can't say IN GOD WE TRUST. People hold signs expressing their religion. People wear shirts, chant, hold rallies, go to church. What is the problem with money? We all are aware of the fact that there are other religions in the USA. So why is money the biggest problem? Perhaps the athiests are board and simply want to start a riot against the religions. (1) http://www.huffingtonpost.com...
Have adults disapeared From America...

Let's establish a few things here.Definitions:Adult n: a fully grown person or animal. [1]Here's an example of an adult:.................................................. Case 1:Pro is 33 years old [2]. If he's an American and his age is not falsified, this debate is over.Case 2:Most of the American population is over 20 years old [3].Case 3: America is led by a 53 year old president [4].Case 4: No evidence exists of a massive abduction that claimed every adult off the face of America. Then again, hold on a second....................... No wait...I thought I saw a man in the beam. Sorry for the mistake. That's a cow and a man is looking at the cow...I think it's kind of clear, although I will need to develop the photo further to be sure that it depicts a cow being abducted with a man watching and not a man being abducted with a cow watching...with a rifle. Cows with rifles are awesome. Then again, cows with rifles are scary. 2% milk packing heat is scary.Here's the same image after I developed it further:............................... No, I'm pretty sure that's a cow.Conclusion:Adults are clearly still in America.Sources:[1] http://www.merriam-webster.com...[2] http://www.debate.org...[3] http://www.census.gov...;[4] https://www.barackobama.com...;
Have adults disapeared From America...

Where have all the adults gone in America, did a mystic character like the Pied Piper of Hamelin wrote about by Robert Browning play a magic tune and all the adults followed him out of the country one day never to return. Was it John Dewey , the father of modern education who's philosophies doomed America to be occupied by a citizenry of ever perpetual youth never to develop into adults."The battle for humankind's future must be waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly perceive their role as the proselytizers of a new faith: A religion of humanity -- utilizing a classroom instead of a pulpit to carry humanist values into wherever they teach - Did the youth of America learn all to well the lessons of relativism and no absolutes taught in the Public educational institutions and so act as children with no rules of conduct to guide their behavior but those of in mature children. Diana West a book titled," The DEATH OF THE GROWN -UP "How AMERICA'S ARRESTED DEVELOPMENT IS BRINGING DOWN WESTERN CIVILIZATION." Diana west wrote this ," once upon a time, in the not too distant past, childhood was a phase, adolescence did not exist, and adulthood was the fulfillment of youth's promise. No more. why not? A profound civilizational shift has taken place...." "....Chucking maturity for eternal youth may have created the culture of perpetual adolescence,, but it should now become apparent that this isn't the same thing as achieving cultural longevity...." Have adults disappeared from America can America continue to survive for long without them.
Have adults disapeared From America...

Thank you for your informative rebuttal. While a lengthy dissertation could be developed delving into all the different subtle nuances that could be inferred by the subject,"Have adults disappeared From America..." The intent of the writer of the debate is quite evident by the further development of the post. As Saul Bellow once said,"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep." Is there a state of confusion because of the use of the generic term "Child," if there is, The American Heritage " Stedman's Medical Dictionary gives this definition of the term child in Medicine child (chīld) n. A person between birth and puberty. An unborn infant; a fetus. An infant; a baby. One who is childish or immature. A son or daughter; an offspring. "The United Nations thus drew up a definition of the child so that all countries having ratified the international Convention of the Rights of the Child share the same reference, which is laid down in Article 1 of the Convention : Thanks to the Convention, it became very simple to (define a child, which is a human being under 18 years of age,) unless the law of his or her country deems him or her to be an adult at an earlier age, which is rare. " A child means every human being below the age of eighteen years unless under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier" The United Nations thus drew up a definition of the child so that all countries having ratified the international Convention of the Rights of the Child share the same reference, which is laid down in Article 1 of the Convention : Thanks to the Convention, it became very simple to (define a child, which is a human being under 18 years of age,) unless the law of his or her country deems him or her to be an adult at an earlier age, which is rare. "" A child means every human being below the age of eighteen years unless under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier"" When I stated that adults had switched behavior roles I was indicating that even though a adult had reached the chronological age in which they were considered adults legally, they still behaved as a child might behave. I refer you back to The American Heritage " Stedman's Medical Dictionary descriptions of a Child above I e, one descriptions given for a child is," One who is childish or immature (chronological age NOUN [PSYCHOLOGY] "the number of years a person has lived, especially when used as a standard against which to measure behavior, intelligence, etc. ." I rest assured and am satisfied that your intentions were well meaning and not meant to confuse anyone about what I had wrote in this debate, I hope that what I have written here will clarify any misinterpretations, of what I had posted to open this debate.
Have adults disapeared From America...

