BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Cannabis

Firstly, thank you, and I look forward to a sensible debate with you, Tommy.leadbetter. Cannabis should not be legalized and available for retail as are alcohol and tobacco. Many say that marijuana should be legalized because there are other more harmful things in the world, such as alcohol, cigarettes, speeding, and unregulated gun distribution. However, if we also legalize marijuana, is that not just a gigantic leap backwards in our society? Alcohol (I choose this example because it also distorts perception) has many damaging side effects, short and long term, too. It has no regulation. Here is an article from livescience.com [ Marijuana can impair thinking, memory and learning for weeks after use. It produces a range of psychological and physical effects that can be unpredictable at times. It can relieve pain, control nausea and increase appetite. Marijuana typically gives a high, or feeling of well being, which is why it abused. But marijuana can also cause acute psychosis, or a temporary break with reality. Marijuana-induced psychosis happens more often in new users or in people prone to mental illness. Marijuana can cause short-term memory and learning problems, dry mouth, impaired motor skills and red eyes. Within minutes after smoking marijuana, the drug increases the user's heart rate. Heart rates can double in some cases, which is a risk for people with certain heart conditions. Some people may feel relaxed after using marijuana; others may develop anxiety and paranoia. ] There is illegality with this drug, and it is still a huge problem in the health of our nation. Why would we legalize it, inducing harm unto many more people? I know, some say that they 'do not do marijuana because they know the risks or they don't want to, but not just because it's illegal.' Really? Do people know the affects of drinking or smoking? They do them anyway! If there is a tiny $5.99 bottle of whisky at the counter of a gas station, it is infinitely more tempting than it would be if it were illegal. There would be the same effect with marijuana. Thank you! I await your rebuttal!
Atheism

As it is late at night, and this was the only argument that interested me, I accept your challenge. First of all, I would like to clarify what I am arguing for. Is it that Atheism exists? Is is that God is nonexistent? Is it that atheists act superior compared to religious persons. Or is it that atheists are indeed superior? As this is my first debate, I am ignorant of format and customs of debates. However, I will try my best to use reasoning to argue my side ( whatever it is I am arguing). I look forward to your reply.
Atheism

Atheist Food For Thought.. IF, "It's arrogant to believe that we're the only ones in our universe." Isn't it also arrogant to discount a supreme being? Remember the Egyptologists trying to decipher ancient runes and inscriptions in the 1800's, only to be declared wrong a century later? Some are so quick to put faith in "Theories" which by definition are not facts, yet look down on others for their belief in something which is just as equally unproven. There are millions world wide that feel they have a personal connection with some deity. If you looked scientifically at the percentage of people on earth that believed in a form of greater power, thinking of each individual as a test, and compared it to the number of non-believer test subjects odds are in favor that the majority feels there is something more to it than just science. What right do Atheists have to feel superior?
Atheism

"I'm sure not ALL Atheists are arrogant, but many are. Also, yes, I believe the concept of Atheism is very arrogant in itself. Why? because they often look down on people for being religious, thinking they are fanatical, or ignorant of science, while at the same time many believe "Theories" which are, by definition, not yet laws, though they treat them as fact."Again, my opponent is claiming that the concept of Atheism is arrogant. He continues on to say the "they of look down on people for being religious." I may be wrong, but I have met atheists but not atheism. I believe that the concept of atheism cannot itself look down on other beings because it is an idea, not a living person. Either my opponent has misinterpreted the definition of Atheism or he has met with beings called Atheisms. I will dismiss the ladder as it is preposterous. If I recall correctly, my opponent was suppose to prove that "atheism is arrogant." However, all he has done so far is write a long definition of DNA and RNA and other signs of intelligent design. He has not mentioned why he thinks Atheists are arrogant. Even if all he claimed were logical (although I do not believe so), he did not even mention how all the information provided can point to his claim that Atheists are arrogant. Although unnecessary, I will explain what I believe to be illogical in my opponent's information. 1. "On top of that, there are many scientists that do not believe the Evolution Theory taught in our schools." And I am sure there are many scientists who believe in the Evolution Theory, so this is irrelevent. 2. "Scientifically its looking more and more plausible that "SOMETHING" intelligent did write the language of life as we know it." Atheists have no problem believing that "something" had a role in shaping the universe. However, this "something" that they believe may be plausible is far from the God that judges individual beings, moreover tells individual beings to act in certain ways. The information my opponent hinted at "something" not a religious God. The information would have equally supported a claim that vampire elves from the thirteenth dimension created the universe. As for the main argument, that "atheism is arrogant," which I still believe should be "Atheists are arrogant" (Anyways, the wording is not important.), I will not address.As we have agreed, there were two arguments: 1. All Atheists are arrogant. In this matter, my opponent has conceded by saying that "I'm sure not ALL Atheists are arrogant"2. Some Atheists are arrogant. Again, this is a matter of personality, not of belief. It is inevitable that some atheists are arrogant, just as some christians are arrogant. There is no logic in isolating the Atheist from the rest. In this matter, my argument from the previous round stands. As the claim that "Some Atheists are arrogant" is obvious, it is not much of an argument. You can replace the word "atheists" with any other believers and the statement will still hold true. Therefore, my opponent must argue that ALL atheists are arrogant, which he has not done yet. I look forward to your reply.
Atheism

