BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Iraq war/Afghanistan War/War on Terror

It is very easy to be generous with other people's money. I would gladly give to a charity to build schools in Iraq. But I do not believe in forcing other people to do it. How would you like it if your taxes were 100% in order to fund every charity in the world? If terrorists destroyed schools, who built them in the first place? Saddam Hussein? Why should it be the U.S. taxpayer's responsibility to rebuild schools that terrorists destroyed in Iraq? What about schools in Canada or Africa or even in the U.S.? There is not enough money to rebuild them all. We should first be responsible for our own children and communities, and then look to charities to help others who are in need. This is the traditional conservative viewpoint. You are reflecting a very big-government liberal viewpoint. The facts remain that the odds of being killed by the tyrant Hussein were much lower than the odds of being killed by an Iraqi death squad or errant U.S. bomb in post-Saddam Iraq. These are facts, not opinions. It is not our job to educate the rest of the world. Why Iraq? Why not Saudi Arabia? Why not China? Why not all of Africa? Why not the penguins in Antartica? We can't do it all. We shouldn't want to do it all. Our federal government was created by the states to provide a common defense -- not to build Iraqi schools or educate foreigners on democracy. When exactly did the U.S. become a democracy anyway? It was founded as a constitutional republic with a limited government. Aren't you supposed to be a conservative? You never answered these points, or at least, you did not do so to my satisfaction: 1. The War in Iraq was undeclared, and thus, unconstitutional. The president, Congress, and military officers take an oath to defend the Constitution. How can the war be "right" when it forced them to violate this oath? If they are not bound by that oath then they are dictators, not republicans. 2. The War in Iraq cannot be funded except by printing money and taking loans from Saudi Arabia -- from whence the terrorists who caused 9/11 actually came. Afghanistan was not even broached. That's a good point, because the War in Iraq has entirely distracted us from Afghanistan, where there was a much more legitimate case for war. Meanwhile, Pakistan's brutal military dictator is our friend, and bin Laden is safe in Pakistan. And yet we give Pakistan more money. Awfully generous of us! Just about as generous as it was to support Saddam Hussein in his war against Iran, or to support the Shah of Iran who was even more brutal than Hussein. History shows that interventionism does not work. Our government's role is to provide the common defense, not to wage wars for the interest-income of China, Saudi Arabia, and the big banks. The War in Iraq is not right because it was not declared, there were no WMDs, there is no logical basis for "bringing democracy" to Iraq and not every other country in the world, it can only be funded by inflating the money supply, and it goes against every imaginable principle of limited government and republicanism on which this country was founded. I rest my case.
Iraq war/Afghanistan War/War on Terror

You say that because we destroyed schools in the first place schools shouldn't be rebuilt? That just doesn't seem right. Are you really that selfish where you don't want to help the children in Iraq that are in need? Besides, we did not destroy these schools. The terrorists set themselves in mosques, schools, veteranarian clinics, etcc.... so when a battle does break out it makes us look like the bad guys. So the terrorists destroy them by setting themselves in there in the first place. Also the terrorists will at times destroy a school or hospital if U.S troops are in the area so they can try to get the iraqi population to think that we did it. You say, "People were safe as long as they "stayed in line." I once talked to a former Iraqi soccer star that had battery cables attached to his earlobes and shocked until he was unconscious because their team lost a game. After this his soles on his feet were beaten so badly that his soccer career would be over for the rest of his life. Nobody was safe under Sadaam Husseins rule. You say, "It is not our job to give the Iraqis an education in political science." Where else are they going to learn how to use a democracy. It is best that they learn by us because we are the best examples.
Iraq war/Afghanistan War/War on Terror

I believe it was right to go into iraq and it is right to stay the course. I also believe that things are improving in Iraq due to the troop surge under the charge of General Patreus. I believe that it is right to destroy the terrorist cells on their own turf because if not they would have more training camps and a wider support base. I know that we are helping innocent Iraqis who want to make a better life for their families. I believe that the majority of Iraqis want a free society where they are free to walk the streets without being in fear for their lives. I do believe that if Iraq keeps going as well as it is going that the main mission should be shifted to Afghanistan to continue the hunt for Bin Laden and secure the region of the ousted reminents of taliban fighters and al queda and also to provide humanitarian assistance to the population who strongly need it.
Libertarians are neither liberal nor conservative.

