BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
According to the Bible unsaved people will go to the Lake of Fire

No specific format, no play on semantics. Thanks and Best of Luck. C-1: According to John 3:18, people who have accepted Jesus as Savior and Lord are not condemned. People who have not are condemned. C-2: According to Revelation 20:12 & 15, the people who are saved have their names written in the Lamb's Book of Life. He whose name was not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the Lake of Fire. Conclusion, the resolution is affirmed according to scripture.
Society Creates Mental Illness

Society has not created mental illness. In today’s world, It is often thought that society is one of the main factors that cause mental illness, And this statement can be true, To an extent. Despite many people suffering from disorders such as anorexia and anxiety, Caused by bullying and pressure, Many more people suffer from illnesses related to genetics and exist from birth. Disorders such as ADHD, ADD and autism are all present from birth for those who suffer from them, And are in no way affected by outside pressures. Even schizophrenia, Depression and bipolar disorder can all be traced to the same genetic variation which causes them. Mental illness has always existed, Which is evident as it has been seen since biblical and primitive times.
Society Creates Mental Illness

Society has created mental illnesses due the constant expectation and reminder of what people should look like, How people should act and how much money people should have. This problem has developed over the years and will keep changing and progressing, Studies show that not only girls but also young boys ranging from young ages such as 8 to 17 fall victim to this issue. People are always trying to look a certain way or act a certain way and they fall further away from their true selves. People are so caught up in the way they want to look like, That they forget who they are, This creates feelings of isolation or the feeling of "not being good enough". This shows how easily society can manipulate a person into thinking a certain, Therefore closing off their mindset to new ideas, And how society can plant a small seed of negativity, That will blossom over time into something more serious, Such as depression, Anxiety, Eating disorders or self-inflicted harm. Over the years, A "norm or "default" was created, People are constantly being judged and expected to fit into these expectations if you don"t fit in, You are considered "not normal" or "different". Everyone is expected to be beautiful or happy, But if there is something different, Then they"re considered "broken" or that there's something wrong with them. Society has created and caused so many mental illnesses onto the world, People are falling further and further from themselves to fit into the expectation of society.
Society Creates Mental Illness

Society creates expectations that many people can"t fit. Everyone is born a certain way, No one is made "perfect" no one is made "smart" or "beautiful". Many people, From their births, Are already critiqued on how they are "supposed" to look. This is especially true in Korea and in many Asian countries where the ideas of "beauty" are one of the main factors that people in those countries live by. Children of various ages are forced and indoctrinated to act the "right" way, Young people already feel the need to consider surgeries to make themselves look better to make themselves feel better. Society creates a sense that "If you don"t look the way I want you to look, No one is going to accept you. " People are relying on plastic surgeries and injections to make them fit into society, Sure it might make the person receiving plastic surgery or injections happy and feel accepted, But the draw further form themselves as a unique individual. So many people are stuck with the feeling of not being good enough, Society pressures people into filling the high standards of "beauty" and "perfection", This causes more people for fall victim to self-loathe, Body shame, Depression, Anxiety, Eating disorders and many other mental and physical illnesses that may have a long-run effect on them.
Vote con.

Hello, this debate is total bullcrap. Let's jump right into it. You should vote for con because I am a teenager. Teenagers are scary to little kids, loud and obnoxious, and we are bad for the economy[1]. Also teenagers are the main population at high schools, and we all now how horrible it is in high schools.[2] I am also providing the worst argument because my entire argument is an ad hominem fallacy against myself, and the only real point in it is that I am a teenager. My sources are also really stupid.[3] Also they are in a ridiculous order.[4] Sources: 2:http://www.thetoptens.com... 1:If you believe hard enough, it's true. Also the snow outside is telling me. 4:Just look here again, as with 3. 3:Just look here, they are crappy. Most aren't even sources, so why are they here.
Vote con.

