BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
I support rape

Pro claims to have been raped by a woman before, But as there is no way to verify this, It should be disregarded. The primary reason I am against rape is because sex ought to require consent. It is fine for people to dominate one another sexually -- providing that both parties are consenting. In addition, Pro seems to think that rape toward women is indeed rape, Whereas rape toward men is not rape. This is sexist. I suspect that Pro is actually a woman who is attempting to justify raping men, Which is so wrong because men are people, Too.
I support rape

The shows good sportsmanship and that impresses me. on to my argument i will be brief: i was once raped by a woman and somehow it felt really satisfying it felt like she was dominating me. Now for the case of a man raping a woman or little girl thats wrong on so many levels but i am speaking towards my own personal experience i know many may not understand but thats what has happened it just made me feel as though i was a different man now to my opponent, Con. You can now make your argument i give the floor to you
I support rape

Pro hasn't even explained why he has reason to believe that he was raped, Or how he came to be raped. I would note that if Pro was a woman, I wouldn't be inclined to believe her any more or less. If someone cannot prove that they were raped or at least provide a convincing account of it, They should of course be questioned -- regardless of their sex. There's also the fact that Pro has yet to show why anyone should "support" rape. For example, Even if Pro did find his alleged rape "satisfying", The vast majority of people who are raped more than likely do not find it so. Rape victims usually report feeling traumatized, Not as feeling any sense of gratification from their experience.
Death Penalty

Ok so for one your acceptance sounds like an argument.... My case: 1. The death penalty is a hypocritical punishment saying not to kill then killing. ( even if they are not innocent ). 2. The death penalty may kill innocents that have been convicted. 3.The death penalty is a cruel and unusual punishment. My opponent says even rapists and pedophiles should get the death penalty, which in some states isn't possible. However my opponent is only wishing to destroy something he does not understand, the reason why these people do what they do. Most of these people need punishment and treatment not death. If the government is going to stand by the banner of a sanctity of life then we need to stop being hypocrites and follow that banner all the way.
Schools Should Get Rid Of Summer

I would like to start by saying nice job to con. Your arguments are good and you are a strong debater. I will start by refuting then I will begin my rebuttal. You said some very interesting things in your second round. You said summer is a necessity. That is like saying ice cream is a necessity when it is not it is just something good and something you like. You also argued something very interesting and i thought this was quite funny. You said that I did not support sleep because I do not support summer. You made up your own argument and refuted it. NICE WORK! We need to get rid of summer to boost our academic level. We are 14th in the world and we need to climb to the top. For an unknown reason we are falling so reform must be made. I believe summer is the way to go to achieve this and my opponent has not offered any other ways to do it so I think this debate is in my favor Thank you.
Schools Should Get Rid Of Summer

"I would like to disagree with you when you said that other countries have summer like we do. Yes some do but they are much shorter than ours is." And you don't give examples of those countries. China for example has only 6 weeks of summer but 6 weeks of vacation for Chinese New Years. http://www.streetdirectory.com... "And may I remind you that we were wealthy back then because school was longer and there was more of a focus on it because kids weren't worried about vacation" Then how do you explain the Great Depression? Also, no kids just sit in class and are "worried" about vacation. They may look forward to vacation and don't have an interest towards school. Without summer vacation kids will have no interest in school. They need a break. While we're taking away summer vacation, we might as well take away sleep. People waste 8 hours sleeping and doing nothing when they could be working (I am being sarcastic using my opponents logic). The answer is that summer, like sleep, is a necessity. Going back to the example of sleep, do you think you will work better when your tired? I think you would answer no. So, in conclusion, although kids are in fact, working longer, the quality of their work will be worse. Also, since kids are ditching school now, imagine how many more kids will ditch of there are no breaks. Some kids might not come to school at all! "Back then summer meant work." I recommend using sources. So since there aren't many sources describing summer back then, the only source I could use to refute your statement is by referring you to a book "To kill a mocking bird". Although, the story didn't happen, it was based on a time period during the Great Depression. All the kids Jem, Scout, and Dill played during the summer and even during the school year. "We are not working during summers anymore" Are you aware of summer school? If kids don't do well, they are REQUIRED do go to summer school. Also, Sylvan makes a lot of money in the summer. "we are simply wasting time." Again, I am going to back to my sleeping example. It is not a waste of time it leads to better quality in a student's work just like sleep does. "Time that could be used learning and passing other countries" America is the wealthiest country in the world which is why a lot of people want to live here. While I do agree with you that our education rankings need to get better, taking away summer will decrease education rankings.
Schools Should Get Rid Of Summer

