BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Forcing equal maternity and paternity leave is better for children: firstly, children are more likel...

Forcing equal maternity and paternity leave is better for children: firstly, children are more likely under this model to develop meaningful relationships with both parents. Parents who care for children immediately after their birth when they at their most dependent and vulnerable are likely to develop stronger emotional bonds with that child. Having close relationships with two parents enhances a child’s development, providing different perspectives and role models. Secondly, reducing the likelihood of male economic dominance within the home impacts on the way that children perceive gender roles as they grow up. Studies show that children who witness domestic violence at a young age are more likely to be the perpetrators of domestic violence as adults: this suggests that the relationship between a child’s parents affects their relations with the other gender in adulthood. If more children grow up in homes where their parents view each other as equals, this will increase their expectations of equality within society as a whole, in turn making society more equal.
Forcing equal maternity and paternity leave would underscore equality of parenthood: under the statu...

Equal paternal leave is unnecessary to underscore equality of parenthood: firstly, equality of parenthood is not about who spends the early months with the child but rather about parents providing mutual support for each other and raising the child together. It is obvious that different parents have different skills and can contribute different things to a child’s upbringing. One parent may be better at looking after a baby, or simply happier to do so, but that doesn’t mean that they will be a better parent for the next eighteen years of that child’s life. Maternity leave, as argued above, is about allowing women to recover from labour as well as simply caring for the child. Secondly, parents with little interest in childcare are unlikely to develop skills even if encouraged to stay at home. Thirdly, social parents will only be perceived as equal when society views different familial structures as being of equal importance and worth. Giving social parents more time off work is unlikely to change views on their families as a whole.
Forcing equal maternity and paternity leave would underscore equality of parenthood: under the statu...

Forcing equal maternity and paternity leave would underscore equality of parenthood: under the status quo, mothers are often expected to be better parents and the burden of childcare is more likely to fall on women. If parents separate, judges are more likely to place children with their mother. Forcing parents to take equal leave would emphasise the fact that parenthood is a joint enterprise between the two parents, both of whom are equally important. This would be important for fathers’ rights more generally. In addition, given the growing number of non-traditional families (for example those with two fathers or two mothers) it is valuable to show that society regards such social parents as equal and that biological mothers have no greater claim to children.
Doesn't always suit the job.

While almost all jobs require a professional appearance, a dedicated, positive attitude and being able to communicate with other people, most do not require these skills at the same level of intensity as in an interview. Some interview skills, such as talking persuasively in a formal situation, may never be used in a job. Some jobs require skills that cannot be demonstrated in an interview, such as working in an unsupervised environment, working unsociable hours, handling a heavy work load and coping with repetitive work. Where a job requires more of the latter kind of skill and less of the former, a different kind of interview technique should be found.
Can't get a realistic impression of a person in such a short space of time.

Interviews usually take around 15 minutes to half an hour, an hour at most. This is not a long enough time to gain an accurate, well rounded impression of a person. A work trial over a few weeks would give the company a chance to see how a person acts in a wider range of different situations. It will also be a more honest picture of the candidate – the candidate cannot put on and hold a persona that is not entirely truthful when they are watched constantly over a long period of time. A very persuasive but dishonest person might be able to get through the process of writing an application form and going for an interview without actually being good at the job, wasting the employer's time.
Unsuitable for employable people with Asperger's Syndrome and similar conditions.

Only 12% of people with Asperger's Syndrome are currently in full time employment (http://www.c-i-c.co.uk/upload/autism%20article%282%29.pdf), despite a much larger proportion being employable in some category or other. In the Opinion Leader online research on adult autism in 2009, most of the volunteers said that their main barrier to employment was interviews. Traditional interviews are not designed for people with Asperger's Syndrome – they involve high levels of stress and social situations with inflexible rules that are difficult enough for people without social and communication difficulties. Factors such as timekeeping and memory are also difficult with some individuals with Asperger's. These difficulties can be met in a workplace but not in the short space of time available between applying for a job and an interview – employers are also generally more co-operative in making adjustments for someone once someone is employed. Many other disabilities affect performance in interviews in ways that can't always be easily adjusted for. Sometimes it is simply easier and more appropriate to offer a work trial or practical test instead.
Relies too heavily on vacancy details.

Badly written vacancy adverts are a major problem when recruiting during the recession. The adverts ask for skills that are too specific or unrealistic amounts of experience, putting people off that are capable of doing the job but not a perfect match, or refer to requirements in a way that is badly explained or vague. Interviews are more likely to involve matching the candidate against the list of skills on the vacancy advert whereas a work trial or practical test more directly proves that the person can do the job.
Misses the point of an interview.

