BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Abortion Is Morally Wrong

I intend to rebut Pros argument that "Abortion is Morally Wrong". I contend that Pro will be unable to prove that "Abortion is Morally Wrong". Interestingly, in the opening round Pro stated that, "The subject of morality is a tricky one. If not carefully understood, it can ruin a debate. " Yet, in the first two rounds Pro chose not to provide or refer to any definition or context for determining "Morality" or what is "Moral". The closest Pro came to any related specificity, was when he stated his position that "intentionally taking the life of another human is incorrect. " Yet, he laid no supporting foundation for that assertion and did not specifically state that his opponent must accept it. Pro's round two argument is essentially the following: A. Abortion is killing B. Abortion is done with intent. C. Killing is morally incorrect D. Abortion is therefore morally incorrect To topple the logic in Pro's argument, I need only to invalidate point C. Without point C, Pro's logic can not make the "connection" between Abortion and Morality. By not, providing specificity, Pro's point C Translates to: "All" Killing is morally incorrect. I challenge that premise, with the following two responses 1. According to Pro's own on-line source. . .a Virus can be considered a living thing. (. http://www.biology-online.org...) If a Virus was killing an unborn child, can Pro prove it is "morally incorrect" to kill the Virus ? I think not. 2. Even if we limit the scope of the word "Killing" to that of Humans. Point C, still can not be validated. If a known relentless Killer was in the act of strangling an innocent child to death, can Pro prove it is "morally incorrect" for a police officer to save a life, by intentionally shooting to kill the killer ? Again, I say no. I say, Pro can not prove that "Killing" is by itself "inherently" wrong or immoral. It would seem Situations and context must also be considered. Pro, The instigator, said that in this debate he "will be arguing with semantics". Since "semantics" is not a person or entity, I translate that to mean he will be "using"semantics" to argue with me. Using semantics however, requires careful usage of words, and proper definitions. Unfortunately, Pro has not gotten off to a good start. His choice of words and lack of specificity/definition may have severely undermined his argument.
Are actors and pro athletes paid too much

you know what Jacob I think its dumb that they get paid to much!!!!! what do they even do for us? sure they entertain but there is so much other things we could do with our time instead of sitting on the couch with our eye balls glued to the tv. We could also give people money that actually deserve it. like veterans I mean the give up so much and they get paid squat I think that actors and vets should switch salaries bc veterans deserve it!!
Republican Presidential Era's Have Been Detrimental to the U.S.

Pro Contention -- Republican presidential era's from 1900 to the present day, on the whole, have been detrimental to the U.S. economy and social well-being by comparison to Democratic presidential era's during the same time period. Here I define a "[party] presidential era" as an uninterrupted period of partisan tenure of the office of President of the United States. For example, the period of time from the election of Ronald Reagan through the departure of George H.W. Bush would represent one "Republican presidential era." Round 1 will be used only as an agreement to the above debate conditions. Three additional debate rounds will follow.
Wikipedia is a Good Source to Use while Debating

"During those few minutes on the site, the information could have just been posted and be wrong." This a problem with any internet source, since the scenario you suggested can be applied to any website. In that case, you might as well argue against using any website as a source. "Plus, I would say most teachers don't allow Wikipedia to be used as a source for school projects, so why should it be acceptable to a debate?" That depends on the teacher's personal preference, not on the credibility of Wikipedia. Some teachers may agree with me, and some may agree with you. "As for the abcnews.com comment. That is true, but again, they may site abcnews but how do you know that it's 100% correct and all from ABC News? You don't." Well, you did use it as an example of a site you could use as a source... =P "Take for example: If it was a debate in the decreasing fish population and they post a link to Wikipedia that states: 500,000 fish die every day from overfishing and cite ABC News, but on ABC News the cited article really says: 5,000 fish die daily. They are similiar in appreance, but totally different." There are a couple problems with this example. First, the author of the Wikipedia article would most likely copy-and-paste the cited information, so there is no danger of misquoting or misinterpreting. Also, the problem would probably be fixed quickly, as we have seen with the example of the page for "Yellow". Furthermore, most opponents would probably check the site themselves for credibility, misquotations by their opponent or other information. "But, as I was saying, if it was not a debate where the debaters are debating over Wikipedia, they may check once or twice while constructing their next argument and then never look back again, risking the possibility of having wrong information." See my earlier paragraph. The opponent of the person who is citing any source will most likely check the link themselves. Virtually every time someone posts a link, you would be a fool to just accept the information, rather than examining it yourself.
Wikipedia is a Good Source to Use while Debating

