BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Should we hunt animals

What you say, my friend, is partial truth. Yes, hunting keeps animal population in check so that they do not migrate to urban areas. However, we cannot forget the fact that their original home is being destroyed and they are driven out by hunters where will they go in such situations. Next, if we talk about overpopulation human will be the first. Humans have overpopulated over aeons. We outlive most animals and hunt them under the pretext of keeping them from overpopulating, we claim it to be our duty to keep the natural balance. If so, animals must be allowed to hunt humans as well. As the inhibitors of this earth they too have the right tto maintain its balance. Our population is 7 billion which is more than any individual animal species on this earth. To satisfy our needs there just aren't enough animals on this planet. Now, what do you have to say to that my friend?
Should we hunt animals

This is were there is a fine line to walk, most animals have a season or a time when it is legal to hunt them, this period of culling is typically in the winter after they have breed giving the yearlings time to mature. And most hunters will shoot for the elder animals this keep the next generation going. However without hunting it leads to overpopulation in time, which pare that with the limited space available for them will cause them to move, possibly into urban areas which is dangerous for both the animal, and the people living there. The hunting which is limited keeps the animals within the carrying capacity of the environment they find themselves in. And for your endangered animals argument don't get hunting confused with poaching which is illegal and a disgusting practice.
The US Federal Goveronment should abolish 99%of its functions

First of all my opponent claims that we should abolish the entire government, so from here I only have to argue that education and military spending are necessary. Either way I only claimed that we should abolish all government programs except these, not all government powers aside from these, though this would be a good idea. The necessity of limited government: My opponent claims that we can live without a government because humans automatically recognize immoral behaviors as immoral; therefor we can govern ourselves as individuals. This is not so, James Madison pointed out; “If men were angels no government would be necessary.” But men are not angels, this is fairly obvious, natural law didn’t prevent Muslims from bombing schools or committing atrocities. So someone needs to enforce this law, this is why the government was created. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,” The Declaration of Independence. So the government should preserve our liberties, i.e. life, liberty, and property. Without the government and the second amendment we would all just be victims of whoever came along to victimize us. Say China wants to enslave us, how are we to prevent this but to have a strong national defense and the right to defend our nation ourselves. Then there is the issue of education, how will we ensure that all our children get an education without funding? Where will this funding come from but the government? If we abolish all other functions, as well as slashing the income tax and government spending, and reducing government regulations, as well as providing military spending and an educated public, our economy will experience unprecedented growth and opportunity. Thus these functions should be retained. The case for low taxes and no debt: The government should pay off its debt with all deliberate time, and we don’t need to go into debt to fund education, we can do that with a 7% income tax and no further taxes. Either way there will be consequences to a 21 trillion dollar debt. But like my opponent said what is stopping the government from simply recreating this situation again? That is why I am proposing we pass a constitutional amendment banning government borrowing. We then pass another constitutional amendment banning the government from creating any more powers. It’s that simple, “The founding fathers had a very good idea of government, they said the government should be very limited, and they should be protecting our liberties, and providing a strong defense and a sound currency, we don’t do any of that.” – Ron Paul
The US Federal Goveronment should abolish 99%of its functions

Google docs are not a violation of conduct, I will argue that the US Federal Goveronment should abolish all its powers exept these:1. Provide a strong national defense. 2. Stamp gold and silver bullion or coin certifying weight and purity for use as money. 3. Fund public education. The following it should leave to the states and the rest it should give to the people. 1. The minimum wage2. Healthcare
Favoritism to sports teams rather than academics

The reason why debate teams need so much money is because they have to pay for tournaments. Each event you do costs money. Here is a great idea stop letting the slacker debaters debate and go to tournaments. Do what schools in my district do and tell them "if you don't have your Oratory memorized your duet acting down and your debate case written then your not going to compete". Its not hard to do as a matter of fact it saves money. Also in my district speech teachers are debate coaches which means that the school pays them a little extra money to coach the team its included in their pay check the one they get for teaching. What supplies do people need for debate teams? Extemp boxes and a dolly? And for other academic programs what a stop watch and a calculator which the school supplies. Sports on the other hand need money to keep their equipment updated. Faulty equipment leads to injuries which lead to law suits. You really want to see funding cuts from academic programs let football players play with broken helmets. To take away funding from sports teams so that academic teams can go out of town for one more tournament is ridiculous. Sports teams deserve money regardless if they are good or bad. Sports teams bring in money unlike academic teams. Not only that but sports teams need the money to provide safety. The only reason academic teams need money is so they can buy hefty duty boxes rather than the 5 dollar boxes at the dollar store. Their is not favoritism with sports teams rather than academic teams. The school and district have how much they can spend on programs and they have divide it amongst many organizations and teams. If you have a problem with how much your teams are getting ask your state what they are doing with the money for schools cause my state is obliviously not investing into my education.
Favoritism to sports teams rather than academics