An interview is not supposed to be a complete test in and of itself. It is one stage of recruitment – a kind of formal hearing in which a person has a chance to explain in words why they are eligible for a job. To create the best impression of a person, the interview should be just one stage of a recruitment process that also involves tests and a probation period. For instance, the civil service graduate fast stream has an online application form first, then a series of online tests, then a more formal test at the centre, then an interview.
A significant number of studies reveal that the first impression is in fact the last impression

A good interrogating probing peek into a person in the space a few minutes can be more useful than knowing a person for an entire lifetime. Why? 1)The questions are job specific.(so even if you know a person for ten twenty years, if you don't ask those questions you won't know if s/he is right for the job) quals are about potential where as interview questions are about capability. 2)Confident people have a certain ambience/ambiance, if a person wants a job you can see it from the way s/he strides into the room. 3)It is very clear whether someone is invested, happy with the job environment, can handle what s/he is required to do, how s/he responds to stress, whether s/he is at home with the people interviewing him/her from the interview and so whether s/he is right for the job.
Doesn't always suit the job.

“A conversation, such as one conducted by a reporter, in which facts or statements are elicited from another.”[[http://www.thefreedictionary.com/interview]] This need not be formal or educationally thorough. If an employer knows what they require for the job they will be able to assess this through an interview. A fork truck driver will not need to be coherent, though he will need to show past experience in the role. Most manual roles such as this do not require the handing in of a CV but the meeting of people to talk through experience and provide references face to face. Even in the manual world, interviews are successful. Also, employers of such a kind would want people they communicate well with; they will not find this out on a work based assessment. Interviews remain the best way to get to know an employee and assess their employability.
Unsuitable for employable people with Asperger's Syndrome and similar conditions.

A good interviewer will be able to account for the effects of a disability in their judgement or tailor an interview for the person, such as asking more literal questions about actual rather than hypothetical problems, leaving more time between questions for answers. Most difficulties in an interview can be worked around by a good employer who shows knowledge and understanding of a disability and actually makes the right adjustments. There is a danger that just replacing the interview with a work trial will be seen as a substitute for actually finding out about the person and their specific needs.
Would create confusion.

The point would be that those who go for similar roles will be tested in a similar way, and therefore the results would be comparable. The argument is not suggesting a different assessment for each candidate based on each candidate’s strengths and weaknesses but a standard assessment based upon the nature of the job at hand. This would mean that what is tested is not merely verbal skills if verbal skills are not needed for the job, instead the employer would gain a greater insight into how the employee would be able to cope with the practical nature of the job.
Misses the point of an interview.

This would be fine if all the parts of the recruitment process were equally weighted and could be used as a substitute for each other. However, the way it usually works is that all parts of the process need to be passed in turn – so if a person receives the best scores in the test but still cannot pass an interview because of poor interview skills, rather than actual job competency, they will fail the entire recruitment process. In an exam a person with very high grades in one part of a paper but very low grades in another would receive average overall grades - an ideal recruitment process with multiple stages would be like this.
A significant number of studies reveal that the first impression is in fact the last impression

It is fairly easy to be both confident and be incompetent at the job if you are good at blagging. At the same time, you can be perfectly suited to do a job but be unable to express this confidently in an interview. A job may not require handling large amounts of stress. If a job is tedious, a person who requires this level of excitement might be completely unsuited. The replacement for an interview would not be just recruiting people you know.
Public opinion in the UK is in favour of extending abortion rights not reducing them

Firstly the second survey was a survey of Abortion Rights members not the general population so it may not represent the general populations views by extension. Secondly a poll commissioned in 2005 for the Telegraph showed that 53% of members interviewed were in favour of the limit being reduced to 20 weeks from 24 week[[http://www.icmsearch.co.uk pdfs/2005_march_sunday_telegraph_abortion_survey.pdf#search=%22abortion%22]].. Also a majority of those in favour were female (59% in favour-compared to 28% disapproving and 12% unsure) as well as male meaning that it wouldn't be just a tyrannical and clerical minority doing it [[http://www.icmresearch.co.uk pdfs/2005_march_sunday_telegraph_abortion_survey.pdf#search=%22abortion%22]].
Abortion helps raise the spectre eugenics against Disabled people rather than provide equality

