BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Gay Rights

The Bible say my people lack knowledge. Seriously is like you don't know how to read or something, to be sincere with you if you win these debate doesn't mean you're right. I want to ask you something, Where you born by homosexual parents!? Is it even possible for same sex to give birth? No. If your parents were Same sex do you think you'll be in this world today I mean how would they even give birth to you in the first place? (I need an answer) Read this short poem 'Born a girl she claims to be a guy(bi), Ok. Taking back to her mothers womb for a rebirth. Born again as a guy he claims to be a girl(gay)'. Seriously what does this person want to really be? Some kind of mixture of girl and boy? If you understand the poem you should know what I mean. I see you're still a kid but I want to let you know few things about debating: The fact that I used Christianity to defend my opinion doesn't mean I'm cheating or I'm a Christian besides using the old testament doesn't make anything wrong it's still in the bible. 1.God doesn't condemn anyone for who he is; so if you're attracted to the same sex, that absolutely, unconditionally doesn't make you bad, evil or "un-Christian." On the other hand, let me note that I do consider hating, tormenting, or bullying people because of their sexual orientation to be distinctively "un-Christian" behavior. As Billy Graham has said, "God will not judge a Christian guilty for his or her involuntary feelings." But when it comes to 'Homosexuality' GOD is totally against it.Well, sorry that's GOD rule. 2. Gay marriage may be where it starts, but it wouldn't be where it ends. Once the definition of marriage is arbitrarily transformed to make gay activists happy, there's no chance it's going to stop there. For example, you could make a much better case for polygamy than you can for gay marriage. It has a much more robust historical tradition, it's more consistent with religious values, it produces children -- there simply is no compelling, logical reason why gay marriage should become the law of the land without also granting polygamy the same legal status. 3.If same-sex civil marriage becomes common, most same-sex couples with children would be lesbian couples. This would mean that we would have yet more children being raised apart from fathers. Among other things, we know that fathers excel in reducing antisocial behavior and delinquency in boys and sexual activity in girls. What is fascinating is that fathers exercise a unique social and biological influence on their children. For instance, a recent study of father absence on girls found that girls who grew up apart from their biological father were much more likely to experience early puberty and a teen pregnancy than girls who spent their entire childhood in an intact family. This study, along with David Popenoe's work, suggests that a father's pheromones influence the biological development of his daughter, that a strong marriage provides a model for girls of what to look for in a man, and gives them the confidence to resist the sexual entreaties of their boyfriends.
Gay Rights

Using the Old Testament to determine if something is a sin is simply a matter of human and not godly opinion. It"s meaningless and certainly not "the word of God". His teachings aren"t some basket of fruit for you to pick over. You either have to accept the old law in its entirety and start killing lots and lots of people or reject it in its entirety. Hand-picking the stuff you like is bogus, especially when you only pick the stuff that seems to legitimize your meanness to other people. So the Old Testament is out. It doesn"t matter anyway because Christ came and fulfilled it. He completed the Old Testament, so it"s done. He even said so in Matthew: "Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfill." True, he also said about the old law: "Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven." So what, exactly, is he saying? That it"s cool to ignore the old law because he fulfilled it, or that we are required to keep even the "least" (meaning lesser) commandments in it? Well, if he fulfilled it, then the point is mute. If it"s the other one, though, then we all suck because even the most devout Christians only keep the parts of the Old Testament that suit them. Before we all start playing REM"s Losing My Religion, consider this: Denying someone the right to marry is not Christian, and certainly not American.
Gay Rights

LOOOOOOL THIS A DEBATE: Finding useful facts to defend your opinion so....I don't really understand why you said I copied from the Internet. It's still defence and besides each of those points where taking from few people opinion in that website...3 and 8 are my points. Frequency of the pro-homosexual articles seen in Juneau Empire recently has excluded two important reasons why same sex marriage should not be legalized. The first reason is God designed marriage to be between a man and women. "6 But from the beginning of the creation, God "made them male and female." 7 "For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife. (Mark 10:6-7, New King James version) According to the Bible, homosexuality is immoral and is one of many sins that will keep mankind out of heaven. "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites". Will inherit the kingdom of God." (1 Corinthians 6 :6-10, New King James Version) The second reason is biology does not support homosexuality. First, God did not design males to have sexes with each other, and vise versa with females. Same gender sexes organs are incompatible with each other. Second, homosexuals cannot produce their own offspring, thus their genetic material is not passed on to the next generation. Therefore, they cannot claim they were born this way, since their parents were heterosexuals. Same sexes marriage should not be made legal because it opposes God"s design for marriage, and is not biologically supported. Maybe Juneau Empire should do a 5 part series on the sanctity of marriage. Sincerely,
Gay Rights