I would like to disagree with you when you said that other countries have summer like we do. Yes some do but they are much shorter than ours is. And may I remind you that we were wealthy back then because school was longer and there was more of a focus on it because kids weren't worried about vacation. Back then summer meant work. We are not working during summers anymore we are simply wasting time. Time that could be used learning and passing other countries with education rankings. We cannot do this if for 3 months kids are forgetting what they learned and not staying academically fit. This fits in with my 3 main points before and I think this debate is in my favor.
Schools Should Get Rid Of Summer

It is difficult to tell based on my opponents debate whether he is against schools' way of educating or summer vacation. "Our kids need a better education which means school." I think you mean more school. If so, have you ever heard the saying quality not quantity. What if the kids have crappy teachers? How would them learning with crappy teachers in the summer lead to better education. "Our public schools compared to other public schools in developed countries are not doing very well." Are you aware that these other countries also have summer vacation? Kids arent doing well simply because they are aren't trying due to a lack of interest, or they just aren't that smart. "and have individual time with a teacher." Why wouldn't kids be able to have individual time with kids during the school year? "If our kids are not educated, America will fail economically." Just because kids have summer vacation doesn't mean they aren't educated. "if they are not educated properly America will not be the best in technology and new advancements" Once again kids are being educated and if they aren't educated properly, it is not because of summer vacation. This quote of yours is an example of how it is difficult to determine what you are arguing about. "Like I said before longer school time will result in a climb in Americas education rankings worldwide." Do you mean the students or the educators? If you mean students, you cannot guarantee better results from kids just because school is being made longer. If a student is doing atrocious in the winter, why would he do better in the summer? "Our economy will not grow without proper education" Okay I am going to point out that the title of this debate "schools should get ride of summer" not schools don't have proper education. "If we cannot keep up with the world in education America will not be as wealthy as we are" I am focusing on the words "as we are". Summer vacation has been around for a long time. If America has been wealthy all these years with summer vacation, why would it change? Conclusion and more arguments: Summer is necessary part in a child's life. One of the main reasons kids do bad in school is lack of interest. Without summer, kids will be less interested and even more bored because they don't have a break and the quality of their work will become lower making a negative effect rather than positive. Once again, all those countries that are better than us have breaks similar to summer vacation and they are simply better because the kids are either just smarter or more interested. Good Luck!
Schools Should Get Rid Of Summer

Our kids need a better education which means school. Public schools test scores are at an all time low. Private schools are doing okay but compared to other countries we are not doing so well. I have 3 main points to back up my opinion. (1) Low test scores (2) Future Economy (3) Keeping up with the world 1. Our public schools compared to other public schools in developed countries are not doing very well. In reading, math, and science we are 14th worldwide. Other countries that are teaching their kids with enthusiasm are passing us economically. If we have longer school time, then we can catch up to South Korea, Finland, China, and Canada. We can be the ones on top like we used to. More time at school would give the students more time to learn different topics, become well rounded, and have individual time with a teacher. 2. If our kids are not educated, America will fail economically. We will not be smart enough to trade with other countries and continue to develop technology and grow. Our kids are the future of America and if they are not educated properly America will not be the best in technology and new advancements. Like I said before longer school time will result in a climb in Americas education rankings worldwide. 3. If we cannot keep up with the world in education America will not be as wealthy as we are. We won't be able to invent new technologies and advancements in our military. These countries that are ahead of us will bypass us in technology and economy. Our economy will not grow without proper education.
Schools Should Get Rid Of Summer

"That is like saying ice cream is a necessity when it is not it is just something good and something you like. " No it is not because summer leads to better work quality, I already explained it to you. Kids cannot focus in school for that long. Even towards the end of the year kids start to joke around. So your comparison makes no sense. "You said that I did not support sleep because I do not support summer. " I did not say that. You said a similar, but worse, argument by saying since I think summer is important therefore I think ice cream is important. My comparison makes sense because sleep you are doing nothing but you need to work better. If you take away sleep and replace it with work, you will work longer, but the quality of the work will be atrocious. Same with summer. Although you are working longer by taking away summer. Kids will not be able to focus because they desire and need a break just like sleep therefore my comparison was legitimate and relevant unlike your ice cream comparison which had no legitimacy or relevance. "You made up your own argument and refuted it. " No you made up your own argument and I am refuting it. "We need to get rid of summer to boost our academic level. " This my third time explaining that when it comes to academics, it is quality of work not quantity of work. I will make the quality worse the quantity more therefore decreasing our academic level. "For an unknown reason we are falling" It is not unknown. It because lack of interest and just generally not being as smart. What is not a a reason for academic level lowering, is summer. "my opponent has not offered any other ways to do it so I think this debate is in my favor" I am not required to provide a solution, just dismantle yours which I have successfully done. And the only solution known is for the students to do the work. It is not the educators faults.
current united states foreign policy in the middle east undermines our national security