To start this off, I believe you meant to say that atheists, not atheism, are arrogant. I do not believe that a concept can be arrogant, rather people who believe in the concept can be arrogant. Therefore, I will try to prove that atheists are not arrogant while you will attempt to argue that atheists are arrogant. So it is set. I will be attempting to prove that atheists are not arrogant. There are two arguments that come with this one argument, and since you have not addressed which one I will be arguing for, I address them both. The two arguments are as follows: 1. All atheists are arrogant. 2. Some atheists are arrogant. 1. It is easy to prove that not ALL atheists are arrogant. It is obvious that some christians are arrogant. I have met a more than a few that could prove my point. However, this does not mean that ALL christians are arrogant, as I have met good-natured christians. What you are claiming is the same thing as claiming that ALL muslims are terrorists. It is an ignorant assertion. A simple google search will show you that there are and were non-arrogant atheists. 2. The second arguments is more difficult to argue. However, I do not believe that this is much of an argument. As I have stated above, some atheists are indeed arrogant just as some christians are arrogant, and just as some muslims are arrogant, and just as some hindus are arrogant. However, for the sake of this debate, I will address the premises you have provided for claiming that atheists are arrogant. Premises 1. "You can browse YouTube and find many Atheist postings which belittle others for believing in the existence of a greater power. You can find posts on social networking sites of all kinds in which Atheists post wall posters and images poking fun of religion in belittling ways." Would you say it is arrogant to claim something to be true if you truly believed that you claimed was true? For example, would it be considered arrogant if you claimed to believe in God? The atheists are simply asserting what they believe to be true. If both christians and atheists are publicly asserting what they believe in, why would you assume that one side is arrogant and the other not? And as you asked, I will attempt to defend atheism. Lets first find out, what I am defending. According to dictionary.com, atheism is "the doctrine or belief that there is no God. " For times sake, I will say that there is no God because I have not seen or read any legitimate proof of its existence. I look forward to your reply.
Atheism

I believe atheism is arrogant. You can browse YouTube and find many Atheist postings which belittle others for believing in the existence of a greater power. You can find posts on social networking sites of all kinds in which Atheists post wall posters and images poking fun of religion in belittling ways. If you believe atheism is so much more correct and enlightened then please defend it. I'm tired of this superiority complex with many atheists I encounter, and want someone to defend their beliefs.
Why children at school age should have phones

I agree having cell phones can be helpful in the ways my opponent has described. However they have not given any evidence as to how every child would acquire the funds. I also relive that all children having cell phones could cause distractions and the children could be less likely to peruse academics because they had there heads in there phones. Schools that ban students from carrying phones see a clear improvement in their test scores, according to a study by the London School of Economics.It found that following a ban on phone use, the schools' test scores improved by 6.4%. The impact on underachieving students was much more significant -- their average test scores rose by 14%. Cell phones I will now rebuttal against my opponents case. The entirety of your case is saying that if in an uncomfortable situation your child would not have the ability to contact you. However after the child has "exited basketball practice" if they feel uncomfortable they could just walk back into the building and tell an adult. If your child is in a situation that he or she has NO adult around or nearby than that child should not be there in the first place. If you can name me a few places a child would be by themselves with NO adults around i will consider your case further. Thank you.
Why children at school age should have phones