I was quite amused and had too laugh at your presentation in debating my supposition that adults have disappeared and childish acting adult homo-sapiens have, taken their place. When I posted "Have adults disappeared From America," I didn't mean it to be taken literally but that people today don't behave as would be expected from adults. Why the reversal of children's and adult's roles in this country, its been taught to parents to regard their children as little adults and treat them as if they were and then not expect that when they do reach the age of adulthood that they won't behave irresponsibly. Why has this role reversal Happened, ,was it because parents early on gave up their position as parents to raise their children to elite intellectuals such as Doctor Benjamin Spock who convinced America's young parents that he knew better than they did how best to raise their children. his ideas about childcare influenced several generations of parents to be more flexible...., and to treat them as individuals....."( Little- Adults.) Although ...."Near the last years of his life, he admitted he was wrong about his ideas, citing the state of society at the time...." Quotes about Benjamin Spock " From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Inter-Gender Relationships before Marriage is Unhealthy

At what point did is say " Pro should be against all relationships" never once did i say that. 90% of pros quotes of me were not even accurate. Im not sure whether pro has dated or is even married. Me personally have done both. Pro assumes that the situation she describes about pre marital couples being only at their best only happens to them while dating, when the reality is this situation happens while you're dating and married. True colors emerge while dating and it will show you how you need to be a better man/woman for that person if it goes to marriage or to the one who best fits you. Pro says if you know someone 40% just get married. In what real world situation do we do that? Do you just know 40% about a car, house, college or financial investment? No. So if marriage is arguably the most important discision two people can make why would you not want to know as much as you can about yourself and what you need in a partner.
Inter-Gender Relationships before Marriage is Unhealthy

I wont touch too much on what has been said. I will leave the voters to decide who had the better arguments. My opponent brings up the fact that ALL relationships have lasting effects and he mistakenly says that in that case, I should be against all kinds of relationships. This is not what I mean. Being in a parental, brother/sister, team relationships are perfectly fine. I am saying that it's ROMANTIC ENTANGLEMENTS without getting married which is the issue. My opponent also has this seemingly strong viewpoint that dating will help partners get to know each other deeper before marriage. This cannot be further from the truth. When you date, both parties are at their best. But when you are married, their true colours start to emerge. This is where the true love and commitment should be proven. If you know someone like 40%, just tie the knot already. Don't prolong the period of "getting to know" them. You will never 100% know someone. Love is built brick by brick. Thank you.
Inter-Gender Relationships before Marriage is Unhealthy

If you're going to quote me please be accurate in wording and representation. I said "ALL" relationships have a lasting effect even if its just "discussions, workplace meetings etc" as you said. If "if lasting effects" are solely negative as you're implying than any relationship ,whether you're with someone or just friends, with the opposite sex is "unhealthy". I never said you agreed with "blind marriage" i said you "almost have to support", and you almost have to because you're never going to know someone in depth through "workplace meetings". Im pretty sure your whole rebuttal was misquotations and things out of context. Referring to your 3rd point DATING RELATIONSHIPS teach you how to treat your partner. You can't learn how to treat someone properly in a relationship if you don't experience it. The 4th point is another misrepresentation of what i said. I said people have relationships for companionship. People in pre-marital relationships do want it to last.
Inter-Gender Relationships before Marriage is Unhealthy

