BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Abortion

Well the baby is not born yet it dose not have heartbeat so really the parents are not killing the baby they are stopping it before it starts,and what if they don't follow any religion without any and don't want a baby without abortion they could kill the baby themselves and would have to be faced with murder charges. it also gives women control over there won bodies without having to commit murder or living a life that the don't want to. http://abortion.procon.org...
Abortion

A baby, even though not yet born, is still a human and life with rights as proven and said by the US Government. It is not only illegal but morally wrong to kill another human being. (This is a fact as it was stated in the US constitution and multiple religions.) It is also proven that the fetus feels pain during the abortion as a result of the obvious reflexes and signals it gives off during so. In saying the child does not feel pain is wrong. http://abortion.procon.org...
Abortion

Abortion is wrong and should not be an option for women when put in the situation of an unwanted baby. 21% of pregnancies in the United states end in abortion, that is excluding accidental miscarriages. Which means thousands of lives are taken away before they have even begun. The main reason for abortions is women and/or teens having sex out of wedlock. They take up 85% of the abortions. This is why women and their male partners need to be more aware of what they are doing sexually. Its is proven that while an abortion is taking place the fetus can feel pain when they are after 20 weeks of pregnancy. A women has to be at most 28 weeks to have an abortion. http://www.abort73.com...
Abortion

Women should have the right to choose what they want to do with their body with out the law coming after them. If they women want to use abortion as a type of birth control no one should stop them. There are plenty of children out their that can be adopted and if the mother dose not want to raise the kid or put it up for adoption but also she dose not want to raise than what is she supposed to do kill the baby herself but she would be arrested for murder so abortion can sometimes be the best thing for a mother or for parents. if a women is raped she should have to carry out with the pregnancies they should not have to go through the pain of giving birth which is the hardest pain a human can endure and all this just so the mother can hive the baby up for adoption. It would easier for her just to get a abortion and she wont have to live with it for the rest of her life . If she gave up the baby for adoption she would always know that her baby is somewhere with a total new family and she is here and can do nothing about it. The odds for a women to get sexually assaulted is 1 and 3 that is 33 percent of the women and if they carried out with the pregnancies it can ruin a lot of their lives. Over 600 lives are being taken away from us each year because of pregnancies and what if the women who died were raped and it was not their fault for becoming pregnant now the women die because they decided to give birth instead of having and abortion which could still keep them alive today. http://amplifyyourvoice.org... http://www.cdc.gov...
Abortion

Women should not use abortion every time they get pregnant. After just doing it once some women will start to believe that it is the best way to resolve the issue. Over half the women who get one abortion continue to do it again. While doing this and even having just one abortion that makes less babies on the market for adoption. Many women and families want to adopt because they either can not have children or have same sex spouses and/or partners. https://www.guttmacher.org... When women have an abortion they are avoiding a responsibility. Whether they made a mistake while having sex or were the victims of rape the child is still their blood and responsibility. Having the baby will show they are responsible and know how to deal with the problem the correct way. Taking care of it or giving it to someone who will. The child's civil rights are also taken away. A baby has civil rights from the start of conception and is a human life. It is killing a human being without just cause. The child has done nothing to anyone and deserves to have a life. It is proven that by the age of 45 one third of woman would have had an abortion. leaving less babies in the world. Most woman have an abortion simply because the do not feel their lives permit for it. only 1% have abortions from the cause of rape. Other reasons are because they are young, do not have the money, or have to much going on in their lives. Young mothers should take on the responsibility as it will help them learn to achieve in life. If the finances do not permit there is welfare. If there is to many things in their life then they need to make a change and focus on what is important. http://www.operationrescue.org... So there are not many acceptable reasons to end a child's life simply because the mother was careless or "not ready". There are other ways to deal with the problem. Word
Heavenly Panda

DO NOT BE RACISt!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Heavenly Panda

Yo, VIP, let's kick it! Ice ice baby Ice ice baby All right stop Collaborate and listen Ice is back with my brand new invention Something grabs a hold of me tightly Then I flow that a harpoon daily and nightly Will it ever stop? Yo, I don't know Turn off the lights and I'll glow To the extreme I rock a mic like a vandal Light up a stage and wax a chump like a candle Dance Bum rush the speaker that booms I'm killin' your brain like a poisonous mushroom Deadly, when I play a dope melody Anything less that the best is a felony Love it or leave it You better gain way You better hit bull's eye The kid don't play If there was a problem Yo, I'll solve it Check out the hook while my DJ revolves it Ice ice baby Vanilla Ice ice baby Vanilla Ice ice baby Vanilla
Heavenly Panda

Once Mother said "My little pet You ought to learn your alphabet!" So in my soup I used to get All the letters of the alphabet I learned them all from A to Z And now my Mother's giving me Animal crackers in my soup Monkeys and rabbits loop the loop Gosh, oh gee! but I have fun Swallowing animals one by one In every bowl of soup I see Lions and tigers watching me I make 'em jump right through a hoop Those animal crackers in my soup When I get hold of the big bad wolf I just push him under to drown Then I bite him in a million bits And I gobble him right down! When they're inside me where it's dark I walk around like Noah's Ark I stuff my tummy like a goop With animal crackers in my soup!
Israel should no longer be given special treatment by the U.S.