You say that sports teams need more money because of equipment and that academic teams need less. However, that's simply not true. Take for example, my speech and debate team. We needed 16,000 dollars to fund our entire season. We didn't get anywhere near that. I think we got 12,000 dollars. One of our fundraisers was selling adds to local businesses and putting them all in the different programs of our school plays and musicals. Granted, the school helps by providing the buses and stuff, but we still had to change a lot of things. Also, many other academic programs need to pay for supplies, books, hire coaches, and other huge things. Allowing sports teams to have their full needs, while not covering the needs of other programs is just not justified. Our speech and debate team does extremely well in the state, as well as the country, but without adaquate funding we don't bring that glory to our school, compared to our football team which stays in the state and doesn't have nearly as much success.
Favoritism to sports teams rather than academics

I understand that not everyone can join a sports team. I also understand that some people want to be on academic teams. But sports need the money. I do understand if the team is not good and the academic teams are great or what not. But what do academic teams need to buy? They only pay for their tournaments that is all. What do athletic teams need to buy? Equipment uniforms football, baseball, softball, soccer teams all pay for the lights when they practice and or play at night. Cheerleaders need to pay for trips and uniforms. They also have fundraisers. Swimming teams pay for the practice place (if your at my school we don't have a pool we go to a park). Academic teams don't pay for a lot of things. Because of that they don't need a lot of money. Sports on the other hand pays for so many things. They also have fundraisers and charging admissions is one of their fundraisers. We cant take away money from a sports team because their not good. We need to invest a little more money and maybe they will get better. Also if schools were to take away money from lets say football their would be a lot of risks for the reason that their equipment is what protects them.
Favoritism to sports teams rather than academics

You make a good point. However, for some schools such as as mine, we have not so good a football team, and a national known speech and debate team. We do loads of fundraisers and such, why? Because we as a program do fantastic. However, many other programs, such as you said Academic Decathalon, or even Science Olympiad, while they do fantastic, don't get nearly as much funding. Yes, I agree that sports generate revenue, but the number of people who can actually play in the team plays a factor, and the entire school can't just join football, or soccer. People who want to do the academic side of the school activities. Those people should be allowed to do so, and not be limited by funding cuts.
Favoritism to sports teams rather than academics

In Odessa and Midland Texas Friday Night Lights took place. In those small towns sports is all they have. They don't have big academic programs. Sports like football is really all they have. Because of that the school administration gives more money to sports because sports is there world. This is the same in other small towns all over America. I am not saying thats what happens in every town. I do understand that academic programs do deserve funding but do they bring in money for the school? No they don't. But sports does regardless if they are good or bad. High Q does not bring in money for the school debate does not bring in money but Football does. Volleyball Basketball Soccer all of them do. When was the 1st time you saw cheerleaders cheering at a Chess Match? Or during and Extemp round for Speech and Debate? Or even at an Academic Decathlon competition? Never you never see any cheerleaders there. You don't see people sitting in Extemp rounds pumping up the speaker. Or rooting for the next move. Because these events are not popular or events where you can take of your shirt (if your a guy) and paint the letters of your school on your chest. No one cares. If the school can not make money off of your club sport or organization then why spend money and not make any? Also some things need more money especially if they are not the best sports team to get better.
Favoritism to sports teams rather than academics

You said you wanted to debate it, now here's your chance! I have to go to sleep, but here was my post from the earlier one. In the event that you want to debate the pro side, we could have another debate if you want. XD Anyway, to the argument. The fact is, I've been noticing trends throughout areas, especially in my school district, where people and the school administration tend to give more funds for the athletic department, rather then all the academic programs that exist in the school. While some programs are well funded, it seems that comparing say a football team to a debate team, the football team will always come out ahead, regardless on how well they do. In my school for example, the football team doesn't do so well. However, our speech and debate team does well at nationals, and doesn't seem to get as much obvious support as say the football team does. Is this fair? I don't think so. All programs are programs, and to give to one that's doing worse off more funds then one that's doing better, doesn't make any sense. It just shows that many people decide that sports are more important, which I believe is not true.
It is irrational for God to hold humanity to a code God does not follow