I personally feel ALL school age children should have phones. Ok, so you know if your a parent you want your children to be safe. Well imagine this, your son or daughter is getting out of basketball it's in a bad part of town. They see a creepy old man slowly walks towards them, the have no phone no way to contact you AND YOU ARE LATE. They ate scared and have no where to run or hide. You finally get there but him or her is gone. They were stolen never to be seen again, probably beaten and abused and maybe even sexually assaulted. You cry and cry, but because there gone you can't do anything about it. Sad right, with today's world, they need cell phones for there protection against creepy people like in the story. Please Vote for phones and decrease the rate of children being stolen each year!!! Thank you for your time -David
Religion on the whole benefits the human race.

:) Now I would like to define the motion as "Religion on the whole benefits the human race"- Keeping it the same, but I would particularly like to stress "human race". As you all should know, this means Caucasians, Indians, Asians alike. My first point is as follows: I. People can receive a feeling of fulfillment Religion on the human race include bringing people together with their God(s), giving them a feeling that they are one with their creator and the people with whom they are surrounding themselves in their place of worship. It is highly evident that some people get a feeling of fulfillment from this, leading on to my next example The effect of people worshipping together is not unlike that of people volunteering for a good cause. * For example: Many middle schools and high schools require community service. When you are through volunteering, you have a good feeling, which can be a result of many different things. This is like the feelings you walk away with after attending a service. * Onto my second point: II. Religion helps people from feeling a fear of the unknown There are those people who cling to religion of some kind because they simply cannot think that this world was not made by a creator. It shakes their world to think that they have been placed here without a "safety net", so to speak. Would it really be that bad if creation was a result of the Big Bang Theory, or if man evolved from the monkey? What difference can either thing really mean to us in the 21st century? * ** *** **** ***** ****** ******* ****** ***** **** *** ** * ** *** **** ***** ****** ******* ****** ***** **** *** ** * ** *** **** ***** ****** ******* ****** ***** **** *** ** * This was, one could say, a "sample"- wait until I get heated! :)
Astrology is Logical and Scientific.

Yes the placibel affect is that people feel better becous they think they'll fell better Hers my aguman Astrology is the belief that the time of year one is born affects things like personality. Here is a supposed "personality profile" for the present astrological-sign. We dismiss it as absurd: How would such a random thing as birthdate affect anything? (There is some idea it has to with how stars line up, which strikes us as laughable). I will not argue for astrology. But I will point out: One"s birthdate is not "random" in the sense of lottery numbers or "coin flips", but is almost always ~9-months after conception. Two things I recently read suggest that, in some animals, conditions of conception matter, a lot, for the character of the new creature. 1.) In alligators, temperature of the nest determines the sex of offspring. (A nest above 90-F will produce a male, any cooler will produce a female). 2.) In certain butterflies in the tropics, the nature of the ornate patterns they develop on their wings are determined by "larval rearing temperature", not genetics as such. [link]. Consider: Is it possible that the temperature of the surroundings of the human womb at conception, and during pregnancy, could affect the child in ways similar to what astrology claims, as seen in these other creatures? Yes, we are warm-blooded. But is it really so impossible? Another possibility: Perhaps a spring conception is ideal for the human condition, which gave rise to European notions that spring and love go hand in hand. Are people born in December, January, February [9-months after "Spring"] superior to the rest of us?) Even if any of this is true, it would not line up with astrology"s hard line on significance of birthdates (implicitly) everywhere: After all, some places have no seasons, some places have "wet" vs. "dry" seasons, others have wild-temp-swings in the year, others milder swings, and southern-hemisphere-ites have opposite seasons as northerners. Anyway, modern people are not exposed to the elements very much, anymore. So is astrology "over"?
Astrology is Logical and Scientific.

