BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
EPL is better than Primera Liga

First of all, Constrating to Only REAL MADRID & BARCELONA dominate Primera Liga, in English Premier League there are no absolute dominacteur or dominee. It means, there is potential and sustainable development in class of league Second, EPL's marketing ability is really better than Primera Liga, Wherever We can pick up a remote controller, we can see any match of EPL! but in case of Primera Liga, it doesn't . and EPL's camera skill for shooting the match is absolutely dominant Primera Liga's Don't you think about this?
Euthanasia

Pitiful. 1000 characters to make a case for Euthanasia... I doubt Pro will contest that people have the right to life. Like with any right, it is up to the individual as to whether or not they are going to exercise that right. Rights, by definition, cannot translate into obligations. If someone has the right to free speech but chooses not to speak out against anything, then it is ultimately their own loss. If someone has the right to vote, but chooses not to vote, it's the same deal. Why should the right to life be any different? If someone has the right to life, they should also have the right to abstain from exercising that right-- they should have the right to death. If someone wants to die, then the safest and least painful way to do it is to have euthanasia administered in a clinical setting. By keeping euthanasia illegal, the government violates our right to death and causes unnecessary additional suffering to citizens, which is completely contrary to the role of government.
Death Battle: Super Hero edition

This is a debate challenge towards lua. He decided we should do a battle with super heroes, but insisted I issued the challenge. There are rules to be followed, of course.1) Your chosen character can't be undefeatable, so no characters with insane healing factor (like Deadpool), or reality warpers. Your character must be defeatable by regular means (it means you don't need to somehow counter the character.)2) No outside help. This battle will only be your character vs mine, no assistance from their friends. (If the friend happens to be a part of the character, like Iron Man's computer program JARVIS, then it can help him.)3) First round will be acceptance and discussion of rules only, so just state your character, and any concerns.If there's any rules lua wants to add, then it's alright, as long as they're not unfair. My character will be Doctor Strange, since I watched the movie a few weeks ago.
Resolved: Should home schooled students be able to play public activities.

So what you are saying is that Home schooled kids should be able to participate in public schooling clubs and actitives. To that i find that wrong because, anyone that is of the age to play high school activites and feels good about the changes of actually making a team or club. They should be able to. Just because they are taught at home doesnt mean that they cant join any clubs at the high school of the district that they are in... For an example I go to Nixa High School, and I believe that we should invite the home bounded or home schooled students to the open gyms at least let them have a feel of what they are interested in. In other words you are stating that if we allow these random kids join the schools activites, that maybe it'll be resulted in Riots. There should be a huge problem with public schools or private schools because they are completely different. But, with public schooling and home schooling shouldnt have a hige fight over mixing when it comes to school activites. And just to add that, we come to public school because its free schooling. So, there is really not much of a conflict between this topic. Please I ask my opponet if there is! Tell me and explain what harm could come from mixing home school kids and public school kids. Actually a main i would like to add is of the fact that we actually compete againist private schools all the time. Exspecially in debate such as: New Covenet High School. So if we can compete and mix private schools then why cant we mix home schooled students in with our clubs and sports and other public school activites. I respectfully ask for a Pro Ballet thanks
Resolved: Should home schooled students be able to play public activities.

My opponent refused to post arguments in her last round. Her refusal to participate should, at the minimum, cost her a conduct point. All I have to do is prove one point and I will thus win the round. Home school students should not be able to participate in public school activities because they would be taking the spot of someone who wants to do it and goes to public school. If a home schooler wanted to participate in some public school club, then they should go to public school instead of taking a public school kid's spot.
Cannabis should be legalised.

In general, it is said that cannabis helps as a medical treatment. It is obvious though, that most countries don't agree with this kind of medical format. Thus, it is only natural to focus on the legitimate use of cannabis as a citizen. It is obviously wrong to allow cannabis to be legalized because minors will abuse this newly founded law and negative side effects are unavoidable. In California, cannabis is already legal, and it is already a rising issue with students arriving at school under the influence. Teachers have been complaining that this is causing students to lose focus and their grades are dropping dramatically. This is then, no doubt, a factor towards a lower IQ. As many people believe, education is the success to life. If students have access to marijuana, then they are clearly going to go dumb and slowly our next generation of workers will be too slow to accomplish anything...
A modernized form of democracy should be the goal of every society

