BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Black Culture in the United States

Thanks to pro for posting their arguments. The BoP is shared (as agreed upon in comments), so I will only post my arguments in this round, without any rebuttals. A. History of Racism and FamilySlavery in colonial and early America is undoubtedly one of the building blocks of current-day racism in the United States. The slave owners enslaved the blacks for many generations, because of the white's power over blacks, building a sense of superiority. This mindset of racism, passed down from generation to generation, kept a racist mindset in the heads of the decedents of those former slave holders. This creates a racist mindset without the involvement of culture. The Ku Klux Klan (KKK) is an example of an extreme racial group. On their website, they admit it is passed down from generation to generation [1]. Being taught like this from early childhood is hard to break out of, parents impact their children hugely [2]. If your parents and those around you all strongly believe, and tell you something from an early age, you are most likely to follow en suite. B. Human NeurologyThe human brain gives evidence as to why racism exists. The part of the brain that starts racial thoughts is called the amygdala. The purpose of the amygdala is to learn what types of situations lead to negative outcomes.The amygdala is a quick learner, and takes information sub-consciously. This means that different racial stereotypes created by others makes your amygdala sub-consciously learn them. It is and was very important for the amygdala to operate fast, so humans can avoid dangers. However, the amygdala operates so quickly it does not give your conscious brain time to think [3][4]. The amygdala is the basis of many racial actions, even without the person being a racist, or close to racist. However, the amygdala is not the only part in the human brain that racism comes from. It can also come from the prefrontal cortex. The prefrontal cortex is involved in decision making, and sometimes sub-consciously [5][6]. The amygdala feeds information to the prefrontal cortex, including these racial stereotypes [7]. This is shown by different studies; including a study that relates pictures of black and white faces, showing that whites, when showed white faces, associate more words with positive, and when showed a black face associates more words with negatives [8]; when told a black participant was going to sit somewhere, the other participant sat further away, and many other studies conducted by the University of Harvard [3].ConclusionRacial thinking is not caused by any cultural group, but family and the human brain. Families with long histories of racism passing down from generation. These stereotypes are then sub-consciously picked up by others, and fuel racism. Racism is not called by cultures, but family members of racists and the human brain Sources[1] http://kkk.bz... [2] http://www.tolerance.org... [3] http://www.motherjones.com... [4] https://en.wikipedia.org... [5] https://en.wikipedia.org... [6] http://www.sciencedirect.com... [7] https://books.google.com... [8] http://www.psych.nyu.edu... Thanks for reading.
Black Culture in the United States

Full ResolutionBlack Culture in the United States of America necessarily maintains the foundations of racial thinking required for racism to exist.DefinitionsBlack Culture [1] - The cultural contribution of African Americans, and Non-African Black Americans to the culture of the United States as disctinct from American cultureRules1. There is no ELO requirement for voting; however, this debate will use the opt-in and "select winner" voting standards as outlined here: https://docs.google.com...2. The first round is for acceptance only.3. No new arguments in the final round. Any arguments given in this round should be disregarded by all voters.4. Any objection of definitions must happen in the comments prior to acceptance of the debate. Upon acceptance, the contender agrees upon the definitions as written.5. For all undefined terms, individuals should use commonplace understandings that fit within the logical context of the resolution and this debate.6. The burden of proof for this debate is on the Pro: the Pro must prove that black culture in the United States of America necessarily maintains the foundations of racial thinking required for racism to exist.Sources1. https://en.wikipedia.org...
Illegal Immigration

Whether it's through the underground tunnels from Mexico to Arizona or the ocean trek from Cuba to Florida, illegal immigration happens and should be stopped. There is a reason why we have a thorough process to issue an immigrant his/her U.S. citizenship. Everyone can relate and understand analogies, or so I hope, so that's where I'll start. We all have stood in line at a grocery store, gas station, etc. and we know what it feels like to wait for our turn to pay-out. Sometimes the line is short and sometimes it's long. Regardless, we all know how to wait for our turn. Now, tell me how you'd feel if someone cut right in front of you while you are waiting in line? You wouldn't like it. Illegal immigrants do the same thing but on a much larger scale. They blatantly ignore the laws that we have set to protect our country. You may argue that a large number of illegals are fleeing to the U.S. in search of jobs and you would be correct. But, by being sympathetic to those that are in search of jobs you do more harm than good. By being sympathetic to them you are turning away from what is really the pressing matter. Terrorists/Terrorism can easily be funneled into the U.S. through Mexico. I'm not willing to sit back and watch someone come into our country, destroy our economy, and possibly kill Americans because of flawed immigration/border legislation. So next time when someone cuts in front of you at the gas station throw away the stereotypical thought of the "fleeing family in search of jobs" and realize that because of a lack of security concerning our border it might just be a terrorist that has cut in front of you.
Illegal Immigration