Pro life charities argue that having an abortion is opposite to treatment of all people as equal. This is because it places a lower value than and promotes a societies view as seeing it as expendable . Currently between over 90% of Downs syndrome foetuses are terminated rather than being allowed to develop the chance to live their lives after their parents receive a pre natal diagnosis [[Jennie Bristow " Abortion Review Comment: Down's Syndrome, live births and statistics," British Pregnancy Advisory Service "http://www.abortionreview.org/index.php/site/article/452/ Accessed 03.06.09]]. This is partly because of entrenched medical model attitudes and expectations that see disability as something to be eliminated rather than as something to be treated as an equal part of the human experience. Furthermore it also raises the spectre of the T-4 Action programme a campaign by the Nazi's in Germany to eliminate disabled people through gassing them. This was something that culminated in the killing of an estimated 30,000 people although the figure has been put as high as 400,000 in the past. [[ The American Israeli Co-operative Enterprise "The T-4 Euthanasia Program"http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/t4.html Accessed 03.06.2009]]
Public opinion in the UK is in favour of extending abortion rights not reducing them

An ICM poll commissioned for the Rowntree Trust in 2004 estimated 76% of people in the UK support a womans right to choose. That's over three quarters of the UK population including both men and women. Something that shouldn't be discounted. [[Voice for Choice "Why some women need late abortions" http://www.abortionrights.org.uk/images/stories/vfc%20later%20abortion%20briefing.pdf%5D%5D Moreover there is also support for reducing the time delays in abortions being provided for people who had been referred for an abortion[[ Abortion Rights-why women need a modern abortion law and better services http://www.abortionrights.org.uk/content/view/180/121/%5D%5D To impose or restrict abortion rights would be an example of tyranny of a clerical and vocal minority.
Sanctity of life : Only god ends life not humans

Every person has a right to life. So the foetus has a right to life. No doubt the mother has a right to decide what shall happen in and to her body; everyone would grant that. But surely a person’s right to life is stronger and more stringent than the mother’s right to decide what happens in and to her body, and so outweighs it which defends abortion as the mother is of more importance. In extreme circumstance an ectopic pregnancy is when the fertilised ovum becomes attached to the wall of the fallopian tube. To continue with the pregnancy would lead to the death of both the mother and the child. In these circumstances, the uterus is removed and the embryo dies. A Christian response to this makes uses of the ‘double-effect’ rule. The doctors intend to save the mother, rather than killing the foetus, so the action is morally permissible. Peter Vardy identified a problem with the ‘double-effect’; new laser technology will enable women to have a safer operation which involves the foetus being ‘lasered’ rather than the fallopian tube removed. The result for the mother is much better, but it’s difficult to suggest that the death of the foetus in this case is a secondary feature. All that is really different is the intention of the doctor. Vardy draws a line at a particular point in the foetus’ development to indicate that before this point the foetus is tissue, and after is a person but it is hard to know when.
Case of Human Rights

The Universal Declaration of the Rights of the Child and the Declaration of the rights of the child are exactly what they set out to be: Declarations that have no binding or legal authority so they do not confer any rights and should be seen as aspirational. Furthermore the UN convention on the rights of Persons with Disabilities which was ratified in 2008 ( which is binding to member states) provide sexual and reproductive rights for women [["Backgrounder: Disability Treaty Closes a Gap in Protecting Human Rights" http://www.un.org/disabilities/default.asp?id=476 Accessed for 5.06.09]]. The Convention on The Rights of Persons with Disabilities does this in article 25 section a [[http://www.un.org/disabilities/documents/convention/convoptprot-e.pdf Accessed 5.06.09]] . Reproductive rights as well as sexual health mean that a women has access and control over how many children she has, if any. While it may fly in the face of policies such as the One Child Policy employed by the People's Republic of China, it also flies in the face of the policy employed by Nicaragua restricting abortion.
A woman's right to choose and control what goes on in her body

Orlando Tardencilla one of the people who proposed the law that was passed banning abortion in Nicaragua :"Unless abortion is made a crime, then people can simply come out and say: 'I have the right to an abortion, this is my body and I can decide....That's like saying: 'I'm allowed to commit murder because these hands are mine, this gun is mine.' [[ BBC News Nicragua votes to ban abortions" http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6089718.stm Accessed 5.06.09]]This is effectively a demonstration of the anti abortion point of view as it shows the lie in the pro choice theory that people can do something destructive to themselves. There are laws and restrictions on banning drug abuse something that people do to harm themselves.
Sanctity of life : Only god ends life not humans

The Catholic Trust Society greatly opposes abortion: “We have been created by the almighty God in his own image and likeness. No pregnancy is unplanned because no baby can be conceived unless almighty God intends that conception and the existence will occur.” The Catholic Trust says that the conception of baby is due to the will of God and a human being has no right to kill that baby, it is ethically unacceptable and morally wrong.
Case of Human Rights

