BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Best Video Game

I will start by refuting your points to why minecraft is better than mw3. Creativity: you said that players can build whatever they want and this makes the game good. I play minecraft. To build awesome stuff it takes forever and I consider good architecture hard. Red stone is very complicated for new players although I can do it. You don't need this for MW3 because you rank up and rank your guns up and play campaign and missions. You don't need to be talented. Survival: You said that its fun to gather resources and get to the end of the game. I find this difficult in some cases. I can barely find diamond without X-ray and it takes forever to have sufficient resources. Minecraft takes a long time for it to be fun where modern warfare 3 is instantly fun from your first game. Objective: There is an objective to most video games but minecraft is one of the only sandbox games with one. I. Find this irrelevant to the topic because most games have it. There is an objective in all three parts of modern warfare 3 anyways. Now for more reason to why MW3 is better than most games. In modern warfare 3 you can play 3 parts of the game. Multiplayer, Campaign, and Spec ops. All three of these are fun and it gives you options if you don't like one style of the game. You can instantly get into the game unlike minecraft and it has great multiplayer gameplay. Thank you.
Best Video Game

Here are some reasons that Minecraft (PC version, not Classic) is the best video game. Creativity Minecraft allows the player to express creativity it is a sandbox game. [1] This allows huge structures to be built, including cities and even logic units if redstone, the game's in game wiring, is used. [1] The game graphic is blocky, but this means that there can be almost infinite maps without causing significant lag, which in turn allows more creativity and provides room for huge buildings. Survival This game also includes a survival mode, where the player builds shelters, fights monsters, make tools, gathers resources and obviously, survive. Survival mode is technically no different from creative mode except that the player has a health and hunger bar and that they have to gather their own resources. Survival can be challenging but fun considering all the freedom the game gives. Objective Unlike most sandbox games, where there is no objective, Minecraft features a final objective, but it is not a linear environment. The final objective is to kill the boss dragon by activating one of the three portals in a game save file. [1] Having a final objective makes something for the players to look for to, instead of just walking around. Education Value As this includes a built in electric circuit system [1], it can be educational as using it requires logic. [1]http://en.wikipedia.org...
Best Video Game

Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3 is the best game out there. It was released November 17, 2011 and December 22, 2011 in the U.K. Within 24 hours of going on sale, the game sold 6.5 million copies in the U.S. and UK alone and grossed $400 million, making it the biggest entertainment launch of all time. When I checked minecraft.net the website said that about 8,200,000 people have bought it ever since the game has been out. in just 16 days of MW3 being out it made 1 billion dollars. People are still buying the game today so the sales always go up and more people are playing. The reason more people are playing this game is because they know it is fun. I play minecraft and Call of Duty but MW3 is more fun. Yes younger kids can play minecraft but it is a bit more complicated for them than a shooter game. Thank you and good luck Sources: http://en.wikipedia.org... minecraft.net
Barack Obama is a gay, Muslim, communist, black, hippie, atheist, and lazy president

I accept. I will be arguing the following:1. Barrack Obama is married to a woman, therefore not gay as in "homosexual" or gay as in "happy" for that matter.2. Barrack Obama is a Socialist, not a communist.3. Barrack Obama is brown, not black. 4. Brarrack Obama is not hip enough to be a hippie.5. Barrack Obama is not lazy, he spends much time tending to his presidential "doodies" in his "oval office".6. One cannot be Muslim and Atheist at the same time. It doesn't work.I look forward to an intelligent, meaningful debate........BAHAHAHAHAHAHAOkay *ahem* really let's do this.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is the closest to the church Jesus instilled