My opponent does have the burden of proof here so I'm confused about this tactic. My opponent is the one making the assertion. Libertarianism can be defined as either liberal or conservative, but for the sake of this debate I'll focus on the liberal aspect. Libertarianism's roots are in what's known as classical liberalism which lead to neoclassical liberalism which is pretty much identical with modern day libertarianism (Mayne pg.124) Classical liberalism is a branch of liberalism. (Hamowy, p. xxix) This classic liberalism (now renamed libertarianism) believed in personal freedom, individual rights and private property rights. http://www.google.com... This form of liberalism is called classical liberalism to distinguish it's self from the social liberalism which was popping up in the early part of the 20th century. (Richardson, p. 52) Just because the Libertarian party doesn't look like the Democratic party of the United states which identifies it's self as liberal, doesn't mean it isn't liberal. The term liberal is an umbrella term meant to cover an extremely broad range of ideologies. "Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally they support ideas such as free and fair elections, civil rights, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free trade, and private property." http://en.wikipedia.org... I pulled that definition of liberal off Wikipedia but it uses 4 different citations to support the statement. Guess what libertarians support all those things and fit the definition of liberal, precisely. http://www.lp.org... I hope I satisfied my opponent that Libertarians are in fact liberal. Not only because their name and party come from and closely resemble classic and neoclassic liberalism but because it actually meets the definition of liberal.
Is Muhammad Prophesied in the Bible

It is very obvious, he is not prophesied in the Bible. He is not in Deut 18:18 or anything like that Instead the Bible would call him an Anti-Christ because he denies the Father and the Son (1 John 2:22-23). Muslims tell us Christians to read their Qu'ran in context but then when they read the Bible they completely quote it out of context and twist scripture to make it say what they want to say. So most Muslims (Not all) I come across are being hypocritical. All respect to my Muslim friends. Also many Muslims pick the parts that fit in to their agenda. Please if you are going to debate me don't quote something out of context. Should be a great debate. But Muhammad is definitely not prophesied in the Bible.
Is Muhammad Prophesied in the Bible

Muhammed the False Prophet- THE SATANIC VERSES -"In Islamic eschatology, Muhammed wrote "the satanic verses", a group of Quranic verses that allow intercessory prayers to be made to three Pagan Meccan goddesses: Allat, Uzza, and Manat. The part of the story that deals with the "satanic verses" was based on accounts from the historians al-Waqidi and al-Tabari." "At its centre is the episode of the so-called satanic verses, in which the prophet first proclaims a revelation in favour of the old polytheistic deities, but later renounces this as an error induced by the Devil. There are also two opponents of the "Messenger": a demonic heathen priestess, Hind bint Utbah, and an irreverent skeptic and satirical poet, Baal." https://en.m.wikipedia.org... * DEMON POSESSION AS A CHILD Here is the story told by Muhammad's wet-nurse, related in Guillaume's translation of Ibn Ishaq, page 72: His (Muhammad's friend's) father said to me, "I am afraid that this child has had a stroke, so take him back to his family before the result appears. ..... She (Muhammad's mother) asked me what happened and gave me no peace until I told her. When she asked if I feared a demon had possessed him, I replied that I did." http://www.answering-islam.org... * Muhammed claimed he had a "visitor" in the cave in Medina. This visitor was angel-like. It kept "pressing him" and striking fear into him, tormenting him in anguish. He claimed to his wife that it was a demon and became suicidal, deciding to leap from a high cliff to his death. The angelic being stopped him and gave him the revelation in the Quran according to Muhammed himself. Referencing from Muhammed's Hadith of Bukhari, 9.111: Narrated 'Aisha: * Muhammed beheaded 800+ Jews in one single battle. https://en.m.wikipedia.org... * Muhammed took a 6 year old bride(Aisha), and molested her at 6 years old through masterbstion. He then actually penetrated her and had sex with her at age 9, according to himself... https://wikiislam.net...'an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Aisha
Is Muhammad Prophesied in the Bible

