BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Gay Marriage Should Be Illegal In ALL States

Calling something marriage does not make it marriage. Marriage has always been a covenant between a man and a woman which is by its nature ordered toward the procreation and education of children and the unity and wellbeing of the spouses. The promoters of same-sex "marriage" propose something entirely different. They propose the union between two men or two women. This denies the self-evident biological, physiological, and psychological differences between men and women which find their complementarity in marriage. It also denies the specific primary purpose of marriage: the perpetuation of the human race and the raising of children.
Should marijuana be legal

Marijuana is not a lethal drug and is safer than alcohol. It is established scientific fact that marijuana is not toxic to humans; marijuana overdoses are nearly impossible, and marijuana is not nearly as addictive as alcohol or tobacco. It is unfair and unjust to treat marijuana users more harshly under the law than the users of alcohol or tobacco. Marijuana use has positive attributes, such as its medical value and use as a recreational drug with relatively mild side effects. Many people use marijuana because they have made an informed decision that it is good for them, especially Americans suffering from a variety of serious ailments. Marijuana provides relief from pain, nausea, spasticity, and other symptoms for many individuals who have not been treated successfully with conventional medications. Many American adults prefer marijuana to the use of alcohol as a mild and moderate way to relax. Americans use marijuana because they choose to, and one of the reasons for that choice is their personal observation that the drug has a relatively low dependence liability and easy-to-manage side effects. Most marijuana users develop tolerance to many of marijuana's side effects, and those who do not, choose to stop using the drug. Marijuana use is the result of informed consent in which individuals have decided that the benefits of use outweigh the risks, especially since, for most Americans, the greatest risk of using marijuana is the relatively low risk of arrest.
Should schools swimming gala be cancelled

Unfortunately, my opponent has forfeited the second round of the debate, so I will take the liberty of posting my own opening arguments and briefly respond to her point about wasting money.Constructive Arguments C1: Swimming galas are beneficial to atheletic students' self-imageStudents, whether in primary school or secondary school, are in crucial stages of personal growth. Children need to be eager to discover their potentials and build up a positive, healthy self-image. Unfortunately, under our current system, which places emphasis on academic results, the needs of more athletically-oriented children to are often ignored. Swimming galas are a great way for them to get a sense of achievement from their athletic ability. Thus they serve an important purpose for these neglected youths and should not be cancelled.C2: Swimming galas are beneficial to the schoolWith increasing emphasis on schools' performance in extra-curricular acitivities - or other learning experiences as they are now called, participating in inter-school sports competitions is a great way to gain prestige. Internal swimming galas are a great place to familiarise students with swimming competitions and also act as good short-term goals for athletic students to attain, thereby increasing their chances of succeeding at the long-term goal of obtaining awards in inter-school competitions. Hence it is imperative that schools retain the swimming gala.C3: Swimming galas are a great way to teach sportsmanship and unity'The student of virtue has no contentions. If it be said he cannot avoid them, shall this be in archery? But he bows complaisantly to his competitors; thus he ascends the hall, descends, and exacts the forfeit of drinking. In his contention, he is still the Junzi.' (Analects 3.7) Sportsmanship is a value that is deeply rooted in our culture. Through swimming galas, schools can impart this value to students. Students who won should be encouraged to shake their hands with those who lost, and encourage them to continue swimming. Students who lost should be taught not to hold a grudge against the winners. The list is endless.Unity is another value that can be cultivated during swimming galas.. Through the house system, students from each house, even those who do not participate formally in the cheering teams, encourage students from their house to win. Students can learn, through this experience, the importance of unity.Clearly, swimming galas are essential for teaching important values like sportsmanship and unity, and should not be abolished.RebuttalsR1: Swimming galas waste money I agree that swimming galas use a lot of money, but this does not mean the money was used in vain or wasted. Education is an investment. If the returns of the investment exceed the original investment, then it is worth it. I believe I have sufficiently demonstrated the returns of this investment in my contentions.
THBT stem cell research should be expanded.

Although your problems may be with embryonic stem cell research, you did not limit the debate to it and therefore cannot do so now. Even if you had, you would have to provide support for the position that embryonic stem cell research is "unethical." As you have not responded to or attempted to counter my arguments, I conclude that I have won the debate. Well I can't predict the future, but any breakthroughs will probably benefit the wealthy first and then eventually those less fortunate as new procedures become more widespread and affordable. Some possibilities include the ability to grow new tissue for patients, to repair organs, and possibly even to grow new organs. If you're interested, I suggest you do some research. It's really quite an interesting topic. Sources: http://learn.genetics.utah.edu...
THBT stem cell research should be expanded.