Sorry I "forfeited" the previous round, I wasnt on my computer in FOREVER. I will, in round, address both rounds posted. Round 2 1. I think I tried too hard. 2. Who is Kefka (please don't hate me for asking!)? C. I can't tell you how many times I've done that, especially while talking. 4. Another question: C4?? E + 6. I'm sorry for the loss of your sources. I appreciate the apology for saying "excaped". Sources: I found your sources. They're a little confused 1. jaofisd dotsipeav 2.jakghafagkjreo C. ahrsatae;hfjgn 4.ajaghjbafh;rs;g;h;a E. agjkslbdfh;k 6. ahagkjfsi:OFJ"ag Round 3: NOBODY WANTS TO SIDE WITH JB. NOBODY. Candy, Candy Canes, Candy Corns, and SYRUP!! -Elf Had to do that. Sorry.
Vote con.

Hello, I see you are an amazing debater! You have refuted every one of my points, clearly you are going to win. Vote con, everybody! Here are the reasons..... 1. You just refuted all of my points in one post. ALL OF THEM. 2. I am a writer. Writers are insane. Would you vote for Kefka or the joker? I didn't think so. It's dangerous. Someone could end up dead. In a book. C. I am mixing letters and numbers, creating a stupid argument. 4. I previously stated that I was crazy, and now if you read top to bottom or the right side it says "He12C4", and if you take away "He12" you get "C4". Now I am a crazy person with C4. You should stop me by voting con. E. Sorry, DisneyDamsel. My sources excaped. I guess that means that I have been disqualified... 6. I. Just. Said. EXCAPED. EVERYONE KNOWS HOW ANNOYING IT IS WHEN SOMEONE SAYS THE WORD ESCAPED LIKE THAT. Sources: _________________ |WE RAN AWAY| |_______________| | | P.S.... I forget what I was going to say for this PS. Oh well. I'm sure it meant that your argument was better, and should be voted for.
Vote con.

Hi, this is my first Debate! It is 1:39 in the morning and I can't sleep. A.) I remember when I used to go to Cheerleading Camp, a fundraiser held by the high school cheer squad, the HS girls would teach us cheers. I. LOVED. IT. I used to stretch with all of them, and as I grew into one, I realized I shouldn't be talking to my friends there, but being to the little girls what the older girls were to me. NO little kid I know is afraid of teens. B.) Teenagers ARE the main population in high schools, but I couldn't WAIT to get to HS! I love it! C.) Your sources are just as stupid as mine. D.) Not really, and if so, mine are too because I copied your order. Sources: A.) My BRAAAIIIN! B.) EVERY HS EVER. C.) and D.) The fact that I copied your argument.
Kevin Durant is a better basketball player than Lebron James

When I talk about a better basketball player, that does not mean who is currently having a better year or stats just on this year. I mean these players careers. Not just this year. And just to let everyone know this guy im arguing against is full of crap and feeding you lies because in fact Russell Westbrook does take more shots than Kevin Durant. ESPN.com clearly states that Russell averages 18.9 field goal attempts and Kevin averages 17.8 field goal attempts and that is adding 2 point attempts and 3 point attempts together. And if you really think about it, in one whole season Russell Westbrook takes about 100 more field goal attempts than Kevin Durant does. Lebron does not have anybody on his team competing with him on shot attempts. Also to my opponent stating that Lebron is a better passer is also retarded, yes he may average more assists, but if you were to look up team stats (which is linked below) you will come to find that the Heat have a better shooting average. To add onto that Lebron's carrer turnover average is higher then Kevin's (Will also be linked), so to all of his assists he also turns the ball over. Also to compare there assist average really is not fair because they play two completely different positions. Lebron is a point forward, if you watch there games over 50% of the time he will be carrying the ball up the floor. Where as Kevin does not. So which proves my point on why Lebron has more assist opportunities. Also how can you say that he is a better rebounder and defender when he only averages .2 rebounds more per game and "there is no stat" to back up defense. Kevin averages more blocks then Lebron and barley any less steals. Which are the only "stats" you can base defense on. So to all of these "Stats" my opponent is giving me, About 50% of the ones I looked up are actually wrong. So to all of you people thinking this guy im arguing is smart and using good stats to prove his points are wrong. So all in all this person im arguing against is wrong and in fact Kevin is a better total basketball player.
Kevin Durant is a better basketball player than Lebron James