Thanks you slammin for starting this debate. My opponent begins with a common anti-Wikipedia argument: that anyone can edit it, at any time. However, this is not a flaw, but an asset, for two main reasons: 1. It opens up to a variety of people. By letting anyone edit it, Wikipedia can open itself up to many different people from different fields of knowledge, allowing for a more accurate source. 2. Pages without credible sources are deleted quickly. If anyone can edit it at any time, surely it must be subject to vandalism. However, vandalized pages are quickly corrected or taken down. So are pages without valid sources. If the article cites a credible course such as your abcnews.com, then it is just as good as using abcnews.com itself, and is faster. For example, here is a link to another Wikipedia debate: http://www.debate.org... In Con's R1, she posted a link to a false/vandalized/spam page, by editing the page for the color Yellow. However, if you click her link now, it will take you to the correct definition/article for Yellow. This was corrected three hours later (probably sooner, but that was when the link was checked). I urge you to find a page containing false information, that does not have a warning on it or is not up for review.
Wikipedia is a Good Source to Use while Debating

I will just start out with something small to begin with and let my opponent begin with bringing up other points. Really, WIkipedia is not a valid source to use while debating because anybody can go on and change information. That's it. The information can seem real, but actually be completely the opposite of what you thought. Other sites like www.abcnews.com and other sites that are professional and viewers cannot change info. Thank you and I await my opponents response! :) ~Slammin
Abortion situation

Not every women pays more out of pocket money than the other, because all abortions vary from each other. From the type of abortion procedure, the length of the pregnancy, Health indications (including costs for additional lab work that may be needed based on your pre-operative medical review),needed medications if the women blood Rh is a negative. So you cant just say that women spend more out of pocket money than insurance because all operations are different and depending on the insurance the women has it could cover it. http://www.feministcenter.org... Abortion procedures are safe and don't cause cancer or any other health issue. A peer-reviewed study published by Obstetrics & Gynecology in Jan. 2015 said that less than one quarter of one percent lead to major health problems. On a 2012 study in Obstetrics & Gynecology came to the conclusion that a women's risk of dying from abortion was 0.6 out of 100,000, while the risk of giving birth was 14 times higher than abortion, which is 8.8 in 100,000 a higher risk than abortion. The National Cancer Institute (NCI), the American Cancer Society (ACS), and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists argued if abortion causes breast cancer. In 1939 10,767 women by the Joint Royal College of General Practitioners and the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists found that women who had at least two abortions experienced the same future fertility as those who had at least two natural pregnancies. Which means that abortion doesn't lead to a higher risk of breast cancer its a 50% chance. http://abortion.procon.org...
Abortion situation

"Most abortion patients had health insurance in 2014. 35% reported that they had Medicaid coverage, while 31% had private insurance. However, insurance does not necessarily cover abortion services, and even if it does, patients may not use their coverage for a variety of reasons." This proves that women spend more out of pocket than what insurance can actually offer to the women if she wants the abortion. More than 60% of women delay the out of pocket abortions because they need to raise money or make arrangements. This will prolong the medical procedure and the fetus will continue to grow if the fetus continues to grow, the women goes into her first trimester the abortion will cost more. For an In Clinic abortion procedure this may cost up to $1,500 or less depending on the trimester. The abortion pill is $800 or less but it can only be taken early in the pregnancy, the average women will be more likely to pay the $1,500 due to an unstable emotional state. Shown in the graph below more women get abortions in the first trimester. https://www.guttmacher.org... Some women who have abortions have mental issues such as depression, anger, anxiety, nightmares, flashbacks of the abortion procedure, and eating disorders. There has been an increase in the risk of suicide of women who have had abortions. These are the effects of some women who have abortions. Resources: https://www.plannedparenthood.org... https://www.plannedparenthood.org... http://www.childrenbychoice.org.au... https://www.guttmacher.org...
Abortion situation

The women who go though dangerous attempts to go though abortion though untrained people is on women who take part in this because if the women wanted abortion she should have been smart about it and done it with professional people. According to The Abortion Surveillance Branch of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) says that induced abortion is safer than childbirth and that the serious complication rate is less than one percent. Which therefore means that complications though child birth has a higher chance than abortion, which can also mean that abortion may be better for the mother if the child has disability's or other complications. http://www.nrlc.org...
Abortion situation