Having read over the comments, I think I have a better understanding of where your argument comes from and amazingly enough, where my own argument comes from. Neither one of us will budge in our stance on our faiths. While our religions are similar, they are not the same. In both of our arguments we both argue for what seems to be similar but is slightly different. We will never be able to fully understand one another because we will never be in the same position as the other person. This is the on-going story of humanity. I think we can both agree that the only person (or creature) responsible for spurring on this debate between you and I, and other people from both our faiths, is the devil. He promotes this ignorance so that it distracts us from what our focus should be on. I will not know whether or not my faith is placed in the correct hands, not in this lifetime. The same can be said about you. But I suppose that is why it is called faith. As for your beginning statement. It is true that the LDS practice the same rituals as the beginning church and in a sense are therefore most similar in practice. Perhaps, you are the Christians of the modern era and we are the Jews, still unaware of the new faith. I cannot question your faith and I have no right to. I can only question your practice when it is juxtaposed against mine. As a Christian, i.e. follower of Christ, which is not a denomination, I believe that the only way is his and therefore I can only follow him. There can be no others. I do not say this to degrade your faith but to establish mine. There is only one book, the Bible and any other is false. If the Bible explicitly reads that it is The Word of God, then why take another. That is the basis of Christianity and the fundamental difference between Mormons and Christians. We are not the same and to say so is ignorant. In following, the "Topic of Debate", I am not the winner. There is proof that the LDS is closer to the beginning Church. But I would like to point out that Christianity has evolved. Christ did not die recently. He died nearly 2000 years ago and since then Christianity has grown and aged a little. It has had some pretty horrific and deceitful leaders and will continue to have them as the devil attempts to corrupt the faith. To come full circle with my point, Mormonism is relatively new and that is why it still resembles the early Church. Do not think that its resemblance has anything to do with how right or wrong it may be. Consider what you believe. Consider the facts; that it uses a book written by a man considered the "prophet" from God, or a latter-day saint if you will. I will not sit here and attempt to batter Mormonism, as I feel that is another form of persecution, I can only raise questions I have about it. That what you will from this debate, as I am sure it was between two people who care very deeply for what they believe in.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is the closest to the church Jesus instilled

1. In what Christian church do they have prophets and apostles? I have heard of not one. Jesus and God set up prophets and apostles before and (for awhile) after Christ's coming. The LDS church worships Christ and still sees him as the head of the church. Yes, the LDS does practice communion but in the LDS church it is known as sacrament. 2. Preaching His gospel is what Jesus commanded all his disciples to do until his second coming and as far as I know the LDS church and the Jehovah's Witnesses are the only ones obeying that commandment of Christ. That is what I was originally trying to say with the previous statement of mine. Mark 16:15(KJV) 3. Christ DID NOT say that it was the meaning of baptism that mattered. He said that we MUST be born of the water to enter the kingdom of heaven not just understand the meaning of it. The meaning of baptism is to cleanse the body of sin and truly enter into the kingdom of God. If it was just the meaning that was important then why would Jesus, sinless and pure of heart, do it? It was to be taken as an example of what we must do to live with God someday. John 3:3-5(KJV) 4. He did go to a prison of spirits. It says so in the Bible. If He had gone to Hell it would have said Hell not prison. He did not go to the right hand of God until after His resurrection because He told Mary, "Touch me not for I have not yet ascended to my Father in Heaven". 1 Peter 3:19 & 4:6 (KJV) 5. A person is not supposed to go to Heaven or Hell until their hearts are judged on judgement day. Until that day they wait in either spirit prison or heaven to await their judgement. The spirits in prison are preached to just as they would have been if they had had that opportunity here in their earthly life. Baptisms for the dead ARE important just as Paul taught that they were and those people being preached to in spirit prison have the opportunity to accept or reject that baptism just as they would have had that opportunity here on earth. 1 Corinthians 15:29 If the Mormon church was established by a corrupt and blind leader(Joseph Smith as you say) and not Jesus Christ. Would you say then that God would encourage half the country at that time to rape, kill, plunder, and drive every Mormon from state to state until there were trails of blood across the frozen prairies which they walked? Or would you say that those were things that the Devil would encourage? To me, a God that would condone that kind of behavior in his children is not a just and merciful one. Therefore, unless you are in the belief that God had encouraged that then it was the Devil. Why would the Devil encourage the destruction of something that was leading people into a falsehood about God?
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is the closest to the church Jesus instilled

The only thing I can argue currently is that, and this may seem offensive, Mormonism is the closes thing to the establishment of an Anti-Christ I have seen in the modern era. First off, while Mormonism is very close in relation to Christianity it is still not the same. Jesus preached that there would be others after him who were close to Christianity and mirrored its intentions but that these would be false prophets. I cannot say for certain but that sounds an awful lot like Mormonism. I will assess your 5 arguments individually. 1. Jesus did establish His church with his apostles but that church is still held today. Its called Christianity. While there may be many sects of the church it is still set solely in the believe that Jesus is Christ and that having a relationship with him is the only driving force in life. The church was established officially when Jesus gave the first communion, that all shall take his the bread, his body and take the wine, his blood, in communion with him. I am not certain whether or not Mormons do this but this is the true spirit of the church. Mormon churches may have the exterior characteristics of the church but if they do not have a communion with Jesus then it is fake. 2. Just because Mormons preach there gospel does not even make them anything like Christ. Mormons preach their gospel in order to spread it around. A stagnant religion is a dead religion and Mormons know this. Salesman can go door to door selling their product as well. 3. Again, while the LDS may believe in baptism, its the purpose for baptism that truly matters. LDS is the merely mimicking the Christian church, it does not make it anything like the church. 4. Christ went to Hell, not spirit prison. That is the essence of the Resurrection is that Christ rose from death thus defeating it. He did not go to a spirit prison and he did not ascend to spirit heaven. He went to rest on the right hand of God, in Heaven. This concept of spirit prison and spirit hell is more similar to Muslim ideology than Christian believes. 5. The dead have already gone to either hell or heaven and baptism does not help them either way. Baptism is purely to decision of a single living person to be immersed in the spirit of Jesus and if they are dead they cannot do so. Thus, baptism of the dead is pointless and very similar to paganism or Medieval Christianity, which was coincidentally very similar to true Christianity but was muddled by corrupt leaders who taught falsehoods. The basis of this argument is that while the LDS church may be similar to Christianity, it is fake and was established by Joseph Smith not Jesus Christ.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is the closest to the church Jesus instilled