I can see what you're trying to say, but I strongly disagree with some, wait, most, of your points. Especially since you just copied and pasted from http://www.blameitonthevoices.com... *cough* Way to think *cough* "Gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children" This isn't really true. Just because your parents are gay/straight doesn't mean you have to follow in their footsteps. Imagine a straight couple, and their child chooses their sexual orientation as gay. That isn't raising them to be straight. They choose their own path. Marriage happens to be a union of love, not a union of gender. Imagine, if you really, really loved this person, and you weren't allowed to marry them. It would suck, wouldn't it? Why does it have to be specifically between a man and a women? You realize that's exactly what people were saying 60 years ago with black and white people, right? Are you saying you would rather have 2 people of different genders that hate each other be married than two people of the same sex that love each other?
Gay Rights

Homosexuality is not natural, much like eyeglasses, polyester, and birth control. Heterosexual marriages are valid because they produce children. Infertile couples and old people can"t legally get married because the world needs more children. Obviously, gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children. Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage is allowed, since Britney Spears" 55-hour just-for-fun marriage was meaningful. Heterosexual marriage has been around a long time and hasn"t changed at all; women are property, blacks can"t marry whites, and divorce is illegal. Gay marriage should be decided by people, not the courts, because the majority-elected legislatures, not courts, have historically protected the rights of the minorities. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That"s why we have only one religion in America. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract. Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That"s why single parents are forbidden to raise children. Gay marriage will change the foundation of society. Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and we could never adapt to new social norms because we haven"t adapted to things like cars or longer life-spans. Civil unions, providing most of the same benefits as marriage with a different name are better, because a "separate but equal" institution is always constitutional. Separate schools for African-Americans worked just as well as separate marriages for gays and lesbians will. 12 reasons why gay should be illegal
Religion is based on fear

In the beginning, I will disprove what you have written in your first paragraph. You said that I fail in suggesting that religion isn't based on fear, but I will answer with these two claims. 1.There is no burden of proof so I do not need to prove(defend) that religion isn't based on fear. We both cite evidence to our side and the others will vote who was the better in arguments in this debate. 2.You didn't make any evidence that religion is based on fear. You just presented your thoughts which can collide with logic. I didn't want to speak about this topic like atheist and theist on the street with unfounded and unscientific opinions. I want that psychology,science and evidence say is religion based on fear. You wrote in the round two: "Religious belief is a symptom of fear: aware that our lives are precarious and vulnerable, we seek the protection of a powerful deity, to comfort ourselves with an illusion of safety. The second is that fear is a symptom of religion: in particular, doctrines of punishment in both this life and the next cause ignorant believers to live in fear unnecessarily." These are not your sentences and opinions. You copied that from the link you wrote down so I am not in debate with Clare Carlisle, the author of that text. Before explaining (disproving) your second contradiction, I have to say that you make no order in your arguments (round 2) and you didn't mention any sources for that text. So you have to be clearer in your writing. I hope the voters will notice this. Now about your contradiction. I said that we face many kinds of fear every day and it is important for our survival. And I will mention the same source again, if you didn't check it. (1) If there is no religion, there also would be same kinds of fear, so if you say : 'if there is no religion there wouldn't be any fear', you are making mistake. And finally, I will contradict your third paragraph. You made a big own contradiction. In the second round you said: "From the moment we opened our eyes we have been scared. We have lived in fear, because there was no other way of living." and after that in the third : "We cannot be sure that we are living our lives in fear. Firstly, because if we are used to living this way so we wouldn't actually know what fear is.." If morality is based on fear in the meaning you said then there wouldn't be positive situations and appearances in religion. But there are, and I will list just two reasons (evidence) for that from the scientifical sources. 1.Religion helps us gain self-control (2) 2.Religion can help college women who are sexual victims deal with distrust (3) At the end I just want to say to you that most religions are created by humans but there is only one right, which isn't created by human. Sources: 1)http://science.howstuffworks.com... 2)http://www.sciencedaily.com... 3)http://www.sciencedaily.com...
Religion is based on fear