We are staying out of wars and pulling out of Iraq. Our policies are changing. There have been no major terrorist strikes on American soil after we started drone strikes.(http://www.examiner.com...)The policy is working and that is why this policy is getting continued. This is helping america and this is what this debate is about."Terrorism has gone down" This is what I am trying to prove and migration just means that we are making their current region uninhabitable. The United States is helping when people need it. Look to Egypt. We helped people when they needed it and we spread democracy where possible. Your point in Syria is not relevant because we are staying out of wars that we cannot "win". There is nothing to gain from going to this war while there was in Egypt. Our policies are working because of a lack of terrorist strikes and only joining wars that we can profit from.
current united states foreign policy in the middle east undermines our national security

1998 is not recent enough to be in this debate In the 1990's the United States was occupying Iraq and they are doing the same thing even in 2012. The old saying If you don't learn from history you are bound to repeat it, right now the United States is going down the same path that could lead to more attacks on the United States soil. Drone Strikes are getting rid of terrorists Reports that from June 2004 through September 2012, that these drone strikes killed 2,562 - 3,325 people in Pakistan, of whom 474 - 881 were civilians, including 176 children, also injured an additional 1,228 - 1,362 individuals.This is just in Pakistan the United States could be killing these terrorists, but the United States kill far more innocent civilians then Terrorists. We are stopping terrorism and giving help where help is needed. Terrorism has gone down, but it has migrated to Africa and Syria. If the United States is giving help where it is needed, why haven't stepped in for Syria really 1998 is not recent enough to be in this debate In the 1990's the United States was occupying Iraq and they are doing the same thing even in 2012. The old saying If you don't learn from histrory you are bound to repeat it, right now the United States is going down the same path that could lead to more attacks on the United States soil. Drone Strikes are getting rid of terrorsts Reports that from June 2004 through September 2012, that these drone strikes killed 2,562 - 3,325 people in Pakistan, of whom 474 - 881 were civilians, including 176 children, also injured an additional 1,228 - 1,362 individuals.This is just in Pakistan the United States could be killing these terroists, but the United States kill far more inocent Civillains then Terrorsts. We are stopping terrorism and giveing help where help is needed. Terrorism has gone down, but it has migrated to place such as Africa and Syria. If the United States is giveing help where it is needed, why haven't stepped in for Syria really if the plan is to help Middle Eastern countries with democracy and freedom why hasn't the United States gone in and help solve the problem. The answerer is that they don't care who they help they just want something and that something is oil. United States has done this before and got burnd this is why bring the troops back and take a new plan to keep America safe. Sources- http://www.cnn.com... http://counterterrorism.newamerica.net... http://www.youtube.com... http://topics.nytimes.com... http://uspolicy.belgium.usembassy.gov...
current united states foreign policy in the middle east undermines our national security

1:1998 is not recent enough to be in this debate. It was two presidents ago and our policies have changed. 2:The problem is that these terrorist organizations are in the middle east. We are using drone strikes to get rid of these terrorists.(http://articles.cnn.com...)Osama bin laden himself even talks about drone strikes getting the job done. We are stopping major terrorism attacks. 3:We are stopping terrorism and giving help where help is needed. "The revolts embody American values and, at least in Tunisia and Egypt, have achieved significant political change through non-violent methods, striking a blow to radical ideologies that depend on violence."(http://www.nydailynews.com...) Our policies have changed since the 1998 incident so that is irrelevant and we are stopping terrorism and helping the mess of the arab spring.
current united states foreign policy in the middle east undermines our national security