[Quote] "Government of the people, by the people, and for the people, shall not perish from the Earth." -Abraham Lincoln It is because I agree with this quote that I affirm the resolution: A modernized democracy should be the goal of every society [Definitions] (1) Modernized Democracy: how today's societies view democracy, that is, a political system in which the supreme power lies in the body of citizens who can elect people to represent them under a free electoral system (2) Should: expresses a moral obligation; ought [Observations] (1) The resolution states should. ‘Should' express a moral obligation. Therefore, the affirmative only has to prove why it is our moral obligation to achieve the action (in this case, democracy), not if it is possible or if it would work [Value/Value Criterion] Value: (Modernized) Democracy Value Criterion: Consent of the Governed Democracy is obviously inherent and implied in the resolution, due to the fact that it is directly stated. Democracy forces decision-makers to take into account the interests, rights and opinions of all people in society. Because democracy is a majority rule, and because people tend to vote for people who make them happy, democracy almost always ensures that the majority of the voting population is happy. My value of democracy will be represented and shown through the consent of the governed, or the will of the people. No other government upholds the consent of the governed as well as democracy does [Contentions] (1) Democratic Peace Theory. The democratic peace theory holds that two democratic nations almost never go to war with each other. Immanuel Kant foreshadowed this theory in his essay Perpetual Peace. He thought that the majority of the people would not vote to go to war, unless in self-defense. Obviously, it is not needed to explain why not being at war is a positive effect of democracy. I reserve the right to make arguments in future arguments
Non-human animals should have rights.

This should be fun and entertaining. =================================== REBUTTAL - CONTENTION ONE - FIRST PARAGRAPH =================================== +My opponent has made a lengthy, thought-out straw man argument. It has nothing to do with the resolution. He is making an argument based on the fact that since humans are individually different, alludes to animals are individually different, and thus should be affored rights like humans. However, humans are not granted rights based on individually. Humans are granted rights based on the fact that humans are the same species as each other. Rights has nothing to do with human individuality. I'll say it again, straw man. My opponent said nothing about non-human animals, which is what the resolution is about. +Even if my opponent can prove that humans are granted rights based on individuality, that doesn't mean anything for this debate. We are not debating whether all humans deserve rights, we are debating whether animals deserve rights. =================================== REBUTTAL - CONTENTION ONE - SECOND PARAGRAPH =================================== +Animals are not members of society. They are not able to be enter a social contract where they have moral responsibilities, like humans. Animals are neither moral or immoral, they are amoral. Animals do not respect human rights, so humans should not respect animal rights. Animals are amoral, instinctual, irrational beings much likes robots. [1] ====== SOURCE ====== [1] . http://spot.colorado.edu...
Non-human animals should have rights.

Thank you and good luck to whoever accepts the debate. ======== DEFINTIONS ======== Non-human animals - any of the kingdom Animalia that is not a human should - used in auxiliary function to express obligation, propriety, or expediency http://www.merriam-webster.com... rights - an abstract idea of that which is due to a person or governmental body by law or tradition or nature http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu... *Do not accept this debate if you do not accept the definitions. Semantics is not acceptable. *For the sake of simplicity in this debate, non-human animals shall be henceforth called animals. ============= BURDEN OF PROOF ============= The BoP is on my opponent because nothing had rights until humans granted rights. My opponent is now trying to prove why something (non-human animals) should have rights, which puts the BoP on my opponent. Since my opponent has BoP, I will allow them to first.
The existence of an afterlife.

“I have no other arguments other than what I have already presented. ”It looks like we both have given our side on this topic and finished sooner than the allotted number of Rounds. That is fine. I won't belabor my points either. I ask that we are evaluated by the voters on our cases made thus far. My opponent did make a few points in the previous round, though. Mainly, she expressed her belief that there is a spiritual realm. She posited the notion that humans have the potential to access a spiritual realm. I don't think that there is such a realm. And so, we differ on that point. It was great to debate someone who really cared about getting to the truth of a topic.
The existence of an afterlife.

Very well written. Thanks for going into depth when answering questions I have raised. It seems like you have your understanding on the afterlife as do I, and they may differ. Religion is taught in school once a student becomes of an understanding age, highschool. For an unbeliever its a 50/50 chance weather or not there will be an afterlife, regardless of what they believe because as you said there is no direct proof. There is an unseen world for sure that exists, as i believe. There is the paranormal, miracles, the unexplainable, there may even be other dimensions. I have no other arguments other than what I have already presented. The afterlife may be evident because we are more than a physical body. We have higher capabilities. The fact that we exist, should be eternal. We have only unlocked a small portion of our brain. By using all of it, we never know what is possible.
Imabench's 500th debate: Attempted Suicide should be punishable by death