I think, it was prophecies of all the [other] religions to come that denies that Jesus Christ is God or Son of God. The Bible says that there will be Antichrists. Yeah, we agree on that Muhammad is [a] Antichrist. (Sorry are you a Muslim?) There are a few religions that deny that Jesus is the son of God. Like, Judaism, Jehovah's Witness, Christadelphian, and of course Islam. I didn't title the conversation properly. It was supposed to be if Muhammad was prophesied as a true prophet.
Is Muhammad Prophesied in the Bible

The Bible says in 1 John 2:18 that there is many Anti-Christ's in the world and many to come. A Anti-Christ is a person/religion that denies the father and the son. Now as we see Muhammad is a false prophet because of the Satanic Verses (Muslims use Deuteronomy 18:8 but later on it exposes Muhammad as a false prophet V. 20) but back to the argument. The Bible says to beware of Anti-Christ(s). It is so simple. 1 John 2:22 ..... He is Antichrist, that denies the Father and the Son. 23 Whosoever denies the Son, the same hath not the Father..... Quran Surah 19:88 They say: "(Allah) Most Gracious has begotten a son!" 89 Indeed ye have put forth a thing most monstrous! The only begotten son was prophesied in the Old testament John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. but 5 centuries after the word of God was complete, he went far beyond simple denial of the Son of God, Muhammad even engaged in unvarnished blasphemy against Him: Quran Surah 19:88 They say: "(Allah) Most Gracious has begotten a son!" 89 Indeed ye have put forth a thing most monstrous! The only begotten Son of God was prophesied in the Old Testament: Psalms 2:7 I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. It was confirmed in the New Testament as a fulfilled prophecy, of the Messiah, the only begotten Son of God: Acts 13:33 God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. The word of God which gave us the word Antichrist, gives us a what an Antichrist is: 1 John 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is Antichrist, that denies the Father and the Son. 23 Whosoever denies the Son, the same hath not the Father: [(but) he that acknowledges the Son hath the Father also]. Now back to the Bible, the reason Muhammad is not prophesied in the Bible is because he is simply not there. But Muslims will use the same passages that have been proved to not be talking about Muhammad eg, Deut 18:18, Isa 29:11, Song of Solomon 5:16, and many more. Please keep the debate on if Muhammad was prophesied. After a simple read of the context you realize there in NOWHERE in the Bible where there is a prophecy of Muhammad. Have a Good day, God Bless. Some links to look at: http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com... More sources: The Holy Bible The Qu'ran
Benevolent God

Where it has failed us a thousand times it has succeeded at least once in that you are here today to debate on anything. That isn't gods doing. You have been at the mercy of your fellow man since you were born on this earth. Your existence is tolerated by them and they keep you in light of the free will they possess. For every death you label a failure of this system, there are multitudes of successes walking around as we speak. Those very failures you speak of were brought down by that same subjective human instinct, not any god. And they did it through sin even! You make it sound as though the failures of man were brought about by gods rules, but we succeeded in eliminating those threats by going against his rules. That we were justified by him to break the rules to end those uprisings. He goes against his own definition of evils many times in the old testament. Many contradictions, but none of them are evil because he is the one doing them? Eternal life was a great thing to use to convince people of this rhetoric. But, I implore you to consider that man had the capacity for giving their lives in the name of a cause greater than themselves. If eternal life is all he has to offer and it doesn't align with everyones idea of the highest honor, then eternal life sounds a lot more like a blanket scare tactic aimed at the majority of men. His lust for your love is unfathomable. It boarders on what measures a demon would go to to own your soul. Lies, threats, and human rationale to convince you to worship and live by his law. What of free will? how can you say he is performing good by gifting you with choice and then submitting you to a world where you are doomed to failure? what of all the unsaved that came before Jesus' time? Every life spent on this earth outside his influence was an evil he committed. He set them up for failure with no hope of redemption. I believe we revere an even higher level of honor and sacrifice than the bible could ever envision. 1 life for all sins and the opportunity for eternal life? Eternal life is a fate worse than death. He covets when he loves. He has broken the barriers of his gift to us to just to manipulate us further. He is a contradiction. He absolutely must contain both good and evil to be a '1 true god', an alpha and omega with a consciousness. If the world is void of 'gods love' the same characteristics of man that prevailed before will still prevail. It doesn't go with him. It is of us. The only thing that will go with him is the idea that he deserves our respect and not ourselves.
Benevolent God