1. Introduction JCMT has noted that he is looking for an interesting religious debate and I would like to deliver. JCMT, in this thread - http://www.debate.org... , stated that : "An omniscient God creates several problems for morality in general, most specifically the problem of holding people responsible if God knows what their actions will be. Furthermore, God represents a somewhat unusual case of an entity that can somehow be the arbiter of morality, but not live up to his own code." I would like to dispute that, on balance, God's ability to break with his own established code of morality is unjustified. My opponent will be looking to apply established moral principles, particularly those derived from utilitarianism, against God's actions, and I will be seeking to defend God's actions using relativistic arguments. I know that JCMT hates semantics arguments, so I am going to ensure that there will be no miscommunication: A. God is defined as that deity of the Judeo-Christian line of faith acting as the source of all morality. For the purposes of this debate, God is assumed to exist. B. Code of Morality is defined as a way of living or standard of acting. C. Obedience is defined as conducting oneself in accordance with the desires of another; in this debate, that other is God. Being obedient will therefore mean being willing to act in accordance with God's wishes. D. God is assumed to be omni-excellent, and I will not attempt to argue God's traits if JCMT assigns God those traits reasonably consistent with the Judeo-Christian conception of God. E. **My argument will hinge on the purpose of morality, and so at this time I would like to define morality simply as right action in accordance with the established code of morality and nothing more. My opponent may include under morality anything that follows as proper conduct under those commandments and edicts transcribed allegedly on God's behalf. ** 2.Rules of Engagement: A. Pro will defend his contention first. I will then seek to disprove this contention. B. All specific sections shall be numbered and titled for the sake of clarity by both debaters. C. The final round for Pro shall not be used for argument, but rather as an opportunity for Pro to sum up the debate. As such, Pro may post no sources or open any new arguments in the final round. This is meant to even the overall number of arguments out. D. The debate shall be for four rounds, max time, 1 month voting period. E. If my opponent would like me to amend any part of this debate, he need only ask in the comments section and I will discuss with him the possibility of doing so. My thanks to my opponent for his consideration.
It is irrational for God to hold humanity to a code God does not follow

Well, I must of course relinquish this last round in the spirit of fair debate. I know the opening argument by Con states that this is a round for summary, but I'm going to forgo that, because it's certainly possible that any summary I give will have the effect of influencing the voters... However, I am going to correct a mistake in one of my earlier rounds... Romans 2 should be Romans 1 - specifically 1:20...
Kirby Could Beat Sonic In A Fight

I enjoy this debate too but once again Kirby has to have something to activate his power.Counter Argument:1.) Sonic is too fast and too cautious to immediately be inhaled.2.) Kirby can't move quickly if not at all when trying to inhale.3.) Kirby can only swallow in a cone shaped area in front of him.4.) The hyper nova ability comes from a very rare fruit Kirby has to swallow called the miracle fruit which is only in Triple Deluxe, a game where you can't store your powers.5.) Kirby still has to store a power in his stomach in all of the DS games and he cannot store them in the others. Every power can still only be activated once.6.) Whether it be ability storage, a deluxe pedestal, or just ingesting enemies or abilities, Kirby still has to have something to activate the power.7.) Both characters at max power and performance would be Kirby with hypernova and Super Sonic with Excalibur armor and sword and all 7 chaos emeralds and powerful time control abilities, while invulnerability and chaos energy powers would not only protect Sonic even if Kirby tried to ingest him which wouldn't work since Sonic would be literally impossible to even scratch, let alone digest, that would just let Sonic slice through him from the inside.8.) Sonic could freeze the time before Kirby can get his stone power ready, because it takes a few seconds for him to equip it.9.) Sonic doesn't have much durability, but he doesn't need it. He's an extremely fast glass cannon, meaning he can't take hits but he can deal heavy damage quickly, with infinite endurance.All of the statistics and power lists for both characters lead me to believe that Sonic would win the fight relatively quickly.Vote Sonic The Hedgehog!Hypernova ability: http://kirby.wikia.com...Good luck to both of us. This debate was fun :)
Kirby Could Beat Sonic In A Fight