I must admit you have a good counterargument, which really impressed me. Now on to the point, (I'll paste on what my opponent said all right) what my opponent said was "Now for my argument, I will provide evidence that stem cell research is not inhumane but is, in fact, humane and therefore should be expanded. In order to fulfill my burden of proof in supporting the statement "stem cell research should be expanded," I must simply provide satisfactory evidence that it is humane and has potential benefits." ( this is not my statement just to be clear.) My argument is that the cons of stem cell research refer to issues with embryonic stem cell research. Those who oppose stem cell research oppose the use of embryonic stem cells. To use these cells for research, the embryo must be destroyed, and some feel that this is an ethical issue. If you can, may you answer this this question, please? It's just curiosity, nothing part of this debate? "If they do have the stem cell research how will it benefit any person if they are low, middle, high class? also would this benefit humanity ten years from now or would it affected?"
Enforce The Dress Code!!!

Sorry about last round... Having a dress code suppresses a students individuality. If they want to dress like a slut, that's their decision. It may not be mature but that's what they are comfortable with. Students learn better and can focus more when they are comfortable. If someone is comfortable in slutty clothes then that's their freedom. Also, it is not a right it is a freedom because you also do not have the right to go tell a person what to wear or place restrictions on what a person wears. It is their freedom. If other people are distracted by it, it is their problem because many other people can withstand this and they can concentrate on their work. However if a few people get distracted by this it is their problem for not having a firm mind and decision. In addition, shorts shorter than mid-thigh are not really a problem because it does not reveal as much. It does reveal a little but just extending the short a little won't make a big difference. Thus, dress codes should not be enforced.
Enforce The Dress Code!!!

I'm just going to point out it is a privilege to dress like a slut, not a right. You can express yourself just fine with a dress code. People may think it limits your ability to tell a little bit about yourself by how you dress, but if you're that scantily dressed and not being able to wear appropriate things then all it shows is that you really need something (a dress code) to show you the appropriate attire for when you step out into the public. If you're dressed like a slut then, I hope you don't mind it when you're being called one. Not all dress codes have color restrictions and I'm not talking about school uniforms. I'm talking about no spaghetti straps and your shorts have to be longer than mid thigh, along with skirts.
Enforce The Dress Code!!!

Dress codes should not exist. This is because it restricts the kids' freedom to express themselves and it doesn't allow them the rights that everyone should have. People should be allowed to wear whatever they like. One example of a dress code restriction is not being allowed to wear all the same color. This is enforced to stop gangs and gang violence. Someone might want to wear the same color because they like that color or they believe it matches or looks good. This does not have any violent motive but they may get in trouble or be accused of gang violence. Also wearing uniforms does not ensure lower rates of violence because people with violent motives will still have them despite uniforms. Sources: (1) http://www.wahijournal.org... (2) http://everydaylife.globalpost.com...
Enforce The Dress Code!!!

Some people say, "Boys need to just grow up, girls showing their skin and wearing what they want is unconditionally acceptable." May I just say, boys do need to grow up. But their most likely not going to. According to NPR (National Public Radio) most people are not fully mature until they're 25. Dress codes are not there to "ruin your life". They're there to make sure what you wear is appropriate. They are in no way shape or form unreasonable. They are there to guide you and show you how to present yourself in public. They're not going to kill you. You can still represent yourself, but in a appropriate way. What I'm trying to say is kids/teens should have a dress code through Primary, Middle and High school.
Mitt Romney vs. John McCain: Romney is a better choice for the Republican nomination.