Thank you for saving me the trouble of defining our key terms. In response to argument 1 you claim that there is no evidence that religion is based on fear yet you fail to provide any evidence suggesting that religion isn't based on fear. You also claim that all we can see is the opinions of people who prefer religion. Religious belief is a symptom of fear: aware that our lives are precarious and vulnerable, we seek the protection of a powerful deity, to comfort ourselves with an illusion of safety. The second is that fear is a symptom of religion: in particular, doctrines of punishment in both this life and the next cause ignorant believers to live in fear unnecessarily. To contradict argument 2 you have supported my argument. You have said that without fear we wouldn't survive for long. This means that you agree with my argument. This debate is not about survival it is about religion. In response to argument 3 we cannot be sure that we are living our lives in fear. Firstly, because if we are used to living this way so we wouldn't actually know what fear is and secondly because not everyone is religious. It is true that religion is based on 'moral things' as you have said but the source of these morals is from fear. The creators of these religions are fearful of death so they have made up a God and made up an afterlife to rid themselves of this fear. Sources http://www.theguardian.com...
Religion is based on fear

Main terms: Fear - Fear is a chain reaction in the brain that starts with a stressful stimulus and ends with the release of chemicals that cause a racing heart, fast breathing and energized muscles, among other things, also known as the fight-or-flight response. (1) Religion - A religion is an organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to an order of existence. (2) Argument 1: There is no evidences that religion is based on fear. All we can see is just a opinions of people who do not prefer religion. Argument 2: If we couldn't be afraid, we wouldn't survive for long.(3) Fear is every day appearance and focus it on just one thing like religion is unfounded. Argument 3: If religion was based on fear then our life would be based on fear, in all, which is no true. Religion is based on many things, like moral things and it is unfounded to say that religion is just based on fear. (1) http://science.howstuffworks.com... (2) https://en.wikipedia.org... (3) http://science.howstuffworks.com...
Religion is based on fear

From the moment we opened our eyes we have been scared. We have lived in fear, because there was no other way of living. All other emotions, beliefs, drivers came from our lives cooked in fear. They distracted us, protected us made us temporarily forget. The biggest distraction? The biggest protector? Religion. Religion marinated in love and forgiveness. Religion telling us to not be afraid (to remind us fear is out there), that we can conquer it. But we can't forget it. Don't let your guard down.
Religion is based on fear

I accepted Pro debate challenge and this is my first debate. I just want to say that English is my second language so I will make effort and hope it will be OK. I am Con(against) and will be arguing that religion isn't based on fear. Because I did not understand the concept about first and second round, and also he did not introduce his arguments, I will introduce my arguments and justify them in the round two. I'm looking forward to the round two and good luck!
Religion is based on fear

Well, it is conclusion round. I will try make it briefly and simply that people can understand easily. On the first case, I advice you to check what is really logic (1). I thought that we should make statements based on evidence, and not copy text by some author like you did. Yet, you didn't have any order of arguments and we should enclose arguments in the second round. I wrote the numbered arguments so every one can see that, while you could write anything you wanted because your writing was unspecified. You said: ..'reason that religion exist today is because people are afraid to accept the truth about both life and death.' I call you and others to check what I wrote in the end of third round and scientifical sources for that. I totally accept the 'truth' about death and life and does that make me an atheist ? No. That makes me believer in something like atheist believe in something. I will quote the most famous scientist of all the time( who wasn't atheist) Albert E. and he said: "Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one." Yes, you made big own contradiction. Now in the 4th round you left out the first part of your saying. Before conclusion. On your discriminating, dishonest and UNFOUNDED saying about religion I will not answer because of many things. That isn't freedom of speech when you criticize something you do not know and you do not have any logical, scientifical evidence for that. Extremism is not about real teachings of some religions. It is about people who use it to make their own violent goal. In the conclusion, I won't do that like my opponent because people can check up there what is mentioned to support my side that religion isn't based on fear in the meaning pro made this debate. I will just point out some important things why people should vote for me. My opponent didn't specialize his arguments so he could write whatever he wanted. He constantly base his evidence on logic, nevertheless that logic is not acceptable by the most people. Sources which he used aren't scientifical or proffesional. Those were subjective texts written not by experts but ordinary people. Did he make a own contradiction you will see up there also. I am the only one here who has a scientifical sources and founded statements and you can check out that. I hope voters will notice this and make a objective decision. Thanks to my opponent for opportunity to debate on this topic and others who followed this debate. (1) https://en.wikipedia.org...
resolved: In the us criminal court system jury nullification to be used when percieved injustice

Rules. 1. Ld format debate 2. Respect all others 3. Provide links to full article 4. Answer all questions 5. You forfeit all points to me if you break any of the following rules: 1-4 Rounds: R1: Acceptence R2: Opening R3: questions R4: answer questions R5: rebuttal and closing arguements
I Have the BOP.