Fair points, and I enjoy this debate, but what I'm going to say is Kirby doesn't need to absorb them, as he has done so in the fast and it stays forever, "He learns the ability and it goes to the lower screen of the DS or television screen, depending on which game is being played, from which the player can choose it as many times as they wish. Kirby can also switch between the Copy Abilities he has picked up by selecting the respective ability icon." -Kirby Wiki Also, I just have a theroy but this is easily debateable, sonic has to say "Time Freeze!" before he can move, right? Even normal Kirby could open his mouth and suck him in mid-setence but if that is not possible, as he is saying it all he would have to do is quickly switch to stone and wait until the time-freeze ends, as Stone Kirby is invincible under any circumstance.Also, with Caliburn as not going Excalibur in my opinion couldn't kill Kirby in 20 seconds but that is once again debatble and I'm not 100% sure on the matter.Also Soul Surge slows down time, correct? It may slow down time but if Kirby opened his mouth, even if time is slowed, would still be sucked in just at a slower rate, unless I'm missing something, so I will try to recap.Strength: Fighter Kirby has punched through planets and can fire energy blasts, normal Kirby has hit sombody to the sun within seconds.Speed: The Warpstar, instantly summoned can reach Warp Speed within a second.Durability: Has been hit with the Halberd twice, burnt by the exhaust flames, thrown down a canyon, and much more, his durability is not the greatest but is nothing to laugh at, also his body is highly mallable and survived in a universe of pain.This leads me to believe the only advange Sonic has is his time-freeze ability, but Stone Kirby could wait it out, also with the entire "Hypernova is only consumed by a plant." He has consumed is before, and could easily add it to his copy pallete, and one last thing, Super Sonic has a short time limit, so after showing you all of Kirbys feats I ask youPlease Vote For The Pink Puffball Kirby!
Kirby Could Beat Sonic In A Fight

1.) Kirby using the "Copy Essence Deluxe" proves that Kirby still needs the copy essence to use as a catalyst for his powers, so that being said he can only use that power if he has obtained that essence. Which correct me if I'm wrong, and I'm not, He has one use of the copy and he has to obtain and store them before hand. 2.) Keep in mind that Sonic rarely needs a catalyst for his major powers, unless it's his transformations, which he doesn't need to manipulate time, and I can't even begin to explain why time manipulation is one of the most powerful abilities of all time. 3.) You can have all of the speed in the universe and being frozen in time will make your speed account for nothing. 4.) Even if it's not Sonic's own transformation, which it isn't, the Caliburn is the transforming catalyst. But It's still considered a powerful sword in that universe either way. And let's not forget Soul Surge which slows time so he can make critical attacks with precision and can dodge everything. 5.) Hypernova is an ability that can only be obtained from the plants that the main boss of Triple Deluxe grew so once again he can't just do it. He needs a catalyst for every single power. Also if you allow Kirby's every power then it's only fair that Sonic gets his. 6.) Sonic never uses time stop in super form, but he can and he can also use it without the form. Sonic Adventure 2 Battle he can freeze time for 10 to 20 seconds which that combined with speed break and Caliburn can demolish Kirby before he can even open his mouth, without super form mind you. And if you need evidence for a time slowing power, I have already provided you with links to several instances in the second round of his time manipulation. 7.) Also I'd like to bring up the fact that Sonic can run so fast he can rip a hole in space and time sending him through different points of time, seen in Sonic CD. Sonic's time stop: (0:40) Sonic's time travel ability:
Kirby Could Beat Sonic In A Fight

Well we're implying he will start off with Super Sonic, but let me go another route. Rebuttal1.) In Milky Way Wishes, Kirby can activate any power at any time, this is called Copy Essence Deluxe (http://kirby.wikia.com...) and he can switch between them when he pleases, so this proves he has the ability to activate powers when he wishes and sense Ultra Sword has been consumed before it would make sense that he could activate that aswell. 2.) Read #13.) "In Kirby SSU, the Warp star can travel through his solar system or move from a planet to another in mere seconds during both gameplay and several cutscenes in Milky Way Wishes." (Taken from people discussing another fight about Kirby)4.) Read #1 and " Excalibur Sonic may not even be Sonic's transformation, but Caliburn's, because Sonic is only in a golden suit of armor, while Caliburn looks indistinguishable from his appearance in the rest of the game. Also, Sonic did not absorb anything to transform and is not invincible." -Sonic Wiki I'm not 100% sure on what this would mean but I thought it would be worth noting.End Rebuttal Hypernova, let me just state if Sonic is even close to this thing, I think the hedgehog will just be a new suit for Kirby, also, I never saw Super Sonic slow down time, could you send me it (Not accusing you of lying, I can't find it.) And if they started within a decent range, all Kirby would have to do is open his mouth and *Gulp.* His ability is so strong, it destroyed the fourth wall, and can instantly kill ANYTHING, I have no doubt this would end Super Sonic's life as Hypernova Kirby has killed immortal and intangeable creatures such as ghosts. He could instantly summon his warp-star, and suck Sonic up while moving around, ending the blue blur's life.