This debate is pointless. I've pointed out twice that I do support LEGAL immigration. The debate has nothing to do with whether or not immigrants contribute to society or not. It has to do with the fact that ILLEGAL immigration needs to be stopped. I'm all for Mexican citizens coming into the United States in a LEGAL manner. The problems starts when they completely disregard our LAWS and STATUTES that we uphold. By allowing ILLEGAL immigrants to stay in OUR country, we are simply rewarding unlawful behavior. So next time someone breaks into your house just give them a plate full of food and $1000 and tell them that their friends and family are more than welcome to do the same. You'll have more come, I promise. There are thousands of ILLEGALS in the U.S. that have been convicted of felony's. Explain to me how you justify allowing ILLEGALS to stay in our country but turning a cold shoulder to those who are following the LEGAL judicial process to become a citizen of the U.S.
Illegal Immigration

I honestly do know what your talking about. My pops and I moved out to Cali to expand his construction business only to fail because Immigrants where to hard to compete with. But thats life i cant blame a "class" of people because they conduct business differently or because they "cut the line" when coming to the United States. But we all want to blame someone or something for our problems and this time of age its usually the immigrants who are the scapegoats. As far as terrorism goes.. Lol Honestly do you actually think that a sophisticated terrorist or organization would get in the United States illegally? I'm pretty sure they would do every right thing and follow the "Laws" to get to the United States. 9-11 ring any bells? None of the hijackers or a matter of fact no terrorist ever in America's history came across the border from Mexico. Your watching to much fox-news maybe? "They report and you decide" right? besides California, Arizona, Texas and New Mexico used to be part of Mexico... No it doesn't give them the right to hop our fence and raise there family's but America encourages that kind of behavior in the first place. Yes, it does encourage that kind of behavior especially with that military law which states "join the US military and become a US citizen" hell there whole family become US citizens. So if you want to be angry and mad and get them immigrants out of the States how bout turning negative to a positive and look at how much immigrants have contributed to this country. America was basically built on the backs of Immigrants.If you want to Blame anyone it should be the government. By the way forgot to mention the only reason the military is able to keep up with its recruiting quotas are because of Hispanics. Nearly 15 percent of U.S. Marine Corps enlisted personnel were Hispanic, compared with 6 percent of Air Force enlisted personnel. Latino representation in the Navy has been rising. By September 2006, they constituted 14 percent of Navy enlisted personnel, about the same as in the Marine Corps that year
Illegal Immigration

Well, if you only knew me. I grew up on a farm and my family has done it my entire life. I know what it's like to be on the tractor for 15 hours a day. I also know what it's like to be in a field all hoeing weeds while it's 100 degrees. My argument is not that we shouldn't have LEGAL immigration, my argument is that those who break our immigration laws should be removed. By allowing them to stay we are rewarding them for breaking OUR laws and OUR statutes. Their are all sorts of ways how people can come and work in the U.S. to help provide for their family (ex. Temporary Visa, most of our workers are on a Temporary Visa and the others are legal citizens). My argument also encompasses the fact that we need a better plan regarding our border. I live only a few hours away from the border and I know the first hand effects of having illegals come across. I know what type of effect they have on our community and I'm not going to stand for it. If you live remotely close to the border you might know a little of what I'm talking about.
Illegal Immigration

So your talking about the grocery stores right. Honestly ask yourself the next time your in a grocery store instead of worrying about someone cutting in front of you and using that as an analogy for an illegal immigrant how bout you stop and think about how the grocery's that you have in your basket. How they got on those shelves in the first place? I'm pretty sure its not a blue eyed blond haired man that picked those cherry's or strawberry's that you have in your fridge as we debate but most likely picked by an illegal immigrant that your complaining and so angry about. Weather you or I like it or not illegal immigrants do most of the back-breaking hard work in America that most people would never want to do.
Border collies make good dogs on farms.