1. It is evident that the practice of Astrology was prevalent in the ancient times. But, how can that prove that Astrology was/is scientific? Have ever heard of placebo? 2. Popularity of Astrology does not make it a science. Majority of people believed that Earth was the the centre of Sun's orbit, before the real scientific facts were introduced. 3. "Based on the stars, astrologers could determine the fate " - Where is the evidence that the mechanism of Astrology works? How can it asserted so easily? If you predict something, and that comes true, does that mean you have a special power? Well, if you claim that you have, then you have to present the evidence too. The burden of proof is on you. 4. "Many believers have witnessed events in their lives which became a reality out of astrological prediction" . Does that prove that Astrology is scientific? No, it does not. What you gave is just an example of ANECDOTE, it is clearly EMPIRICAL. This cannot be regarded as evidence for the scientific base of Astrology. If it is, anyhow, then alien abduction-claims will have plenty of evidences! And, also, if a wide range of people claim something, are you prepared to accept that? If you are not, then why do you do it in case of Astrology? Science deals in evidence, observation, and very importantly, logic. I cannot find that in your argument. There are plenty of anecdotes, instead. 5. You have said a lot of things after that. But all are assertions without evidence. You are giving your opinion. That's right. But what are you giving as reference or tangible evidence to back your argument? Nothing at all! What can I say about all these? Nothing at all! I mean, I have told what I had to say, already.
Astrology is Logical and Scientific.

Okay here's my argument my friend In ancient times, Astrology was used to predict the birth of children. It was also used by the Chinese to know what"s in store for babies when they grow up. Astrology was also used as the basis for determining the character traits of children and their future. Practitioners of astrology were respected and honored among the Chaldeans, Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, and Arabs. Astrology became popular in Europe during the ancient time Based on the stars, astrologers could determine the fate that awaits the children when they grow up; either they were born to have a good life or they were doomed to suffer. Even now, Astrology is still part of human life and many people especially in Asia believe in this art. Compatibilities in human beings are based on the planets and stars with emphasis on the dates of birth. This art has continuously propagated due some occurrences in the past which were attributed to its power of divination. Many believers have witnessed events in their lives which became a reality out of astrological prediction. Events were predicted out of symbols and images with corresponding meanings provided by astrologers. This was combined with palm reading and the use of tarot cards for precision in readings. Astrology deals with the effect of forces in the universe toward the human life on earth. Records of history show that there is a great influence of the stars and planets on the life of human beings. Astrology does not require anyone to believe or not. It is a tool that can help you to interpret the symbols in your own chart of life which can give deep insights into your life purpose and life lessons including your needs, spiritual, emotional, mental, social, and physical. One of the most popular and commonly used applications of astrology is natal astrology. By using a natal chart, an astrologer can tell you the beginning of your life and what lies ahead. In choosing the most appropriate time for establishing a new business, or starting a trip, astrology made a major part. It is advisable to find good dates for events like weddings, filing of law suits, etc. Even in politics, Astrology also plays an important role. Many politicians consult astrologers when is the best time to launch their political career and when to lie low. Even people who intend to take a certified examination are inclined to take the advice of astrologers. An analysis on the movements of the planets and their position influence the entire populations, by countries, cities or localities, eclipses, and full moons. The application of astrology has also something to do with problems of health, mainly as a diagnostic gauge when confronted with symptoms of diseases. In dealing with astrology, one has to use his deep analysis of facts and events on a realistic point of view. It is improper for a person to blame it on the stars or karma whenever he fails in his life. He must treat astrology as a guide to improve his life and not totally depend on its outcome.
Astrology is Logical and Scientific.

1. The Mayans made calendar which had different periods of time. An ancient counterpart of the way we count centuries,years, months etc. For example, the 13th Baktun ended a few years ago. 2. The moon and menstruation connection is a misconception. (Refer to "What's the link between the moon and menstruation?" - Cecil Adams) You can refer to 'The Skeptic Dictionary' for more info. 3. Correlation proves nothing. Increase of crimes during the full moon (if it really occurs) does not prove that the moon is the cause. It will be a silly mistake to link the two without any evidence or logic. Suppose that I had a fever and drank 2 glasses of wine. Now, if I come round, there is no way to relate the 'wine' for my cure. That would far-fetched. Prove the speculation with scientific reference. 4. Of course! The celestial bodies have different kind of forces. But, how can that determine our future? Yes, they can, if you say that they determine whether Earth will collide with other objects or not. In that case, I come at one with you. But that is physical, chemical and biological conditions altogether that determines whether we are going to do. And how can something like 'astrology' predict that? I am not talking about coincidences. Why is Astrology science, if it has no mechanism that resembles any scientific outlook?