REBUTTALS AND ARGUMENTS 1. Though Pro's arguments do not fill the BoP, they do not necessarily mean Pro has the BoP. 2. Pro ignores the fact (which Pro himself made) that if I have fulfilled my BoP to prove Pro does not have the BoP, then Pro never had the BoP to begin with. CONCLUSION Pro does not have the BoP while I still have it. Your move, Pro.
I Have the BOP.

REBUTTAL If I have fulfilled my BoP to prove that Pro does not have the BoP (which Pro said himself) then Pro never had the BoP in the first place. ARGUMENT It appears my opponent does not completely understand. I have the BoP to prove that Pro does not have the BoP so that means I still have the BoP to prove Pro does not have the BoP at all. CONCLUSION I still have the BoP. Back to you, Pro.
Theme Song Debate!

Why are you forfeiting so much? It's a shame, bro. Darn shame. Anyways, here's the Friends theme song. http://www.youtube.com... So no one told you life was gonna be this way Your job's a joke, you're broke, your love life's D.O.A. It's like you're always stuck in second gear When it hasn't been your day, your week, your month, or even your year, but I'll be there for you (When the rain starts to pour) I'll be there for you (Like I've been there before) I'll be there for you ('Cause you're there for me too) You're still in bed at ten and work began at eight You've burned your breakfast, so far things are going great Your mother warned you there'd be days like these But she didn't tell you when the world has brought you down to your knees and I'll be there for you (When the rain starts to pour) I'll be there for you (Like I've been there before) I'll be there for you ('Cause you're there for me too) No one could ever know me No one could ever see me Seems you're the only one who knows what it's like to be me Someone to face the day with, make it through all the rest with Someone I'll always laugh with Even at my worst, I'm best with you, Yeah! It's like you're always stuck in second gear When it hasn't been your day, your week, your month, or even your year I'll be there for you (When the rain starts to pour) I'll be there for you (Like I've been there before) I'll be there for you ('Cause you're there for me too) I'll be there for you (When the rain starts to pour) I'll be there for you (Like I've been there before) I'll be there for you ('Cause you're there for me too)
Theme Song Debate!

http://www.youtube.com... Gasp, a Forfeit! Oh well... Now, this is a story all about how My life got flipped-turned upside down And I'd like to take a minute Just sit right there I'll tell you how I became the prince of a town called Bel Air In west Philadelphia born and raised On the playground was where I spent most of my days Chillin' out maxin' relaxin' all cool And all shootin some b-ball outside of the school When a couple of guys who were up to no good Started making trouble in my neighborhood I got in one little fight and my mom got scared She said 'You're movin' with your auntie and uncle in Bel Air' I begged and pleaded with her day after day But she packed my suit case and sent me on my way She gave me a kiss and then she gave me my ticket. I put my Walkman on and said, 'I might as well kick it'. First class, yo this is bad Drinking orange juice out of a champagne glass. Is this what the people of Bel-Air living like? Hmmmmm this might be alright. But wait I hear they're prissy, bourgeois, all that Is this the type of place that they just send this cool cat? I don't think so I'll see when I get there I hope they're prepared for the prince of Bel-Air Well, the plane landed and when I came out There was a dude who looked like a cop standing there with my name out I ain't trying to get arrested yet I just got here I sprang with the quickness like lightning, disappeared I whistled for a cab and when it came near The license plate said fresh and it had dice in the mirror If anything I could say that this cab was rare But I thought 'Nah, forget it' - 'Yo, homes to Bel Air' I pulled up to the house about 7 or 8 And I yelled to the cabbie 'Yo homes smell ya later' I looked at my kingdom I was finally there To sit on my throne as the Prince of Bel Air Source: https://www.google.com...
Theme Song Debate!

Since my opponent used a cartoon theme song, I will use a cartoon theme song as my below song. It's only from the best cartoon ever.http://www.youtube.com...Are you ready, kids?Aye Aye, Captain!I can't hear you...Aye Aye, Captain!oh...Who lives in a pineapple under the sea?Spongebob Squarepants!Absorbent and yellow and porous is he Spongebob Squarepants!If nautical nonsense be something you wish...Spongebob Squarepants!Then drop on the deck and flop like a fish!Spongebob Squarepants!READY?Spongebob Squarepants!Spongebob Squarepants!Spongebob Squarepants!Spongebob Squarepants! *Pirate laughing, then Spongebob plays his nose like a flute.*