I know that many people have prejudice taught by their ministers, pastors, etc. against the mormons. Please do not that prejudice sway your favor in this argument. In no way am I trying to prove this religion right; I am simply trying to say that it is the most parallel to the one set up by Jesus in Biblical times. The reasons I believe this include: 1. In Biblical times Jesus had his church set up with prophets and apostles and the only church with that same set up is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. 2. Jesus went about preaching his gospel throughout the land just as today the LDS church sends out missionaries to spread this gospel. 3. The LDS church believes firmly in the importance of baptism by immersion just as Jesus demonstrated its importance through example. 4. The LDS Church believes that when you die you go to either a spirit heaven or spirit prison to await judgement day because in the three days before He was resurrected, Jesus preached to the spirits in that prison. 5. The LDS church is the only one practicing baptisms for the dead which Paul stressed was important still even after the death of Jesus. I will leave this open to argument, but please take into consideration my first statements before you write your counter argument.
animal rights are equal to human rights

First off, I am not an animal abuser, and I love animals. If you are a theist, here's a bible verse (Genesis 1:26) in which God gives humans rights over animals. Then God said, "Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground." If you eat meat, you are not being equal. If you are vegan, you eat plants that animals need
Cosmetic Surgery

Thank you. Note that there should be no Internet usage on this, rather your own common knowledge C1) It is pricey Cosmetic surgery operations range from around 100,000 dollars or more, and we see this as something that is socially unacceptable. First off, these implantation's might not even last permanently, and is a complete rip off from these celebrities or people. Secondly, we see this as something that can ruin your life. Because these surgeries are very pricey and in fact can be addicting, this can also lead to the spending of more and more money, which could lead to multiple impacts. There are chances in surgeries. It could be successful, and the money was worth. However, if the operation was botched then people would have the automatic impulse to do it again, which then you have to pay money.... Its an on going cycle that we believe poses as a harm C2) Addiction Cosmetic surgeries can be very addicting. A person fixes one thing, only to notice something else that could be tuned up with a quick pick, poke, prod and plunger from a syringe. This overall leads to the notion that plastic surgeries are okay. However with this addiction going on, it can harm our society and we would end up seeing plastic people. This is not what we want our society to be shaped out as. C3)It is risky and very bad for your health Cosmetic surgeries have many bad side effects with the chances of many complications which could even ruin your health. Breast implants in particular can have a multitude of complications. While you may expect larger, perkier, more attractive breasts, asymmetry, deflation, or rippling can occur, worsening the appearance. And if you're seeking a quick fix for your saddlebags, liposuction likely won't remove your fat forever. Cosmetic surgeries are overall an immoral thing. Everyone is beautiful in their own way, they should not try cosmetic surgery and see the chances/results of it being successful or a disaster
Cosmetic Surgery

THIS IS AN IMPROMPTU DEBATE. Instead of researching for arguments, this is all based off of your own knowledge. 30 min maximum for argumentations No sources needed. Even if I can't see whether you use the internet or not, I do expect that debate.org members shall have sense, maturity and understandable reasonings as well as not stooping so low to using internet. Resolution: Cosmetic Surgery Because I am against cosmetic surgery I will be proving why it is bad My opponents will do vice versa. Definitions: Cosmetic Surgery: a surgical specialty dedicated to reconstruction of facial and body parts My sides model: To ensure that cosmetic surgery is not overused, there will be restrictions and exceptions of cosmetic surgery only to those who have body and facial defects, rather than having them for their own looks. Rules: No FF No trolling No swearing If these rules are not followed, the automatic win goes to me. Cheers
Christ was not born on December 25th.