1) Groundwork"she was accepted and sought after by her peers, and she had to choose between loving a werewolf and loving a vampire"My support for abortion is growing....."One day you finally find your one true love, get married, have three blond haired and blue eyed children, then walk in on your love playing naked twister with the elementary school principal."Sounds like a Disney movie waiting to happen!"Bella knows that the only way to truly realize love’s tantalizing promise of happiness is to figuratively kill herself by allowing her boyfriend Edward to literally kill her by eating her baby out of her stomach."And people wonder why there has never been a woman president......2) Counter proposal"Thus I introduce the following Counterplan: We should all kill ourselves"Is this going to be a gunshot to the head type suicide or an autoerotic asphyxiation type suicide, because I will either sign up to be first or last depending on which one we decide to use. "Hamlet decides to kill himself, then decides to kill his uncle, then argues out loud about killing himself. Eventually Hamlet decides not kill himself and gets to watch his girlfriend go crazy and jump in a river while his mother and best friends die, only to finally be murdered with a poison dagger."You can tell that Hamlet was written by Shakespeare because everyone dies in the end with zero chance of there ever being a sequel..... 3. Reasoning behind new proposal"Happy People Deserve to Die"They deserve to die neck deep in hookers and blow if thats what youre implying...."You simply haven’t encountered the true awfulness of life"Ive had to sit through 8 seasons of How I Met Your Mother just to meet the god damn mother, and ive also had to tear those little shards of skin off the edge of my finger next to my nail that hurt like a mother f*cker..... I think that counts as experiencing the true awfulness of life/television...."you haven’t had a beer bottle chucked at you from a passing car"I live in f*cking Miami dude, having beer bottles chucked at me from a passing car is what I consider a normal tuesday night. "Second, whatever small pleasure you glean from life is fueled by the pure misery of others. "And there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with that ;D"Your ipod is made from the bones of slave labor and its a scientific fact that only the fingers of small children are nimble enough to get the stitching right on H&M jeans."God bless lax child labor laws in Malaysia "If you think you are happy you are either delusional or sociopathic."Have we met? Hi my name is Imabench, im one of the most delusionally sociopathic people on the entire site. Nice to meet you.
Imabench's 500th debate: Attempted Suicide should be punishable by death

1. The Greatest Love Story Ever ToldOnce upon a time there was a sad young girl whose life was filled with misery. Everything in her life was terrible- her parents loved her and encouraged interests, she was accepted and sought after by her peers, and she had to choose between loving a werewolf and loving a vampire. "This is my sad face....also my aroused face"Of course, Bella Swan is an allegory for love in its highest form. In real life, you pour your heart and soul out to the world hoping for the best. One day you finally find your one true love, get married, have three blond haired and blue eyed children, then walk in on your love playing naked twister with the elementary school principal. Also, your children were in a train accident- there were no survivors.The point is, love means infinitely investing yourself in an uncertain world and is bound to fail. The best case scenario is you live long enough to watch everyone you love die, the worst case is you live long enough to learn that everyone eventually betrays you. To be fair, you should have seen it comingBella knows that the only way to truly realize love’s tantalizing promise of happiness is to figuratively kill herself by allowing her boyfriend Edward to literally kill her by eating her baby out of her stomach. The beautiful face of deathThus I introduce the following Counterplan: We should all kill ourselves 2. Hamlet Teaches Us the Cost of Pussyfooting AroundHamlet was a whiny teenager who was really bummed out about his dad dying and his family’s creepy incestuous overtones. Kenneth Brannagh as HamletHamlet decides to kill himself, then decides to kill his uncle, then argues out loud about killing himself. Eventually Hamlet decides not kill himself and gets to watch his girlfriend go crazy and jump in a river while his mother and best friends die, only to finally be murdered with a poison dagger.Hamlet teaches us that debating the value of life is pointless, because in the end everything you love dies. It also teaches us that sometimes the things you love come back as ghosts, but only to incite bloody story arcs of revenge. 3. Happy People Deserve to Die I can already hear your objection- “but Raisor! I’m happy! I like living!” First of all, no you aren’t and no you don’t. You simply haven’t encountered the true awfulness of life- your soul hasn’t been crushed by mindless cubicle chatter and drone work, your mom hasn’t died of cancer, your wife hasn’t popped out that genetically impossible biracial baby, your son hasn’t died of cancer, you haven’t had a beer bottle chucked at you from a passing car, your best friend hasn’t died of cancer yet. Second, whatever small pleasure you glean from life is fueled by the pure misery of others. Your ipod is made from the bones of slave labor and its a scientific fact that only the fingers of small children are nimble enough to get the stitching right on H&M jeans. If you think you are happy you are either delusional or sociopathic.
Imabench's 500th debate: Attempted Suicide should be punishable by death