Thank you for accepting. REBUTTALS: 1)My opponent said relationships have lasting effects. EXACTLY. Which is why I don't think people should be romantically involved with each other when not yet lawfully husband and wife. 2)He also said I agree with blind marriage. I DO NOT AGREE WITH BLIND MARRIAGE. There are ways of getting to know someone like through discussions, workplace meetings etc which do not involve romantic attachments. 3) He said relationships teach you how to treat a man or woman. This I wholeheartedly disagree. You don't have to be dating someone to learn about human interactions. 4) He says people go into relationships because of loneliness. He then links up a page on suicides??Loneliness can be cured through friends, team sports etc. He makes it sound like people declare love for each other just to satisfy their own loneliness and they already know it won't last. Also, depression can still happen even if you have a bf/gf. Unfortunately, no chars left.
Inter-Gender Relationships before Marriage is Unhealthy

Relationships whether they be for marriage or just a simple friend relationship all have lasting effects on people. Relationships teach us how to love, care, and treat people with respect. The idea that having a "dating" relationship before marriage is unhealthy i feel is incorrect for a few reasons. To say having a dating relationship before marriage is "unhealthy" you almost have to support the idea of "blind marriage" where you don't know the person until you get married, which to me would be absolutely unhealthy to marry someone you don't know. Another reason relationships before marriage are healthy is that they teach you how to treat a man or woman. The problems i had with Pro was the generalizations of "facts". Most people go into relationships for companionship, one of the leading causes for depression is loneliness (1). I would contend that they are serious even if it doesn't last long and you can learn from your mistake. (1)https://www.uic.edu...
Inter-Gender Relationships before Marriage is Unhealthy

Hello, everyone. This is just a sort of trial debate for me as I am new to this site. I have set a maximum character count of 1000. Format is as follows: 1) Just one argument in Round 1 with rebuttals 2) Just two arguments in Round 2 with rebuttals 3) Rebuttals and wrap up points Definitions: 1) Inter-gender relationships: aka boyfriend/girlfriend/coupling/dating/ courting. Basically any kind of interaction where both parties develop a romantic interest and attachment to one another 2) Marriage: formal declaration of husband and wife 3) Unhealthy: generally damaging to the people and the society Argument: Relationships before marriage can permanently affect a person's future relationships. Relationships before marriage are mostly just based on lust. The people in it are not serious. When they eventually break up, they still remember what it was like. This creates a strain on the future relationship with the person who truly matters. This is not limited to the sexual and romantic acts.
"Rockman" Is a Better Name than "Mega Man"

Well, to conclude this debate, I'll simply offer reasons to why my opponents recap is completely invalid, respective to his ordering: It doesn't matter why the name was changed, as long as the new name fits the character better, which I have shown to be true.As my opponent illustrated in his reference to zazzle.com, the musical wordplay can be and is still implemented, and therefore remains a valid aspect of the game.Even if "mega" is taken to mean "large or vast", it still effectively applies. As in, Mega Man is larger than life, for which his actual size is irrelevant, or has a vast amount of courage in the face of insurmountable odds."People only use the name Mega Man because they're used to it.". The same could be said of "Rockman" had it been kept, or any other name for that matter.The name "Rock" also applies to "Rock, paper, scissors", and again, my opponent has clearly shown that "Rock" can still be considered his name, while "Mega Man" can be considered his title.Fans all over the world are also already familiar with the name "Mega Man".This last bit is an illustration mistake, and has absolutely nothing to do with how good either name is. It therefore bears no relevance in this debate.In closing, I would like to thank ClevelandRock for proposing this debate. I enjoy any discussion in relation to video games, and I hope he found it enjoyable as well.
"Rockman" Is a Better Name than "Mega Man"