It's just as much as a misconception about Obama's religion as it is abot the content and beliefs of Romney's. Yes he was the best candidate.He is still the best candidate. He dropped out for the good of the party. I never said that you claiked he wasn't, but you claimed that he wasn't conservative on gun control. I wouldn't exactly call a member of the NRA not conservative on gun control. It's like calling a member of planned parenthood, not liberal on abortion. He's never backed down from these claims. He's admitted that he's changed his view on abortion. However, he's always had a personal objection to it but if you would have quoted him fully. He stated that he didnt think it was right to force your opinion on others, and this statement was made following his family members decision to have an abortion. If you're claiming he's flip flopped; at least he flipped and stayed there. Unlike McCain. He supported the idea, how he wants to fund and carry it out wasn't said. It's not to be left for your assumption. It doesn't punish poorly performing schools, it rewards schools who achieve. He changed his opinion way before 2007. You keep mking this claim. Just because 2007 is when you first heard of him, doesn't mean it's when he changed hi mind. What teachers were they? Union teachers who dont want to be held accountable for their performance in the classroom? I bet dollars to donuts. McCain has flip flopped and its not that he can work with both sides, its that he's too willing to compromise conservative values. You need to understand that Romney was a conservative in the most liberal state in America. To be able to do so well in a liberal state is incredible. He wasn't disliked what-so-ever. He won his state in the primaies easily, McCain had more trouble to win Arizona than Romney did in Massachusetts. Rmney was the best candidate, McCain hasn't earned any respect from conservatives, in fact he was booed at the latest conservative convention. I would also like to know where he was ranked 8th, wherewas McCain ranked? because the base of the party is strongly behind Roney, he's no RINO, hes a true patriot and conservative. It's a loss for the nation to lose the opportunity at a great President. The best conservative and Republican candidates best represent what Reagan represented and that's NOT McCain!
Mitt Romney vs. John McCain: Romney is a better choice for the Republican nomination.

First off, I was not referring to Obama's religion as the church of Christ. I was referring the criticism that he has got for the misconception that he is Muslim, which is totally false. Also, I feel that this debate is worthless, especially since this "Glorious Conservative" has already dropped out. Doesn't look like he is the best choice now right? Also, Romney is a member of the NRA, I never said he wasn't; however, he joined just a short time before announcing his candidacy for President. On the issue of Abortion. Romney claims to be pro life; however in a statement he said when he ran against Edward Kennedy, He stated that, " 'I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time that my mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a US Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years we should sustain and support it.' " While I personally agree with this statement, I don't believe that this is a statement of a "Conservative" candidate. Romney on Education- In March of 2002, Romney supported abolishing the Federal Department of Education. Although, I do believe that our education system has problems, is it really the best decision to simply shut down the dept. of education? However, in May 2007 he flip flopped, once again, to support the No Child Left Behind Act. This act is a dismal failure, in my mind. The idea behind it is a very good idea; however, it is a failing program. It is leaving every child behind waiting for everyone to catch up. It also punishes the schools that are not performing. I am an education major, and I have had an opportunity to talk to many teachers in all areas of studies, and many of these teachers thought the act was a joke. He does have some good ideas on education, however, he has flip flopped a little bit too much for me on some of the education issues. I will be honest with you, I am Democrat, but if it was Romney against Hillary, I would vote for Romney. He does have some good ideas, but so does Obama, McCain, Paul etc. Romney is not your best choice for the Republican nomination. Many people believe that he is a RINO, and he has actually been accused of that before by being named the 8th most RINO in the Republican party. Romney is a smooth talker, but thats it. He is a flip flopper, and I don't see how you can deny that. When he ran against Kennedy he was pro choice, but now he's pro life. Seems like a flip flop to me. Romney does not convey a good image for the Republican party. Just look at the decline in registered Republicans in his own state of Mass. after he left office...it went down by approx 30,000, while Democrats went up by 31,000. His approval was dismal when he left. He has dropped out, so this debate is useless. McCain is the best choice for the Republican party. He has the ability to work with both political parties. At least McCain has stood strong on his stance on many issues, and has not flip flopped.
Mitt Romney vs. John McCain: Romney is a better choice for the Republican nomination.

Well, since my opponent hasn't responded with an argument of his own, I'd like to take this time to address recent events in the Romney campaign. As we all know he's dropped out of the race. He made his announce and the PAC convention, citing the fact that it isn't about him. He ran because he loves America and feels instead of fighting with McCain, it'd be better for America if he let McCain unify the party in order to defeat Hillary or Obama in November. Although I'm a huge Romney supporter, I do not plan to cast a vote for McCain, he is not what the Republican party represents. I will protest him to the convention floor in St. Paul and if need be until inauguration day. DO NOT VOTE MCCAIN!
Mitt Romney vs. John McCain: Romney is a better choice for the Republican nomination.