My opponent obviously doesn't know how to debate. In a debate you can't simply make statements without using stats, or else I could throw out any statement and the voters would have no way of knowing whether it was actually legitimate, so that is why I depend on stats in this argument. Also, my opponent completely contradicts himself in his last two arguments. In his R2 argument, he claimed that Lebron had an advantage in assists because when he got the ball "he has the opportunity to pass or shoot", but when Durant gets the ball he always "is going to try to score" because Russell Westbrook takes more shots. When i proved that statement to be false, my opponent changed his argument to the fact that Durant can pass the ball as much as Lebron (contradicting his earlier statement) but "when Kevin Durant passes to one of his wide open teammates they miss more often" which is a pure opinion that also goes against his earlier argument. Moving on from my opponent's contradictions to himself, the simple question in this debate is who is the better "complete, all around" basketball player, and there is no question when it comes to this. Lebron is an amazing scorer, like Durant, but what he excels in beyond scoring (rebounding, passing, defense) Kevin cannot even compare.
Kevin Durant is a better basketball player than Lebron James

Im beginning to think that this guy im arguing against does not know that much about basketball, he is only using statistics. Im going to be the first one to tell you that stats lie. For example when Kevin Durant passes to one of his wide open teammates they miss more often then when lebron passes to one of his wide open teammates. To you saying that Russell in fact does not take more shots is true this year, but in the past years it has not been true. Also to your stats saying Lebron averages more and barely shots less, I disagree. Whenever Kevin gets the ball he has a much tougher time scoring because everyone can double team him because he only has one other good player on his team. While Lebron has a bunch of superstars on his team so he only gets guarded by one guy each time. Also If Kevin was a part of the Heat, the heat would be way better then they are now with lebron james
Kevin Durant is a better basketball player than Lebron James

My opponent's argument is false in several different aspects. His points make sense but he doesn't have any proof in the form of stats to go with his claims. His first mistake: He claims Kevin Durant is a "WAYYYY" better scorer than Lebron James, while at the same time Lebron averages more points per game (27.6) than Kevin's 26.6. And this is not due to Kevin taking less shots, Durant averages 23.3 FG attempts per game while Lebron only shoots 24.1.. Saying Durant is a better scorer is fine by me but please introduce some stats to support you next time.. His second mistake: My opponent claims that Kevin Durant "has a player on his team named Russell Westbrook who in fact takes the most shots on the team". Once again, the statement is fine to say but you have no evidence to support your claim. Not only that, but the claim itself is entirely false.. Russell Westbrook averages 18.5 shots per game while Durant takes 23.3... So clearly Westbrook doesn't take the most shots on the team. The fact that Lebron not only can score large amounts per game but also set up shots for the rest of his team leaves no doubt that he is a better all around player. Sources: (remember to add Field Goals to 3PT shots per game when finding total shots per game.) http://sports.yahoo.com... http://sports.yahoo.com... http://sports.yahoo.com...
Kevin Durant is a better basketball player than Lebron James

Kevin Durant Is a WAYYYY better scorer than lebron james. That shouldn't be up for discussion. Yes I will agree Lebron is a slightly better rebounder, but it is to a point in which it does not matter at all. Now to the assists, Lebron has a distinct advantage when it comes to this category due to the fact that majority of the possessions that the heat get the ball will always go through Lebrons hand so he has the opportunity to pass or shoot. Kevin on the other hand has a player on his team named Russell Westbrook who in fact takes the most shots on the team. So more than half of the possessions Kevin does not get a chance to get an assist because hes not put in that situation. So when ever he does get the ball he is going to try to score, which he succeeds in.
Kevin Durant is a better basketball player than Lebron James