Reasons why Attempting to commit suicide should be punishable by death1) What they try to do is technically murderIf killing someone is murder, then attempting to kill someone is attempting to commit murder. Attempting to kill someone is exactly what people trying to commit suicide are doing, yet these CRIMINALS get away with their crimes time and time again simply because they exploit the legal loophole that they are technically the 'victims'. What a load of horse sh** right? People keep looking at people who try to commit suicide as victims, while completely ignoring the fact that ALL of them attempted to commit murder. People who DO commit suicide DO commit murder, but they arent prosecuted or jailed because of the bullsh** and semantical excuse that 'They arent alive anymore'.... Point is: People who do try to commit suicide are trying to commit a crime, they just happened to be committing it against themselves because they have no friends, hence why they might be committing suicide in the first place, but they are still CRIMINALS who NEED to be PUNISHED. 2) "Why kill them though? Seems a little extreme...."^ Thats the excuse you normally would hear from some pansy a** Obama titty sucking liberal who is against this proposal, who also thinks that criminals need to be coddled and given rights even though THEY ARE CRIMINALS.... But some people honestly wonder why people attempting to kill themselves should be given the death penalty when people attempting to kill OTHER people literally only get jailed for 10-15 years before being released http://www.attorneys.com...The reasons why people attempting to try to commit suicide should be killed while people who try to commit murder only get 10-15 are as follows: - 1 - It discourages people from trying to commit suicide - 2 - We technically are doing them a favor by fulfilling their wish of killing themselves - 3 - They were trying to commit suicide, they probably arent gonna stick around and enjoy life much longer anyways - 4 - Despite all the things the US government sucks at, killing people is one of the few things they are REALLY good at - 5 - Nobody f*cking likes to hang out with people who commit suicide, they really make everything depressingPoint is, there are several reasons why attempting to commit suicide should be a crime that warrants the death penalty. Ironic? maybe. Sensible? DEFINITELY
Imabench's 500th debate: Attempted Suicide should be punishable by death

For my historical 500th debate, I shall debate that a person caught attempting suicide or a person who actually attempted suicide and then failed, should be a federal crime with the punishment being the death penalty. Pro is for this resolution, Con believes that suicide or attempted suicide should NOT be a crime punishable by death First round will be for acceptance only 4 rounds, 3000 character limit
Imabench's 500th debate: Attempted Suicide should be punishable by death

Pro's CaseI have won this debate simply by pointing out the logical flaws in my opponent's case. He maintains we should execute the suicidal because they deserve to be punished, but admits execution is really a reward for them. He says we should discourage the suicidal, but concedes that execution will be an incentive for the suicidal. He says execution prevents us from being depressed by the suicidal, but neglects that executions will require prolonged trials for the suicidal to bring everyone down with their depressing life stories.We should reject the resolution in favor of the status quo- wherein the suicidal are punished for being downers by being treated as the freaks and societal burdens they are. Rather than give them what they want (death), they should be forced to live in a society that refuses to acknowledge mental disorders as legitimate health concerns and further alienates those with mental health problems.Con's CasePro has entirely conceded my counterproposal- that we should all kill ourselves.My counterproposal negates the resolution in two ways:First, it precludes the possibility of the Resolution. If we all kill ourselves, then we will not be able to execute the suicidal. We can't both commit mass suicide and sit around waiting to execute the people who fail at suicide. Second, my counterproposal negates the logic of Pro's case in favor of the Resolution. If we should commit suicide, then it does not follow that we ought to punish those who try to commit suicide. If suicide is something we ought to do, then it shouldn't be punished.Since I have won that Twilight is the greatest work of literature and cinema since Hamlet, I have demonstrated the thorough futility of life and love. Just Edward watches Bella sleep night after night, fighting the knowledge that if he were to touch her delicious porcelain skin he would be lost in unbridled blood lust- so we watch the days of our life pass before our eyes, knowing that to pursue what we love means the destruction of ourselves and the things we pursued. Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope. In Twilight, Edward can only escape the desolation of existence by killing the thing he loves most. Just as Abraham was prepared to sacrifice Isaac, Edward is prepared to eat Bella. But Twilight puts the fantastical world of Twilight in contrast to the cruel indifference of the real world: by virtue of the supernatural, Edward is able to transcend the paradox of reality and receive his Isaac. But this supernatural escapes the grasp of humans- alas, we are not vampires. No matter how much blood you drink, how much body glitter you bathe in- no matter the amount you curse your weak human form and cry out in the night for the beautiful lips of Edward to caress the bare flesh on your neck- it is all in vain, you will NEVER BE A VAMPIRE.And when you get down to it, that's really what this debate is about.