My opponent makes only one contention: "The United States should formally end its "special" ties with the nation of Israel and begin to treat it as it would any other nation in the Middle East and World." However, he also sets up several of the valid arguments for the opposition without addressing them in any substantive way. These, among others, are the US' need for an ally in the middle east, ease of military access, intelligence information, military cooperation, and even human rights concerns. I'll address each of these in turn. 1) Need for a ME Ally The United States is greatly served by having a close ally in the Middle East. This comes in the form of a stepping stone for any sort of military action in the region. The majority of the US' remaining enemy states or states that are likely to foster animosity towards the US are in this region, and an ally in this region serves as a first line of defense. 2) Ease of Military Access This follows closely with the first point in that it gives the US a place to base operations in the middle east. Places like Israel and Kuwait provide a ground base for operations that may be necessary where a sea-based operations center won't do. Furthermore, one can store more airplanes on an Israeli air force base than on an aircraft carrier. 3) Intelligence Information The Mossad (Israeli Intelligence) is one of the best services in the world. They are much closer to the actual locations of terrorist activities than the United States and have intelligence agents that can more easily pass as Arab. Thus, they are arguably more situated to procure better intelligence than the CIA. Our intelligence sharing agreements with the Mossad give us better information to guard the US more efficiently. 4) Military Cooperation The Israeli army, but especially air force is one of the best trained in the world. Israeli pilots are trained to much higher standards than US pilots, and frequently, joint training exercises are used to enhance the combat effectiveness of both air forces. Another area that Israeli forces excel is helicopter mission execution - again, joint exercises in this area would obviously benefit US forces. 5) Human Rights Considerations Israel is surrounded by Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon (and Palestine). All are majority Muslim countries, and all would like to reclaim the land that Israel occupies. Without backing from the US, there could easily be another Holocaust in the Middle East.
Israel should no longer be given special treatment by the U.S.

Since its creation as a formal nation state in the 1948, the nation of Israel as been given special treatment by the United States. Such treatment has come in the form of nominally large blank checks written to the government of Israel, first rights to military defense contracts by U.S. contractors, and unequivocal backing in the Middle East. The reasoning for this preferred treatment varies but can generally by traced to the U.S.'s need for a Western ally in the Middle East, as well as the assured access for U.S. military forces in the area. United States backing of Israel has been nothing but detrimental to its international image both as a spokesman for democracy and as a proponent for peace. The United States should formally end its "special" ties with the nation of Israel and begin to treat it as it would any other nation in the Middle East and World.
January PF topic

I'll be arguing that sending more troops to Afghanistan IS indeed in America's best interest. This could be argued due to several factors. First off, America is a country that values rights and freedoms and would like to spread these ideals into other nations that may not be as fortunate. One of these freedoms that exists is the right to vote in a democratic system. de⋅moc⋅ra⋅cy  /dɪˈmɒkrəsi/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [di-mok-ruh-see] –noun, plural -cies. 1. government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system. 2. a state having such a form of government: The United States and Canada are democracies. (. http://dictionary.reference.com...) These such rights in the United States are laid out in the constitution: . http://www.archives.gov... Such rights are non-existant in nations like Afghanistan which was ruled by the Taliban from 1996 to 2001 before being ousted by American forces. . http://www.infoplease.com... Under their regime a strict interpretation of Shari'a Law was implemented into daily Afghan life. This included treating women as second class citizens and denying them rights such as education, harsh penalties such as stoning for petty crimes, and a non-democratic government. Many desperate Afghans tried to flee as refugees to other countries. It is also commonly believed that The Taliban may have links to another Islamic Extremist group, Al-Qaeda. This group is considered to be a direct threat to America due to previous actions such as 9/11. Targeting such groups as The Taliban could possibly prevent them from re-gaining power and providing support to Al-Qaeda which in the long run will guarantee the safety of America. This can be done by sending more troops to Afghanistan so Obama's decision will ensure for peace in the future.
Relaxing the anti-slavery laws would be both morally-sound and economically beneficial