In terms of how we see good and evil, we don't at all see eye to eye with our creator about the use of a great many things. We still see them as good. We value life more than him. We actually make up a place where we think he's taking those people and justify his actions through the idea that we can never truly know his mind. We don't know what he percieves our use is or how our nature dictates we should be used. If we are seen as tools of our creator to be used at his will and not ours ... I would argue that traditionally we have shown this idea to be evil. We call such acts slavery and barbarism to treat life as playthings. He could be viewed as the creator of all things just as equally the destroyer of all things (as The Bible threatens). Damning anyone to a hell based on a want for a relationship with your created and them not wanting one with you seems evil by your definition. He has been know to distort or pervert many things. In fact, I'd go so far as to say any intervention we've read about in the bible is a perversion of nature and the nature of things. Basically what it comes down to is that he perverts all things we find good when he works through them irregularly and selectively (without a sense of fairness), while at the same time we are everything that is evil to him in the way we operate. How can we even say that our definition of good versus his aligns? He is a strange force, possibly not even worth trying to understand, because in it we drive ourselves to actually try an reason with and create an aura around this thing that might have no intention at all. It's almost your definition of evil to even try to reviere such a force since there is no concievable way we can use it for its intended nature. And generating a personality for it and giving it human like qualities is a perversion of what it really is. Perhaps he is merely a reasonable reflection of the mind of evil men? Ones that cant percieve a things use, but they can concieve it, so they try?
Benevolent God

My counterpart seems to define the God we're talking about as essentially the same as the one described in the Bible. God as creator, possessing perfect knowledge, all powerful within the limits of His own nature and logic of course (i.e.. God can't create married bachelors or squared circles or a rock so big that He can't lift it.) He is eternal. I suspect that the question is: How would we know that God is good if we didn't have a book like the Bible to tell us as much or what if we didn't accept the Bibles testimony. Let's define our terms first. Good in my opinion means: to use things or treat people in accordance with how their nature dictates they should be used or treated. Evil is to not treat things and people in accordance with their nature. To do evil is simply to distort or pervert a thing or act in a distorted or perverted way against a person. God cannot be said to meaningfully act in an evil way. He is the creator of all things. He is the creator of the nature of those things and so the nature of those things conforms with his will. In order for God to act against the nature of something he would have to act against his own will. God created us. He gave us sight, hearing, taste, sensation, sex, happiness, laughter, tears, sleep, dreams, snow, rain, etc. He created all these rich and wonderful things for us to enjoy and a body capable of enjoying them in. Evil people are usually self interested. This great person God seems anything but. He certainly wants to make himself known but perhaps that is because He desires a relationship with his created beings. It seems clear He has gone to a great deal of trouble to care for us. This whole planet of ours is like a great green house and protected habitat. The idea of right and wrong is universal. We don't always agree on what exactly is right or wrong; but we all agree that somethings are right and some are wrong and you should do those things which are right. Things don't come from nothing and out of no where. I think it's reasonable to see this as a reflection of the mind of our creator. I think cumulatively this adds up to the reasonable conclusion that our Creator is good.
Yo Mama Contest