Contrary to popular belief not all pro life organisations are religiously motivated,such as The Society for the Protection of Unborn Children. It argues that abortion is a violation of human rights as enshrined three major treaties that have been ratified by the majority of countries in the world today.[[ Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child "Abortion Briefing" http://www.spuc.org.uk/ethics/abortion/%5D%5D Firstly the 1949 Universal Declaration of Human Rights which states that in article 3 that: "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person"[[United Nations "Universal Declaration of Human Rights http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/%5D%5D . This article, although it doesn't mention abortion it does use the phrase "right to life" which implies those that are not yet born as well as those that are born have rights. Secondly The 1959 Declaration of the rights of the child specifically mentions unborn rights [[ Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child http://www.spuc.org.uk/ethics/abortion/%5D%5D. This is enshrined in Principle 4 which states that:" The child shall enjoy the benefits of social security. He shall be entitled to grow and develop in health; to this end, special care and protection shall be provided both to him and to his mother, including adequate pre-natal and post-natal care. The child shall have the right to adequate nutrition, housing, recreation and medical services." Notice the words" pre natal care" that allude to a pre birth state something which enshrines the rights of the unborn child.[[Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/25.htm Accessed 03.06.09]]. This is also bolstered by the 1976 International Convenant on Civil and Political Rights [[ Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child http://www.spuc.org.uk/ethics/abortion/%5D%5D
A woman's right to choose and control what goes on in her body

A woman has ulitimate control over her life and her body and whether that includes whether she chooses to keep a unintended foetus or not. People whether they be religious clerics or secular nurses can not just force a woman to have a baby she is opposed to having it as she may not be . Denying reproductive rights is a form of opression by a paternalistic society and should be treated as such. The right should be extended rather than restricted because of a number of reasons in getting an abortion women can have a number of legitimate reasons for doing so. For instance changes in circumstances can affect both single and married women in the form of seperation or divorce from a partner, problems like "brain damage" or severe illnesses affecting existing children[[ Voice for Choice " Why women need late abortions" Accessed on 5.09.06 http://www.abortionrights.org.uk/images/stories/vfc%20later%20abortion%20briefing.pdf%5D%5D Finally the person affected by a condition has the right to make that decision
Better to make it legal then illegal

Even if a process is illegal or restricted to far some women who are desperate will still travel to have undergo the process or at the worst go for a back street abortion. For example abortion being illegal in both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland has forced a large amount of women travelling to the UK to seek a termination. [[Abortion Rights "Ireland's Hidden Diaspora" http://www.abortionrights.org.uk/content/view/308/118/ Accessed 5.06.09]] At worst a person will seek a back street abortion something that has left to the lives of women being lost or damaged because of injuries due to complications resulting from an abortion.
Abortion helps raise the spectre eugenics against Disabled people rather than provide equality

Disabled people aren't just asexual. We're both adult male and female oh and not to forget transexual . More to the point if we're female just like other non disabled women we want the right to have control over our own bodies[[ National Union of Students "Liberation Officers in Every Union"http://resource.nusonline.co.uk/media/resource/2007_liberation_officers]] . While there may be a high amount of people being aborted further restrictions or a blanket ban is not the way about eliminating the prejudice towards disabled people which can easily be shown by people who are anti abortion in other ways. Instead more opportunities should be given to provide information to women who are going through pre-natal tests or thinking about the possibility of having one. Also pro choice groups like abortion rights support the social model supporting the equal treatment of people with physical disabilities, something that includes over access to abortion. [[ Abortion Rights "statement on disability" http://www.abortionrights.org.uk/content/view/40/129/%5D%5D
A Foetus Is A Person

Yes it will be born into a human being,but because the mother is looking at this option,their is obviously a reason either their age or financial situation.If mothers are forced to have their babys which are recognised by them as mistakes,they will not take proper care of the child .We do not want this baby born into a human being knowing crime,poverty and destitution.And this will have an endless negative affect on the unready mother. It is a question of what makes us human. If all that makes us human is a set of biological impulses, then we may as well all be drones. The things that make us human are not our necessities, eating, sleeping, shitting. It is our personality - this does not develop in the womb. A foetus is no more aware of it's existence than a fruit fly. Why force a human being to carry a gestation, causing extreme emotional and physical torment, purely for the continued dissemination of a profligate species. It's a natural survival instinct to be pro life, but if you approach the subject rationally you'd come to a different conclusion.