MORALITY While it is true that the founding fathers wrote the United States Declaration of Independence back in 1766 and slaves/blacks were not really apart of the phrase ,Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, the founding fathers laid the foundation for 1865 when slavery was banished and now that it is 2013 Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness is now for any American no matter what they are. The difference between criminals and slaves is very obvious. Criminals have been found guilty in a court of their peers and have lost there right to Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness until their sentence is over and even life in some cases because of their actions. Slaves on the other hand are not guilty of any crime the only thing they are guilty of his being African and catch-able that is a very said truth. My opponent claims that kidnapping will no longer be apart of slavery instead it will be criminals that are in prison doing the slave work. The problem is that the 8th amendment of the United States Constitution does not allow it. The 8th amendment states- "nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted(1)," having someone do slave work is cruel if not unusual. The difference between the London Underground and the Middle Passage is great. While the London Underground during a hot day is not convenient, the Middle Passage was inhumane. In the Middle Passage people where stacked one on another on shelves and were chained together they where more like meat in a supermarket than humans. ECONOMICS My opponent seems to have slavery and an unpaid internship mixed up. An unpaid internship is a contract made between two people in agreement that one won't be paid for their services instead will gain experience in the field, but the unpaid internship still has their liberty and their life. Slavery is a whole different ball game. The definition of Slavery is- 'the condition of a slave; bondage(2)' being a slave is being someone's property. Which means that it is not a contract instead one person owns another and the person is forced to do another's biding until or if the owner grants the slave their freedom which is unlikely. If taxes is the main force behind legalizing slavery then that is a very bad idea. Their are much easy ways to cut spending like cutting social programs or defense budget that is in the 800 billion dollar range. This is better than lowering moral for a few dollars if any cut. In conclusion slavery is wrong and History shows why it is with poor treatment and killing people's rights. Vote Con Sources (1) . http://www.law.cornell.edu... (2) . http://dictionary.reference.com...
morality=survival truth

To answer Pro's question - NO. Self sacrifice (as oppose to "protect . .. itself") would be the sensible option according to the ethos of the Friendly Robot. I address the video shown: . http://www.youtube.com... It entails literally a giant, powerful, advanced friendly warrior that crash landed and did not 'escape' - and threatened with nuclear death - sacrificed itself to protect the foolishness of human existence. That Giant Robot shown was originally designed to wipe out humanity, yet died defending it. To that Robot, and the love experienced unconditionally between it and a boy, teaches us that humanity does reserve redemption besides its catastrophic nature.
morality=survival truth

My opponent says "religion is suicide" which is irrelevant to the debate. When it comes to morality, the sacrifice of the individual to benefit the group, is seen as a morality righteous act. For example, George Washington could have maintained his power to remain president, but he let go of such things for the betterment of the US. I now refer to the video provided (a classic of American media) http://www.youtube.com...; a single soldier stays behind to hold off the enemy advance, allowing for his comrades to survive. Ones own life is the most valuable thing to have, to surrender such for anther, with no guarantee of reward, trust in ones species, such verifiable post modem faith - its a standard we should all strive for. Pro has yet to reproach such humanistic appeal. Thank you for reading.
morality=survival truth

In round 1 religion was never defined as a necessity for morality, nor do I imply a religious narrative. With the video given I show Pro's character, "a gigantic powerful highly advanced friendly warrior robot crash lands on earth without possibility of escape, that if threatened or in the face of violence" would NOT protect itself given the circumstances mentioned by Pro. It's love for humanity, despite not being human, compelled it to save humanity from itself and to sacrifice itself - to die and never rise again. Given the scenario, it would make sense for humanity not to attack the friendly robot. FYI I'm an atheist, so Pro's single sentence claim is w/o merit.
Thomson's Violinist Analogy for Abortion

Disclaimer: if my opponent raises an objection that tries to draw a disanalogy between the violinist case and the pregnancy case, I will probably tweak Thomson's original thought experiment to accommodate the disanalogy. I wanted to point that out, because I didn't want my opponent or the voters to accuse me of making a new argument that is different than Thomson's analogy. The analogy runs as follows:"You wake up in the morning and find yourself back to back in bed with an unconscious violinist. A famous unconscious violinist. He has been found to have a fatal kidney ailment, and the Society of Music Lovers has canvassed all the available medical records and found that you alone have the right blood type to help. They have therefore kidnapped you, and last night the violinist's circulatory system was plugged into yours, so that your kidneys can be used to extract poisons from his blood as well as your own. The director of the hospital now tells you, "Look, we're sorry the Society of Music Lovers did this to you--we would never have permitted it if we had known. But still, they did it, and the violinist is now plugged into you. To unplug you would be to kill him. But never mind, it's only for nine months. By then he will have recovered from his ailment, and can safely be unplugged from you. " [1]DefinitionsAbortion:a medical procedure used to end a pregnancy and cause the death of the fetus. [2]Morally Permissible:“To say that an action of mine is morally permissible is to say that no one has a valid claim against my doing it, that doing it violates nobody's moral rights. " [3]Rule:No critiques of the topic (e. g. moral skepticism or moral nihilism. )[1] . http://spot.colorado.edu...[2] . http://www.merriam-webster.com...[3] ttps://ndpr. nd. edu. ..
Give me one good reason for not believing in God