"Cyril of Jerusalem (348-386) had access to the original Roman birth census, which also documented that Jesus was born on the 25th of December. The date eventually became the officially recognized date for Christmas in part because it coincided with the pagan festivals celebrating Saturnalia and the winter solstice." www.gotquestions.org/December-25.html Scroll down in the following page until you get the point 2 of Argument for a late December birth. http://www.hebrew4christians.com... "The angel Gabriel made his announcement to Mary (Miriam in Hebrew) "in the sixth month" of Elizabeth"s pregnancy (Lk. 1:26, 36), i.e. any time between 5 and 6 months after June 25th, 7 BC " let"s guess at December 11th (Kislev 22, 3755 AM). The message was "you shall conceive" (Lk. 1:31), so again, it would be reasonable to assume that Mary became pregnant some time during the following month " let"s guess at December 25th (Teveth 6) " if only because that would be remarkably appropriate day! Jesus would then have been born some nine months later " say September 25th, 6 BC (Tishri 15, 3756 AM), which just happens to be the date of the Feast of Tabernacles!" http://homepage.ntlworld.com... I understand what the paragraph above says, but when a child is conceived in the womb it is now alive. That is why abortion is murder.
Christ was not born on December 25th.

Thank you for accepting. Good luck! Lets begin on how Christ was born. Jesus was born by Virgin Mary in a manger. The baby was conceived by the Holy Spirit fulfilling God's words through the prophets. He was born to be our saviour. His death on the cross and risen gives us another opportunity to live fully. You can read Matthew Chapter 1 https://www.biblegateway.com.... In this chapter it says noting about when he was born, neither dose it mention December. Here are two primary reason why Christ couldn't have been born on December 25th. 1) "First, we know that shepherds were in the fields watching their flocks at the time of Jesus' birth (Luke:2:7-8) . Shepherds were not in the fields during December. According to Celebrations: The Complete Book of American Holidays , Luke's account "suggests that Jesus may have been born in summer or early fall. Since December is cold and rainy in Judea, it is likely the shepherds would have sought shelter for their flocks at night" 2nd) "Given the difficulties and the desire to bring pagans into Christianity, "the important fact then which I have asked you to get clearly into your head is that the fixing of the date as December 25th was a compromise with paganism" (William Walsh, The Story of Santa Klaus , 1970, p. 62). So there is not possible way or proof that Christ could have been born on December 25th. Sources: http://www.ucg.org...
Christ was not born on December 25th.

Everybody likes to celebrate Christmas for many reason. The most important reason is because they believe Christ was born on December 25th. Also they use the term, keep "Christ, in Christmas" There are no references in the bible that says he was born on December 25th. So there's no possible way of knowing that he was born on December 25th. Christ: the title, also treated as a name, given to Jesus of Nazareth Christmas: . A Christian feast commemorating the birth of Jesus. Sources: https://www.google.com... https://search.yahoo.com... First round is acceptance. Good luck!
The US Government should grant universal healthcare to its citizens.

When someone becomes ill whether it be with the flu or a disease and doctors or hospitals turn them away because they can't pay, wouldn't that be stealing someone's life? For someone who worked their entire life and can finally retire and, yet can't pay for medical coverage then has to get another job in case they get sick what type of country is that we live in? Your attacking the fact that they are only taking money from the rich to provide for the poor, they take from every class; upper class, middle class, and yes in fact the lower class contributes as well. When all is said and done we can look at the countries now that have universal health care, none of them have went bottom up and the "upper class" has never complained they were taxed more heavily. Also when looking at it when everyone is covered it would be cheaper then the health care system we have now. Universal health care is the belief that all citizens have access to affordable high-care medical service; i.e. smokers etc.
The US Government should grant universal healthcare to its citizens.

The government should only protect the basic rights of people, to protect the pursuit of happiness and prevent theft. Murder is stealing another's life and scams steal people's money, but who steals when one becomes ill? No one. Many governments will do more than protect its people's rights; they do charity work by giving people things they never worked for. Now I'm all for charity work if you are a charity organization or you are a person willingly giving up money to another out of compassion. However, what dignity is gained by giving money unwillingly to the government so that the government may act out its people's charity. Univ. healthcare is a charity in that the government takes more money from the rich to pay for the healthcare of the poor. Univ. healthcare is not free, it will in fact be more expensive. The healthy will pay the burden of those living less-healthy lifestyles, i.e. smokers. Finally, its such a complex process that will never be efficient and is better left alone.
The US Government should grant universal healthcare to its citizens.

Universal health care should be open to all citizens. The United States has made health care for many residents unaffordable; even through businesses. People who are sick are not focused on getting better anymore, they are focused on whether or not they can pay for treatment. Doctors as well are also focusing on whether or not they will receive payment for this treatment. Knowing that many other areas in the world have universal health care shows it's not impossible for the United States to inquire; the transition may be a tough one as well as a shock to many, but it is definitely something the United States can do.