Border collies make great farming dogs because that is what they are known for. They are known to herd sheep as farming dogs. Border collies are also very smart dogs, research proves that border collies are the smartest dog next to the poodle, which helps with their herding skills. To a border collie, everyone is a sheep. Proof that border collies are the smartest dog and good for herding Bordercolliehelp.com
Young Earth Creationism is bunk

I have done that all throughout this debate mate. All I have done here is let you present your arguments for Young Earth Creationism, and then I've repudiated them. Lol. Yes you did. "All assertions that Earth is not young, based on what are acknowledged as "scientific" findings, are in fact unsubstantial claims that are not supported by the evidences used as a reference to their validity. IE. Carbon dating, without relative references cannot determine that the half life of these molecules is 5000 years, which is the references point they are starting from concerning the deterioration process (all dating methods follow this actual, exact same example of Inconclusive Analysis, Which are then used in reference to one another." You used carbon dating as an example, which followed your sentence talking about the age of the Earth. You most certainly talking about carbon dating when you were talking about the age of the Earth. That quote is verbatim from text in Round 1. You are either lying, or you simply don't remember what you typed. Con barely touched on my refutation for Round 3, and I am thus inclined to believe that Con does not wish to partake in this debate anymore. Because of that, I won't touch on any of Con's other "arguments" he has put forward in round 3. If Con does not wish to continue, then I will not flood him with refutations to his text in round 3, as that would make it so that Con wouldn't be able to address points I brought up in Round 2 & 3. If Con does not wish to continue, then I ask Con to comment "Forfeiting round" when it comes time for him to post his argument. Out of fairness, I will also do this if Con takes this route. If Con does not wish to do this, then I would like to suggest he present 3 more arguments for Young Earth Creationism in Round 4, and we can continue from there, since all other avenues of talking points has now been exhausted. This is merely a suggestion; Con does not have to take the latter advice however.
Young Earth Creationism is bunk

Well again you failed to explain how or why YEC is Bunk. But, I never said, Carbon dating was specifically used to date the age of the earth. Carbon dating is used to suggest, unscientifically, without foundation, that things are 10 000 -100 000 years old, without any relative references to support those assertions. IE. dinosaur bones. trees. fossils. Carbon dating is an unreliable reference to science proving things are ages at all, for reasons I explained. ie. Simply because you cannot substantiate those claims: the science is non existent. You cannot assert C-14 can indicate any age older than a mere 2000 years based upon reliable fact based sources, and anything after that can have radical changes in deterioration. PLUS, carbon dating doe snot account for variations in weather, wear, or burial technique or condition... etc etc. Radiation scanning, is even less scientific because they don't know what they are looking at, what to expect, nor the situations. There is nothing supporting the claims that these are sciences, Besides cigarette, booze, porn and drug cartels buying academic influence and funding documentaries to travel to tropical places and get into Russia and china. Your entire argument thus far is elusive. and your arguments against me were out-right hog-wash. I wouldn't even bother putting facts before you. Because you begin to rant, with completely pointless, flawed and outright redundant remarks. So I'll save them fro next round and prove your a Troll with the accumulative 3rd strike when your next round falls flat on top of your other shadow
Young Earth Creationism is bunk

So you don't have any evidence, Young Earth Creationism is bunk. ??? seeing as you didn't provide any. I expect you to provide evidence next time. So. You wanted to improve upon my reference to Carbon dating, by providing an alternative. How little regard you have. One major point about Carbon dating, other than conditions being unaccounted for, was that there was no comparative information to prove the findings were accurate. How can you determine that C-14 has a half life of 5000 years, when we have been studying C-14 for less than 40. Uranium? was it. has a longer half-life? With less conclusive supporting data to indicate that is scientific or fact. Hmmm... The point is, bud: Bunk is something entirely unsociable with Creationism. and you do have Burden of Proof. and I have provided plenty, indicating you have nothing. And don't say I have nothing. I do. and I WILL get to it. But as a debate, we had 5 rounds. and You wasted yours stipulating over what the Audience has to evaluate, all the while 'Making absurd accusations that I provided nothing' as though that actually diminished my contributions. This is my argument this round. YOU have NO evidence, criteria, or MOtive to assert that ASSUMPTION, that Young Earth Creationism is Bunk - simply because you haven't seen the Proof yet. Because NO ONE can possibly think that something that is not a fact is a fact: IE. Creationism is scientifically debunked by science. (Now if you want to introduce me to a super Philosopher, who can defy and over come millennia of the wisest people from each and every culture on the planet {this is where the funny part about aliens came in [seeing as, their supposed "higher authority and wisdom' was a holistic God with no flesh nor temple. Aumubla, chaos, Allah, Krishna, Creator. etc. ]} that would be great. Because, I've only heard of na"ve brats who think their intellect somehow exceeds our moderators and ancestors alike.)
Young Earth Creationism is bunk