[The contender has to be an athiest]. I am convinced that if God truly exists then, a person standing before God in the next life, would not even have one good reason for not having believed God's existence. Though if the contender gives me one unrefutable good reason to not believe in God then, I may reconsider my belief. So contender, give me one good reason of why you do not believe in God's existence. (This debate will contain 5 rounds - may the best human win!)
Give me one good reason for not believing in God

Contender, may you then at least answer my 'critical' question in round 2. [An answer seriously needed from round 2]: "Contender, the biblical scriptures quote; this foolish plan of God for people to worship God 'in spirit' [prayer] (and in truth) is wiser than the wisest of human plans. ***So contender, if God himself were to be seen on the flesh here on earth, give me one greatest plan for people to glorify God than his foolish one?*** (Because the foolish plan of God - the one of worshiping and serving him without even seeing him, is certainly better than glorifying him only with your job, invention or sport etc.)" In other words I am saying that, if God truly doesn't exist then, you 'contender' must find a better solution for people to worship God other than the one God has proposed, for that would show that you are wiser than God (and thus, show that God doesn't exist). So, may you please answer that question.
Give me one good reason for not believing in God

I have given my opponent many good reasons for not believing in god. He has obviously not accepted any of those reasons. That is his problem, not mine. I have satisfied the requirements of the opening question. I have provided many reasons why people should not believe in god. My opponent is obviously going to carry on with an endless rendition of bible quotes and other related nonsense. So that's it for me! Note - Religious people have a dislike of logic. I don't know why they tolerate them on this website. They have nothing to contribute to the sum total of human knowledge. lol
Give me one good reason for not believing in God

Good day to my contender and fellow debate.org community. Firstly I would like to begin with thanking my fellow contender for accepting this challenge and I would also like to thank the attention of the debate.org community. May everyone who read's this debate, enjoy it! Contender: "God doesn't exist because God is a man made phenomenon." Or... a devine-phenomenon, Let me simplify this: there are endless mysteries finding favour with the fact that this world was designed. i.e: This universe would have 'never' been like this: -Without there being some kind of a being to think and create in order of importance. -Without at least understanding what you're trying to do. (Yet this universe obeys an astronomical number of rules, i.e. perfect atmosphere, food catering for the stomach, a man's sperm going into a woman in order of reproduction etc. etc. [In fact, these mysteries can never be all completed in a list, yet doesn't this prove the glory of God?]) Therefore, no, God is not a man made phenomenon because, we have good reasons (like the endless mysteries) to believe that this world was designed by a Designer [God]. Contender: "The creator is usually a person who is in charge of, or is a ruling class person with responsibilities." There my contender, says in other words; that we have to 'see' God as supreme and ruler of this world, to claim him as ruler. When, if God existed here on earth: -'Belief' in God would not be required because, we would see him with our own eyes in the flash. Meaning, that there would be no more problems for us to glorify God with. Problems give a meaning to life otherwise life is meaningless. God has always given us this opportunity to glorify him, for example, the forbidden fruit in tree in the garden of Eden. Therefore, belief in God gives us the opportunity to glorify God and, this is the greatest opportunity ever for men! Amen! -People (not deserving God's generousity because of their constant seeking of immorality, jealousy, greed etc.) would be to demanding and, God would be the government and only government of the world. And the cue of people's requirements from God, would be infinite. When they could easily seek him in spirit since he is God, not the government. That is why we must worship God in truth and in spirit! Amen! (Etc. Etc. [Like I said, my aim is simplification]) So by the grace of God, it seems to me that I have defeated my contender in just the second round, since I asked for one good reason in which my contender gave me an empty reason. Contender, the biblical scriptures quote; this foolish plan of God for people to worship God 'in spirit' [prayer] (and in truth) is wiser than the wisest of human plans. So contender if God himself were to be seen on the flesh here on earth, give me one greatest plan for people to glorify God than his foolish one? (Because the foolish plan of God - the one of worshipping and serving him without even seeing him, is certainly better than glorifying him only with your job, invention or sport etc.)