Women often make the dangerous attempts to induce their own abortions or went to untrained people who performed abortions with the limited instruments or in unsanitary conditions." Women streamed into emergency rooms with serious complications with the uterus, retained placentas, severe bleeding, cervical wounds, rampant infections, poisoning, and shock." Those are only a few list of complications that can occur when having an abortion, there is also the risk of not being able to give birth again due to having a weak placenta. 21.6 million women experience an unsafe abortion worldwide each year, 18.5 million of these occur in developing countries in the U.S. 47,000 women die from complications of unsafe abortion each year. Deaths due to unsafe abortions remain close to 13% of all the maternal deaths. "21% of all pregnancies in 2011 ended in abortions; the abortion rate in 2011 was 16.9 per 1,000 women aged 15-44, down 13% from 19.4 per 1,000 in 2008." These statistics show that the abortion rates increase within each year; millions of unborn children die due to women thinking an abortion is their only option. http://www.tfpstudentaction.org... http://www.friendsoftheunborn.org... https://www.guttmacher.org...
Abortion situation

Research indicates that relief is the most common emotional response following abortion, and that psychological distress appears to be greatest before, rather than after, an abortion. "There are undoubtedly some women who, in hindsight, wish that they had made different choices, and the majority would prefer never to have become pregnant when the circumstances were not right for them. When a wanted pregnancy is ended (for medical reasons, for example) women may experience a sense of loss and grief. As with any major change or decision involving loss, a crisis later in life sometimes leads to a temporary resurfacing of sad feelings surrounding the abortion. Women at risk for poor post-abortion adjustment are those who do not get the support they need, or whose abortion decisions are actively opposed by people who are important to them." This shows that abortion isn't always a bad thing sometimes it is good to just leave the baby maybe because of finances or pressure being put on the mother to abort. http://prochoice.org...
Abortion situation

A woman's only choice doesn't have to be abortion, there also is adoption. A women should not kill an unborn fetus just because she "feels incapable"of taking care of it. 94% of women who gave birth said that abortion would not be a good solution resulting from rape. " I was an innocent victim of a horrible crime. I was not to blame for what the rapist had done to me. But in choosing to abort, to kill an innocent child growing within me, I lowered myself to the level of the rapist.- Patricia Ryan" This is one of the many women who felt abortion was never the answer, and women who did abort felt regret immediately after. "After the abortion I wanted to die. How could I live when I had just ended my child"s life? The negative feelings resulting from the rape were not eliminated by the abortion. Nothing was solved; instead more grief was now doubled.- Helene Evans" http://prolifeaction.org......
Abortion situation

"Without publicly funded contraceptive services, there would be 40% more abortions each year in the US. The rate among teens would increase by 58%. The teen birth rate and births to unmarried women would both increase by about 25%." This means that without publicly funded contraceptive services abortions each year would raise as well as teen birth rate and unmarried women. Also "14,000 women have abortions following rape or incest" which means that abortion doesn't mean that a women has sex then goes into abortion, it sometimes means that a women is forced into sex or the man leaves her, the women shouldn't have the responsibility to herself to take care of the child herself and with abortion she has other options to help her with the problem.
Abortion situation

The pregnancy is the result of carelessness on the mother"s part. If she did not take the proper precautionary measures to effectively prevent an unintended pregnancy she should have to deal with the consequences. 'Despite the use of local anesthesia, a full 97% of women having abortions reported experiencing pain during the procedure, Compared to other pains, researchers have rated the pain from abortion as more painful than a bone fracture, about the same as cancer pain, though not as painful as an amputation." So Abortion is not only hurting the unborn fetus but the mother as well this shows instead of causing harm to one life its two. Also abortion can leave the mother in a higher risk for breast cancer around the age of 45. Women with a family history of breast cancer are more likely to get it. "All 12 women participating in the study who had abortions before 18 and had a family history of breast cancer themselves got cancer before age 45. [102]" http://www.nrlc.org...;
Abortion situation

Abortion should be legal because some women who have not fully ready to have a child and to take care of the child then they should abort the baby. "19% of teens who have had sexual intercourse become pregnant each year. 78% of these pregnancies are unplanned. 6 in 10 teen pregnancies occur among 18-19 year olds. From the Alan Guttmacher Institute Facts in Brief on Teen Sex and Pregnancy." http://web.mit.edu...
Abortion situation

Abortions should not be legal because it is harmful for the fetus if it is beyond 10 weeks. "Bernard N. Nathanson, MD, the late abortion doctor who renounced his earlier work and became a pro-life activist, stated that when an abortion is performed on a 12-week-old fetus, "We see [in an ultrasound image] the child"s mouth open in a silent scream... This is the silent scream of a child threatened imminently with extinction." Scientists say during abortions the fetus flinches and is experiencing some type of pain. According to the Victims of Violence which was "to protect unborn children from assault and murder" anyone trying to intentionally kill an unborn child should be punished. "38 states have passed similar fetal homicide laws" this shows that the states care about giving the unborn child a chance at life. http://abortion.procon.org...;
Abortions are unneeded