GoOrDin presented this in a comment to me: "Spud, when you ugh, find some time. We should have a discussion maybe in the forums, or you can man up and challenge me. I am A Young Earth Creationist. and My profile here is already substantial reference links to expand upon my limited character count. I bury people." Rules: - Max 3 arguments at a time (for example if you want to present evidence for a global flood, a young universe, or a Young Earth, you can present 1 argument for each category. This makes it so that I'm not inundated with refutations to make. To quote an episode from Rick & Morty, "Show me what you got."
Was the Michael brown shooting justified

Let's take a look at the situation.Michael Brown, moments after robbing a convience store, numerous witness reported that Brown physically attacked Officer Darren Wilson, reaching inside his car, grabbing and punching him. Wilson exited the vehicle, and Brown reached for Wilson's weapon and struggled for control of the firearm. The weapon fired and striked Brown in the hand. Brown continued to struggle for control of the weapon, and Wilson fired and killed Brown. This story comes directly from the police report (derived from witness accounts and autopsy reports) and if correct, Darren Wilson's killing of Michael Brown was justified under the realm of Missouri Law.There is a popular misconception that Michael Brown put his hands up in surrender while being shot at. While witness vary on whether or not his hands were up, all witness hold that Brown was charging at Officer Wilson while he was doing it. The myth spawns from a friend of Brown, who, shortly after the incident, claimed Brown turned his back to Wilson with his hands up in surrender and was shot in the back. The autopsy report and testimony of all credible witness fully and completly discredits that statement, as Brown was not shot in the back.Knowing this information, yes, Darren Wilson acted in self-defence and his shooting of Michael Brown was justified.
under god in the pledge

Agreed, if people were forced to say "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, that would be violating their First Amendment rights. But the fact is they aren't. In schools, students have the option to abstain from the entire pledge or two omit parts of it. This case has already been brought before the United States Supreme Court and they decided to allow students in school to do exactly that (abstain or omit). Obviously, government/affirmative must win because in real life, they already have.
Gay Rights

I AM NOT GOING TO MAKE THIS TO LONG . you would need to PROVE that homosexuality is a choice before I will answer that. 1.UH Y DO I HAVE TO PROVE SOMETHING THAT IS A FACT. PEOPLE CHOSE TO BE GAY ITS NOTHING TO BE PROVEN This is judgmental, contradicting, and retarded. You are teaching kids that it is wrong. So if they develop homosexual feelings they are going to think it is wrong and try and hide it. Also, just because someone sees homosexual behavior that DOES NOT make them gay. Telling your kids that the two men are confused and possessed by demons is not teaching your kids to love and not judge, that would teach them to think homosexuals are possessed by demons, you really think this is a good thing? 2. I AM NOT CONTRADICTING, I DIDNT SAY THAT IF U SEE A GAY ACT THAT IT WILL MAKE U GAY, BUT IT CAN MAKE U CONFUSED. AND TEACHING KIDS RIGHT FROM WRONG IS BEING A GOOD PARENT AND I DID SAY THEY WERE POSSESSED BY DEMONS I WAS SAYING DEMON IN THE SINCE OF THE VOICE THAT TELL U TO DO BAD STUFF EVERYONE ONE HAS THERE DEMONS THAT TELL THEM TO DO BAD STUFF, WE JUST GOT TO FIGHT IT.AND THE ONLY WAY TO HELP OTHER PEOPLE WITH THERE DEMONS IS TO LOVE THEM AND PRAY FOR THEM SO LIKE I SAID ITS NOT A CONTRADICTION. AND U DONT DEVELOP HOMOSEXUAL FEELING, U DEVELOP CANCER OR ARTHRITIS NOW LET ME ASK U A COMMON SENSE QUESTION OR SCIENCE QUESTION CAN U PUT 2 SAME SIZE CIRCLES IN EACH OTHER OR CAN U PUT 2 SOLD POLLS IN TO EACH OTHER . NO CUZ IT IS NOT MEANT TO HAPPEN Y CUZ A POLL IS MEANT TO BE PUT IN A CIRCLE. WHICH IS Y 2 MEN NOR 2 WOMEN CANT HAVE A BABY NATURALLY WHICH IS Y HOMOSEXUALITY IS UNNATURAL 3. U SAID THIS STATEMENT IS WRONG BUT ITS A FACT THIS STATEMENT IS 100% TRUE
Gay Rights