Former Massachusetts Governor, Mitt Romney, is the best choice for the Republican Presidential nomination. He has the experience as a business man and in the realm of business as a whole to lead America out of it's economic low. He can bring America's economy to it's golden ages. He is also an overall good conservative on all the issues that are important to the hardcore conservative base of the party. He also has the leadership skills, seeing that he has already lead a state in the eecutive branch. John McCain is barely a Republican, let alone a conservative. He doesn't connect with the conservative base, and more times than not compromises the party's position to side with the democrats. His views are very liberal on many issues, and doesn't have the leadership qualities we need in the next four, and possibly eight years. Lastly, he;s hardly the face of the Republican Party we'd like to have in this crucial election.
American football is vastly superior to soccer in every conceivable way

I'm not even going to refute pros arguments. As I stated in my acceptance, we are not debating if football > soccer in a on balance manner, but we are debating the fact that football is greater than soccer in every possible way. If there exists a way where soccer is greater than football in some possible way then the resolution is negatedC1) CardioSoccer requires so much more cardiovascular power than football that there is no comparison. In football you often get breaks in between plays or can go on and off the field depending on who is going to be used for a certain play. You get breaks and water when you switch between defense in and offense. You spend half the amount of time on the field in football than you do in soccer. Soccer is considered one of the most difficult sports that require cardiovascular training. [1]C2) EnduranceSame concept but to maintain the level of cardio that soccer requires you need a great deal of endurance and your body needs to be able to run without stopping for great periods of time. As I stated in football you get breaks, water, and pauses while most times in soccer you are trudging up the field without a break and extremely fast paces and you don't get a breakC3) Global ReachSoccer is famous and enjoyed all over the world. It's played in Brazil, Spain, Europe, and even America. You can think of more countries where it is played easily as well. The same is not true with Football in that sense. Football is primary enjoyed in America while Soccer has a global fan base. [2]C4) Olympic SportNeedless to say soccer is so relevant and viable that it is an Olympic sport where football is not. C5) Less Strain on BodySoccer requires you to be more fit than football but does not require the strength football does. Some may think that is a point for football but it is a point for soccer. Soccer is a better sport to keep your body health, build up some strong cardiovascular workouts, and doing so without the strain that football puts on you. There are also less injures in soccer due to this. Basically soccer allows you to be more healthy and have a stronger body without the downsides of footballConclusion In short Pro has to show that there is no possible way that soccer is not better than football in every conceivable manner. If i manage to show just one way in where soccer is better than football, I win. [1] http://www.fitday.com...[2] http://a2zsports.blogspot.com...
American football is vastly superior to soccer in every conceivable way

I accept by the resolution Resolved - American football is vastly superior to soccer in every conceivable way American Football - a form of team game played in North America with an oval ball on a field marked out as a gridiron. Vastly - of very great area or extent; immense: Superior - of higher quality Soccer - a game played between two teams of 11 players in which a round ball is moved toward a goal usually by kicking Conceivable - Imaginable So let's break this down. (a) The BOP is on Pro (b) Pro must show that football is monumentally greater than soccer in every imaginable way possible If there is a way imaginable that soccer is equal of value to football or has a higher value than football, his BOP is not fulfilled. He must show that football is greater than soccer in every conceivable and imaginable way.
American football is vastly superior to soccer in every conceivable way

American football is to soccer what chess is to checkers. Football has a richness and depth to its strategies that soccer is sorely lacking. It is more exciting, more challenging and more entertaining. It requires more intelligence and skill both to play and watch. The strategies needed in soccer can be mastered by a child in a few minutes. The strategies needed in football can take a lifetime to master and may, in fact, never be mastered by many. The physical and mental skills necessary for football are incredible. Those needed for soccer are ....."can you run"? Soccer: boring to watch AND play Football: mankind's greatest acheivement in the world of sports
Pluto2493's plan for voting reform on debate.org is a good plan.

Well, my opponent does not respond to any of my arguments, so please extend them into this round. He also does not make any arguments, he just says Pluto's plan is great. I already responded as to why it isn't great. Thus, I have built up my offense as well as effectivly defended myself. At this point, I see nothing but a CON vote.
Pluto2493's plan for voting reform on debate.org is a good plan.

As far as I know, Pluto2493's plan is fourfold: 1. For debate.org to make him win every debate. 2. For debate.org to overturn every loss already. 3. For debate.org to make each debate (even the ones he's not in) a win for himself. 4. For debate.org to give exactly 237 losses for every other member. This would be a bad plan. First, there won't even be a shot for someone to win in a debate against him. Thus, no one will debate him, but he will still get wins. He won't have fun or learn anything, nor can anyone else learn from him. Second, it is unfair that everyone recieve 237 losses on their record. Everyone will have a winning percentage of less than 10%, and Win/Loss records will be pointless. People also aren't attracted to the color red, and all win/loss records would be red. Third, it doesn't promote democracy. The idea of democracy on this site, where everyone votes, will be lost. Fourth, it will lead to hostility. People will be mad at Pluto because he would be so much more elite than the others. Also, people would get mad at the people that made debate.org for putting such an unfair plan in place. It would not promote the friendliness that this site has right now. I now eagarly await my opponent's response.