I am not here to put down Kevin Durant in any way, shape, or form. However, compared to Lebron James as a "total package" basketball player, Durant doesn't compare. It is often argued that Durant is a better scorer than Lebron, and Kevin does in fact have some stats to back that up (his 3 consecutive scoring titles). And even though Lebron has only won a single NBA scoring title, he has averaged more points per game throughout his career with 27.6 PPG, compared to Durant's 26.6 PPG. And while this isn't a staggering discrepancy, points per game is one of the only stats that people usually give Durant the advantage on. Moving on to another stat which is close in comparison, but still goes to Lebron, rebounds. The 6'8" Lebron averages 7.5 rebounds per game compared to the 6'10" Durant's total of 6.8. While again this isn't a huge difference, when given Durant's height advantage you'd like to see more boards. While both of these players are without a doubt outstanding athletes, Lebron is a better total player than Kevin Durant. And no stat more clearly illustrates my argument than assists. Durant's 3.1 assists per game dont even come close to Lebron's shocking 6.9 assists per game!!!! All this proves is that even though lebron might not be the leagues leading scorer every year, he gets the rest of his team shots. Many times he is able to do this with his big body by driving to the basket and attracting double teams. From points per game, to rebounds, and to assists, Lebron is superior in every category. There is absolutely no question as to who is the better "total" basketball player is
Technology has taken the position of PARENTS

Well,looks like the con is seeing no way to counter,that's why he forfaithed two round in a row. . . . . .well,nothing to say more. . . . . . .but,at the last ,I wanna say some final things,dear con,you should not try to trap anyone. Because,truely to say,why should only the tech,if you put the whole world into one side and the parents on other,it won't be possible to take the place of the parents. . . . . . . .I just carried out the debate because I don't like to challange anyone . . . .But I also admire it that nothing can take the place of parents ever . . . . . .But ,atlast,I think that the voters will show the ans who deserves to win this debate. THAT'S ALL,THANK Y0U EVERYB0DY.
Technology has taken the position of PARENTS

[] At first,I'd like to say that I'm agree with your defination.But still,some things are remaining in shadow .So,I'd like to bring them in light. DEFINATI0N: PARENTS:I agree with your defination. TECHN0L0GY:I agree,but I'd like note that you said that it have to computer based.Well,not only computer or internet,every electrical device is computing based. HAS TAKEN THE PLACE:well,I agree. SPECIAL FACT 'TAKEN':Well,we can see that a word of past tense has been used.Which means there is a fact that it will a comparision of past and future. TIME FRAME: Well,because it will be a comparision,it needs a time frame.Well,in this fact,the comparision will be between ; 1950-1960 and todays age,2015. Which means the stand is comparision of 1950 to 1960 and 2015 and the comparision will be the fact of:the things which was done before and now it is being done by technology. Well,before going to other segments,I'd like to note that technology can't do things by it self,it is done by the user.So it is depending on user.The thing I'll have to prove is that the things which was done by the parents by theirselve,now they do it by technology,and also it is nothing to be proved that technology need to be used all over the world.Even if in some place it'd been used,it'll be considered as it has taken the place of parents. CR0SS FIRE AGAINST BURDEN TO PR0OVE: TECH FILLS OUR NECESSITY:talking about it later. DOES THINGS WHICH WAS DONE BY PARENTS:well,yes,the parents now do use technology which they didn't use in past. HARMLESS:well,nothing is harmless,not even angles.and,even we face problems sometime for parents unawareness.From that base,Technologies harm depends on its user. THE THINGS WHICH WAS D0NE BY PARENTS IN PAST BUT N0Y IT'S D0NE BY TECH: : : 1>GENUINE BIRTH:Well now,science has invented test tube formula.through this tech can give birth as well 2>PAIN :before,the mothers had to have so much pain for giving birth.But now,scizor technique and suction cup tech has removed that problem. 3>MEDICAL:in the past,if disease harmed the child,the parents used to give treatment by theirselves.But now,they don't do it and instead of that,they use medical tech to remove these provlems. 4>BREASTFEEDING :in past,the mother generally used to give her child stright breast feed.but,now,we see the mothers to feed artificial powder milk which is nothing but a output of technology. Well,for this time,that's all.WAITING TO BE GET RUSHED BY AWES0ME HILARI0US SPEECH
Technology has taken the position of PARENTS