I already used the cigarette joke You already used the "let there be light joke" Remember no jokes in the last round since I didn't get any in the first. Just forfit. Voters please give conduct point to Pro, since Con reused two jokes. Yo mama so poor she can't afford a free clinic But yo mama so nasty she needs a free clinic every day Yo mama so fat they don't have underwear in her size Yo mama so poor, I saw her kicking a can down the street, and when I asked her what she was doing, she said, "moving". Yo mama so ugly, she broke the cameras in the bank. Yo mama so big, they saw her wearing a yellow raincoat and yelled "taxi!" Yo mama so big, when she wears a red sweater she looks like the kool-aid man Yo mama so big, she has her own orbit. Yo mama so lonely, she uses dildoes But yo mama so poor, she uses hot dogs instead.
Yo Mama Contest

Yo mama is so nasty that the fishery pays her to stay away. Yo mama is so nasty that she only changes her drawers once every 10000 miles. Yo mama is so nasty that a skunk smelled her @$$ and passed out. Yo mama is so poor, when a cigarette is stepped on, she said,"Hey, who turned off the heater?" Yo mama is so fat, the army stole her pants for a parachute. Yo mama so fat, before god said"let there be light," he told her to move out the way. Yo mama is so ugly, when she walked into a bank, they turned off the cameras. Yo mama's so big, she uses a jungle gym for a walker. Yo mama's so big, she uses bowling balls for earrings. Yo mama's so big, she uses the interstate for a Slip `n Slide.
Yo Mama Contest

Before the jokes, I'm asking con not to post any jokes in the last rounds, since pro didn't post any in the first. Yo mama so dark the government made a law to put blinkers on her butt at night. Yo mama so fat she needs mud-flaps on her butt. Yo mama so fat they ride her at SeaWorld. Yo mama so fat that when she lay in the Atlantic Spain claimed a new island. Yo mama so old her birth certificate is written in sumerian text. Yo mama so old she has baby pictures of Adam and Eve. Yo mama so poor that when I walked into her front door, I was already in the backyard. Yo mama so poor that when I stepped on a lit cigarette she said "who turned of the heater?" Yo mama so small she hula-hoops with a cherrio. Yo mamas tits sag so much that slvador dali, the artist with the saggy clocks, stood in awe.
Yo Mama Contest

Yo mama is so dark that she has to wear white gloves when she eats Tootsie Rolls to keep from eating her fingers. Yo mama is so dark that when she goes swimming it looks like an oil spill. Yo mama is so dark that her butt looks like two tires. Yo mama is so old that her birth certificate is written in Roman numerals. Yo mama is so old that she has Adam & Eve's autographs. Yo mama is so old that when God said "Let there be light" she was there to flick the switch. Yo mama is so stupid, that she thought Moby Dick was a sexually transmitted disease. Yo mama is so stupid that she makes Beavis and Butt-Head look like Nobel Prize winners. Yo mama is so poor that after I pissed in your yard, she thanked me for watering the lawn. Yo mama so small she had to dunk the toilet.
Yo Mama Contest

Yo mama so stupid she used lipstick to make-up her mind. Yo mama so ugly her birth certificate was an apology letter from the condom company. Yo mama so dirty she uses rotting corpses to get clean! Yo mama so ghetto she breast-feeds kool-aid. Yo mama's teeth so yellow she drank water and it turned into lemonade. Yo mama so stupid she climbed over a glass wall to see what was on the other side. Yo mama so ugly she stuck her face out o the window and got arrested for showing her butt. Yo mama fat when she farted the sun was made - a big hot ball of gas. Yo mama so fat the sun orbits her. Yo mama like a microwave - a four year old can turn her on.
Yo Mama Contest

Yo mama so dirty she has to creep up on bathwater. Yo mama so dirty she makes mud look clean. Yo mama so dirty that she was banned from a sewage facility because of sanitation worries! Yo mama's so black every time she gets in a car the check oil light comes on. Yo mama's so black if she sat in a jacuzy the water turned into coffee. Yo mama so fat when she sits around the house, she SITS AROUND THE HOUSE! Yo mama so fat the only way she burns calories is when her food catches on fire Yo mama so fat she entered the Hunger Games and won all 75 of them. Yo mama so hairy that when she walked across the farm the farmer said "OH NO I GOT A WILD GOAT"