I didn't know the fetus and the unborn baby were the same thing - I was taught that the fetus is the egg. Inside that egg is the unborn baby. So is a seed a tree? Is an egg a chicken? Yes! Let's open ourselves to a new array of terminology! Wait! I think I get it! When a woman is pregnant, she goes through terms - when we explain these terms we use word terms - WHAT IF, WORDS ARE CONNECTED TO THE WOMB! Maybe, JUST MAYBE, that is why people say "you're thinking with the wrong head", or "that's a mighty fine tower you got there", or "what happened to your soil, it looks like it got ran over by horse hooves and conquistadors!". Amazing! Maybe that's why we say "hatch an idea", because our word terms are connected to the womb terms! WAIT THERE'S MORE. You have to open yourself up to get pregnant! You have to open yourself up to word terms! I think I am a word wizard right now with a very large rod that can create terms in two ways, oh yeah! Come and get me ladies, I am not only a naughty wizard that can handle terms in more than one way, but I am am against pro-abortionists! Stand by me ladies, we'll take down these people! They care more about your unbirth egg than our own men, women and children fighting in the wars built on the same little egg inside our heads that needs to be destroyed called ego! And I'll celebrate our victory by making eggs in the nude in the morning! Don't worry, I am very fit - I can't say the same for a pro-abortionists argument though! How about we go and egg their houses! Sound good?
I won't get a girlfriend

Being a bigot doesn't mean a person will never get a girlfriend, Though it might hurt one's odds a bit, Specially if they aren't willing to change themselves or their behavior. Altogether, Or just around people. Though I'd suggest altogether myself. My dad didn't really represent himself all that honestly to my mother when they first met, When they dated, And when they married. Some twenty years go by and she divorced him. Currently he's on his third marriage (Youch). But hey, People have fallibilities and flaws, Doesn't mean we 'have to change them. Why would sociopathy prevent you from having a relationship? Sure Wikipedia says things like lack of remorse, Controlling others, Deviant tendencies, Ignoring others needs and what not. But in a broad view of it I can imagine a sociopath with enough self awareness and motivation to have a normal seeming relationship. One simply has to realize that their own happiness matters. And a way to go about keeping your own happiness is to have a give in take relationship with other people. Not trying to control them or ignoring their needs, Because even if you get away with it, There's a small risk each time. It's like crime, Sure it 'could be easy to get away with, But why steal something that you could buy easy enough? Why risk a relationship for some cheap control you don't really need? So you like to lay around, Bah who doesn't? Well some people. Anyway, Find a girl who does, Or find some reason you like more than lying around and change yourself. Going nowhere in life, Right now. Eh, So are some girls. And besides, That's just right now, Doesn't stop you from choosing to go somewhere. Self loathing? Eh, Common enough. Part of life people live with now and then. Generally unhealthy, Eh so are some girls. Eh, Main part is, There's plenty enough girls with the same issues as you. Plenty of guys with the same issues as you who have girlfriends. Even you issues don 'sound that bad as to stop you in dating. Then there's the odds, As a thousand girls to date, You think a thousand will say no? And lastly, You can change if you wanted.
I won't get a girlfriend

I'm a bigot, Am possibly mentally ill (sociopathic, I believe), I don't care about my parents and sometimes hate them when I'm angry, I am going nowhere in life, I'm spoiled, I lie alot, I'm kind of retarded, Have crossings with Incels and SJWs, I have self loathing, I am average and want girls who are out of my league, Who are also traditionally feminine. I am also generally unhealthy.
Older People Behind the Wheel Should be Tetsted on Skills

My argument is that the older people behind the wheel should be monitored frequently enough to avoid the harm they are doing to society without a second thought. You may wonder about older friends and family members' performance on the road. You want to support their continued mobility but on the other hand you worry about their driving abilities. I feel that the elderly people can cause so much havoc and enable so many dangerous situations while driving that it is simply not bearable anymore. I believe that there should be restrictions on driving at a certain age. For example, I, personally feel that at the age of sixty-five years old, people should have to take a course on safe and defensive driving and also have to take a road test as they did years ago when they first started driving. This would insure that all of the people on the road are safe drivers and know all the rules of the road. I find that not everyone on the road does, indeed, know what the rules are and how to use them. There are many dangerous situations that happen every minute around the country due to ignorance or negligence of people. I am not debating that the elderly people should not be able to drive, but I am simply stating that the elderly should have to take a refresher course of driving and how to drive defensively. There is statistic that states that older drivers and younger drivers have the highest accident rates per miles driven. This goes to show that the elderly drivers, although they may have more experience, are paralleled with the younger drivers in a way that it is evident that the state needs to regulate such a thing.There are too many people out there in the world that are at the age where they just do not care anymore, and their regardless driving ends up hurting many people and causing much chaos on the road.