Hello , friends . Before commencement , I would like to define the key words of the topics. 1.TECHNOLOGY: It means those instruments which are directly or indirectly computing-based . For example , I can talk about computer , internet , digital machines like : television , mobile phone , video games , etc 2.PARENTS : It"s simple . I"m talking about fathers and mothers who show us the light of the world , take care of us and fill all necessities of us 3.THE POSITION OF PARENTS : This segment is a bit complicated . Our parents do so many things for us . Such as : taking care of us , fill our all necessities , etc . So , if anything is placed in lieu of parents and that thing does everything which parents do , it"ll be said that that thing has taken the position of parents . *Here it should be cleared that , parents usually do no harm to us . So , if the proposition wants to prove this topic"s sustainability , he has to show three things : 1.How technology fills our all necessities 2.How technology does everything which a parents do 3.How technology has no harmness BURDEN OF PROOF : The proposition must prove that technology does no harm to us , it fills all necessities , it does everything that a parents do . Because , to take the position of parents , technology has to have those characteristics stated above. If the proposition is able to show how technology has those three characteristics , the topis will be proved as a sustainable one ".. Now , the burning question is : How does technology take the position of parents ?? Let's wait for the proposition's speech . But I think , technology can NEVER , EEEEEEEEEVER take the position of PARENTS .
Cars were better in the 70's and 80's then they are today.

(I would also like to point out the fact that my opponent used one car for his example. On average the newer model cars come with a hemi engine and are faster. ) They may have a hemi option, but they are nothing compared to the older versions (counter point 2. most modern re-issues of cars come with a hemi option) Only the Charger and Challenger have the optional hemi. You can never match the sound of the old muscle cars starting up and revving.
Cars were better in the 70's and 80's then they are today.

While I have already won the argument that modern cars are much safer I would like to point out my opponent had agreed that not all older model cars are faster and more powerful then their modern day models. I would also like to point out the fact that my opponent used one car for his example. On average the newer model cars come with a hemi engine and are faster. engine options are still available so you can customize to your will and whim counter point 1. basing cars on looks is an opinion and cannot be disputed. I like the newer Challengers compaired to the older models. however that does not mean everyone thinks its as cool as me. counter point 2. most modern re-issues of cars come with a hemi option
Cars were better in the 70's and 80's then they are today.

My turn. 1) They are much safer. / I concide this point. 2) As my opponent had stated they were more powerful back in the 70's and 80's and that is just not true. / This is 50/50 true. 1968-1970 Dodge Charger B-body ( i was unable to get HP for the engines. sorry) 225 cu in (3.7 L) 1bbl I6 (1969-70) 318 cu in (5.2 L) 2bbl LA V8 383 cu in (6.3 L) 2bbl B V8 383 cu in (6.3 L) 4bbl B V8 426 cu in (7.0 L) Hemi 2x4bbl RB V8 440 cu in (7.2 L) 4bbl RB V8 440 cu in (7.2 L) 2x3 RB (1970) 2010 Dodge Charger 2.7 L (160 cu in) EER V6 190 hp (142 kW) 3.5 L (210 cu in) EGJ V6 250 hp (186 kW) 5.7 L (345 cu in) EZB/EZD HEMI V8 368 hp (274 kW) 6.1 L (370 cu in) ESF HEMI V8 425 hp (317 kW) 3) As seen above, they had more engine options then they do today. My turn 1) They looked better in the 70's and 80's then todays cars. 2) Almost every car back then had a V8 in it.
Cars were better in the 70's and 80's then they are today.

Right off the bat I would like to state that most of my opponent's argument is that of opinion and therefore is hard to debate, That is choice. but what makes a car "better" I would like start my argument off my stating that a way a car looks and how cool it is, merely an opinion and cannot be proven either way. I do think that modern cars are better because 1. they are much safer. in 1970 the fatality rate was 52,627 fast forward to 2009 and the fatality rate decreased dramatically to a 33,808 2. as my opponent had stated they were more powerful back in the 70's and 80's and that is just not true. 3. you can customize modern cars much more then you could with older cars.