Mega Man may have been a somewhat fitting name for the first game in the series. However, the name change was unnecessary, and Mega Man doesn't fit the intentions of the creators the way Rockman does. It was pretty awful that Joseph Morici changed the name of someone else's creation just because he didn't like it.There's one more thing I'd like to add. In some parts of the world, the name Mega Man is associated with the infamously bad North American box art that went along with the change of name.[1] However, the name Rockman, as I said earlier, is "known and accepted all over the world."Now, I think I've said just about everything that needs to be said, so let's recap. The title was only changed because some guy didn't like it. The name Mega Man invalidates the musical wordplay found throughout the series. The word "mega," while it may have multiple meanings, could be considered contradictory to Rockman's small size. People only use the name Mega Man because they're used to it. "Mega Man and Roll" just isn't the same as "Rock and Roll." The name Rockman also refers to the game Rock, Paper, Scissors. Fans all over the world are already familiar with the name Rockman. In some parts of the world, the name Mega Man is associated with a humorously bad localization decision.[1] 1: http://i.imgur.com...And, with that, I'd like to thank my opponent for participating in the first debate I've ever started on this site. Mr. Satan, you have the final argument.
"Rockman" Is a Better Name than "Mega Man"

As you don't dispute how well "Mega Man" fits the character, I'll take it as you agreeing that the title fits."Rockman wasn't actually created to fight Dr. Wily's robots. When he was created, his name was simply "Rock," and he was designed to help Dr. Light in his studies. It wasn't until he was repurposed for combat that the suffix "-man" was added to his name."My apologies, this is correct, and just as he was being repurposed for combat, so was his name. His name was changing to fit that new role anyways, and "Mega Man" still adheres to that role better than "Rockman". Accepting "Mega Man" as a new moniker doesn't mean the one of "Rock" must be rejected."Actually, changing Rockman's name to "Mega Man" leaves the name "Roll" completely irrelevant."Not at all. As I said above, Roll wasn't introduced by name until the 3rd installment, whereas the name change was put into effect with the first. "Rock" without "Roll" isn't musical wordplay. Since it was the first game of a new character, a more relevant name was a good decision. And again, there's no reason "Rock" could not remain his name while he's titled "Mega Man". "Second of all, the name "Rock" serves an additional play on words. Keiji Inafune designed the game with "Rock, Paper, Scissors" in mind."Well, this play on words does actually have relevance to the game, or more directly, the game mechanics. But one last time, accepting "Mega Man" doesn't invalidate the use of "Rock"."It should also be noted that the "Rock" name is used in two different designs on Capcom USA's official Mega Man store on Zazzle.com.[3] This goes to show that the Japanese name is known and accepted all over the world, and makes for a much more pleasing play on words than "Mega Man" ever could. Rock on!"Precisely! Refer to my other Round 2 arguments.Therefore, "Mega Man" is a better name than "Rockman", as the wordplay, though unnecessary in my eyes, can be and is still achieved, and it fits in better with the actual game.
"Rockman" Is a Better Name than "Mega Man"

"Mega Man is a humanoid boy robot, created by Dr. Light, to fight Dr. Wily's robots and put a stop to his evil schemes."Rockman wasn't actually created to fight Dr. Wily's robots. When he was created, his name was simply "Rock," and he was designed to help Dr. Light in his studies. It wasn't until he was repurposed for combat that the suffix "-man" was added to his name."This leaves the play on words unimplemented, and makes the name 'Rockman' completely irrelevant."Actually, changing Rockman's name to "Mega Man" leaves the name "Roll" completely irrelevant. What kind of a name is "Roll" without a "Rock" to accompany it?Second of all, the name "Rock" serves an additional play on words. Keiji Inafune designed the game with "Rock, Paper, Scissors" in mind.[1][2]It should also be noted that the "Rock" name is used in two different designs on Capcom USA's official Mega Man store on Zazzle.com.[3] This goes to show that the Japanese name is known and accepted all over the world, and makes for a much more pleasing play on words than "Mega Man" ever could. Rock on! 1: http://web.archive.org...2: Nintendo Power issue 46 (March 1993)3: http://www.zazzle.com...