"AND I COULD CARE LESS IF GAYS GET MARRIED I AM SAYING THAT THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT HAVE A SAY IN IT AND THAT ANYTHING GAY SHOULD BE PRIVATE NOT IT THE OPEN AND IF IS ILLEGAL LEAVE IT ILLEGAL. You are saying that government shouldn't have control over it, then you are saying they should keep it illegal. This is contradictory. "OR HOW DO SOME ONE WITH AN INCURABLE DISEASE GET CURED SOME STUFF CAN BE ONLY ANSWERED BY THE WILL OF GOD. JUST CUZ PEOPLE DONT BELIEVE IN SOMETHING DOESN'T MEAN ITS NOT REAL." Whether or not science can explain it, it is still not enough to prove that the alternative is God. Also just the same, just because people believe IN God does not mean he IS real. "AND ABOUT THE KIDS I THINK THAT SAME WAY THAT KIDS SHOULD BE TAUGHT TO LOVE PEOPLE NO MATTER THE RACE OR GENDER JUST NOT IN A SEXUAL WAY. AND I DONT WONT TO HIDE FEELING FROM KIDS BUT I DONT WANT KID TO DEVELOPED UNNATURAL FEELS CUZ OF WHAT THEY SEE. BEING GAY IS A PERSONAL CHOICE THAT I WOULD NOT WANT MY KIDS TO MAKE LIKE KILLING, RAPING, STEALING ETC....... I JUST WANT MY KIDS TO MAKE THE RIGHT CHOICE IN LIFE AND NOT GET CONFUSED BY THE WRONG ONES, CUZ OF WHAT THEY SEE OR HERE.THIS IS WHAT I WOULD HAVE SAID "Two men walked into a coffee shop holding hands, at the table next to me I heard a little girl ask her mom why the two men were holding hands, her FATHER replied "because they ARE CONFUSED sweetie THEY HAVE DEMONS IN THEM THAT THEY NEED TO GET OUT LETS PRAY FOR THEM." This is judgmental, contradicting, and retarded. You are teaching kids that it is wrong. So if they develop homosexual feelings they are going to think it is wrong and try and hide it. Also, just because someone sees homosexual behavior that DOES NOT make them gay. Telling your kids that the two men are confused and possessed by demons is not teaching your kids to love and not judge, that would teach them to think homosexuals are possessed by demons, you really think this is a good thing? Also, you would need to PROVE that homosexuality is a choice before i will answer that. "NOW LET ME ASK U A COMMON SENSE QUESTION OR SCIENCE QUESTION CAN U PUT 2 SAME SIZE CIRCLES IN EACH OTHER OR CAN U PUT 2 SOLD POLLS IN TO EACH OTHER . NO CUZ IT IS NOT MEANT TO HAPPEN Y CUZ A POLL IS MEANT TO BE PUT IN A CIRCLE. WHICH IS Y 2 MEN NOR 2 WOMEN CANT HAVE A BABY NATURALLY WHICH IS Y HOMOSEXUALITY IS UNNATURAL." And thus wrong? ================== Summery of debate thus far ================== My opponent has attempted to use the Bible to prove it's wrong, without proving the Bible to be a legitimate source of morality. He has contradicted himself multiple times saying we should teach our children to love freely (but then says to tell his child that homosexuals are possessed by demons). His only response to my equal rights and 14th amendment argument was that he doesn't mind as long as they don't do it around him, this doesn't answer the argument and is completely stupid, should heterosexual PDA be illegal then too? If not prove why. See ya in the next round. Also, please make your round easier to read.