The three points we will be discussing. Our three points are fist history has proven it undermines our national security, America is in more danger there, and lastly doing more harm than good. First point is that history has proven that when the United States is occupying and putting sanctions on Middle Eastern Countries like Iraq. On December 16, 1998 Bill Clinton launched a four day bombing campaign against Iraq who was already blockaded and starving. Hundreds of civilians where killed in the campaign. This and already having put sanctions and occupying Iraq for more than eight years lead to over half a million children dying or already dead because of bombings and the lack of medicine and food because of the sanctions the United States put on the country. How this all relates to national security let us jump to the date of September 11, 2001 where four planes where hijacked and flown into the world trade centers and the pentagon. This lead to the deaths of 2, 996 innocent Americans. How does this relate to what happened in the 90"s with Iraq well in October 2001 only a month after the 9/11 attack a video of Osama Bin Ladin Being asked about why he was a part of the 9/11 attacks That he was angered with how many of his people died because of America"s sanctions. That why are they being attacked from the world when America committed a similar crime. Unconstitutional act of war that America showed to the people of Iraq and Middle East. Our second point is that the United States is in more danger there than anywhere else. The biggest threat to Americas national security is not any military the Middle East has it is the rogue groups of terrorist would be America"s most feared opposition. The last time America was attacked by an actually military from a nation was 60 years ago in pearl harbor by the country of japan. terrorism can"t be stopped is can only be prevented by having a strong defense and being in a country instead of being in America to defend our country. Terrorism is not a place, person, or thing it is an action an idea a military tactic. Terrorism can"t couple of bullets. Our last point is that United States is doing more harm than good. In the ten year war of have died, and for the United States army around 5,000 have died. The bandage the U.S government tried to give its people by going and fighting against these terrorist groups in the Middle East has led to another 5,000 deaths that is 2,000 more than 9/11 and 8,000 total and growing. Iraq and Afghanistan 132,000 civilians have died I thought the government was trying to bring peace and democracy to the Middle Eastern people how can they enjoy freedom when they are decaying the streets.
Abortion is murder

I will be taking the stance that abortion is not murder. This debate will be relative to the US only, as Pro did not take the opportunity to restrict the limits of the arguments and situations. The debate to which Pro refers to in his argument can be found here. I will reiterate my arguments for convenience later this round, however. Rebuttals “You said so yourself that murder is defined as ‘killing someone’” Ah, the ever-present fallacy of quoting out of context. Yes, I did say this, yet you took this quote and used it to misrepresent my side of the argument. Murder is defined as “killing someone,” just unlawfully. You fail to mention this, leading me to question your integrity relating to debates. Now, back to the actual quote. Abortion is not unlawful, but I will go into this in more detail later. “Although the baby is connected to her body it is not her brain and it is not her body” And? This doesn’t make it murder or even cause it to be illegal. I will admit that the baby is technically not part of her body, yet this isn’t a point backing up abortion’s status as murder. Abortion may be immoral, but that is for another debate. Argument(s) Abortion is legally not murder. Murder, as I said roughly before, is defined as “the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought.” [1] Abortion is lawful, as shown in the Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade [2]. The decision written by Harry Blackmun, who had previously served as the counsel for Mayo Clinic from 1950 to 1959. His resolution states that the laws in Texas, which prohibited abortion unless the mother’s life was in danger, were unconstitutional [3]. Roe could not afford to travel to another state for a safe, legal, and approved abortion; she was also single and unmarried, so she had no husband to raise the baby with. Roe argued that these laws infringed on her right to privacy as written in multiple amendments to the Constitution. The Supreme Court eventually ruled in favor of Roe, 7 to 2, showing that abortion is legally justified. P1) Abortion is legal. P2) Killing is murder if and only if it is illegal. C1) Abortion is not murder. I have no need to state any more arguments, as I have easily fulfilled my BoP. I look forward to Pro’s response to my likely irrefutable argument. [1] http://www.merriam-webster.com... [2] http://www.pbs.org... [3] http://law2.umkc.edu...
Abortion is murder

You said so yourself that murder is defined as "killing someone" a baby is someone. So technically you are killing someone. A baby has a brain, arms, legs, and a heart just like we do. Which makes them a person. Now if you're a woman who is saying "these are my rights." WRONG! Although the baby is connected to her body it is not her brain and it is not her body ( the baby.) There goes all the babies potential and hope.
gay marriage should be accepted

Marriage is the institution of a church, whether gay marriage is accepted by a church is not of concern to those outside the church. No religious institution, including marriage, should have legal standing. A contract of civil union should be available and legally binding to those who sign it, and there should neither be limits on the gender nor number of parties. In accordance with the establishment clause of the constitution, the appropriate legal solution is to remove the legal standing of marriage, and replace it's function with a secular contract.
Schools in the US should ban junk food.

"There may be an impact made by banning junk food in schools but it would be so ridiculously minuscule there would be no point in doing so.". So you admit that there will at least be a "miniscule" change ? Then how is it pointless ? What is there to gain by keeping junk food in schools ? If we go on your theory that EVERY SINGLE STUDENT will go and buy food rom the convenince store, then at least we would be boosting the economy. So let us summarise : My theory on the result of banning junk food - Decrease in child obesity Your theory : Miniscule decrease in obesity and greater cashflow in the economy Not ban junk food: Obesity rate unchanged. Economy unchanged. Thanks for the debate, you have shown great potential and perhaps will one day be able to hold your own against the elite debaters of world.