BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Vaccines should be mandatory

First, I would like to talk about why people might not vaccinate. There are many different reasons, some of which are more absurd than others. However, I would like to start off with some reasons why perfectly reasonable people might not vaccinate: 1. They have heard of the "dangers" of vaccination and wish to be cautious. Online, there are thousands of trash blogs talking about how vaccines cause ASD and other "terrible diseases. " Due to the sheer amount of these blogs, a mother trying to research about vaccinations may come across one. Unless the mother has been completely informed on vaccines and their benefits, it is completely possible that she will be swayed by their arguments. 2. They want to have their own decision. Now, don't get me wrong. I completely support having your own opinions. However, studies show that parents who think about vaccines instead of trusting their doctor are 8x more likely to reevaluate the decision to vaccinate (. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...). With all the mistrust in the government as well as the power of anecdotal online blogs, that number shouldn't be a surprise. 3. Religious beliefs. I completely respect religions, even though I am an atheist (hopefully that doesn't cost me votes), and I am completely aware of what the Constitution may say. However, no one will allow an Islamic radical to blow up their family for "religious freedom. " The difference here is the freedom of religion vs. the welfare of the public. There are religions that prohibit vaccinations, and many anti-vaxxers are falsely saying that they are part of a religion to get a free "get out of getting vaccinated" ticket. When weighing religion against vaccinations, I would support vaccinations all the way.
Vaccines should be mandatory

Hello. I am a strong supporter of vaccination. In fact, I support mandatory vaccination in many circumstances. However, I do not support the idea of mandatory vaccination for the entire populous, especially under your proposed strategy. This will only be an exceptance , as you are the one making the positive claim, which must then be supported by evidence, but I will do all I can to clarify the debate topic. Please provide all possible information you have in your response, as this will allow me to form a cohesive argument. Until then, I must draw some conclusions- -You are suggesting mandatory vaccination to be instituted in the United States. I assume this because this is my country, and this is a hotly debated topic here, along with the fact that this site appears to be primarily (but not entirely) American. -You are suggesting mandatory vaccination for all members of the populous, from birth to death. -You are suggesting that the sole exception for this should be in the case of a health detriment making vaccination impossible and/or a severe detriment to the person in question. Please let me know if this is not what you mean, and I will attempt to adjust the argument. In addition to this, I am communicating through a mobile device, and this causes occasional spelling and grammatical errors. I apologize for this in advance. With regards, Thrillogy.
We Should Continue Music Education in Public Schools

Hello! Here is the round setup: Round One: Acceptance and opening argument. Round Two: Rebuttals Round Three: Closing argument. I stand in firm affirmation to the resolution: Resolved: We Should Continue Music Education in Public Schools. 1. Music helps kids get involved in school. Classes like math and English tend to follow a strict curriculum that some students find boring, But music is an enjoyable subject. For some students, Music classes motivate them to get up every day and go to school. Student musicians are more likely to stay in school and to do well in other subjects outside of music. ("10 Reasons Why We Need Music In Schools" 2018) 2. Improved Testing Scores Students in all regions with lower-quality instrumental programs scored higher in English and mathematics than students who had no music at all, And students at schools with excellent music programs had higher English test scores across the country than students in schools with low-quality music programs; this was also true when considering mathematics (Journal for Research in Music Education, June 2007; Dr. Christopher Johnson, Jenny Memmott). 3. Musical Training Helps Develop Language and Reasoning Skills Students who have early musical training will develop the areas of the brain related to language and reasoning. The left side of the brain is better developed with music, And songs can help imprint information on young minds. ("20 Important Benefits of Music In Our Schools" 2018) 4. Music Is A Way To Connect with Others Music education is also important because it will give students a way to connect with other people. Children are naturally very social, And it"s important to encourage them to build relationships by providing them experiences to share with each other. Creating a school band or small ensemble, Or encouraging participation in a chorus will allow children to work together towards a final product (such as an end-of-year performance). This encourages bonding and will provide students with something to reminisce on together in the future. It has been proven time and again that having people of all ages play or listen to music together will help to create bonds. Having an impromptu drumming circle or listening to and enjoying a piece of recorded music can connect people through sound, Singing and even movement or dance. Musical experiences such as these can bring back a fond memory or create new ones! ("Why is Music Education in Schools Important? " 2019)
Unicorns do exist and are hidden from us so we bow down to the the man

My opponent disregarded all of my arguments.All four of the contentions I made in the previous round were ignored by my opponent. Thus, my opponent has no disagreement to the fact that logic and genetics demand that there cannot be unicorns, that the man would expose unicorns rather than hide them, and that his initial arguments carried no weight.My opponent's round 3... didn't make sense.I'm not sure if what my opponent posted was an argument, but regardless, it in no way links to the resolution, neither that unicorns exist, or that the man is hiding them. Thus, the resolution has been fully negated and a Con vote is the only logical ballot.
Unicorns do exist and are hidden from us so we bow down to the the man

Hmmm My anguish from ...... HAHAHA you have fallen for my trap don't you see I am a unicorn you humans have hunted us for years and know we shall hunt your most beloved creture the spider we see how you worship them and know we shall rid the world of them what will you then have to love puppies nobody likes puppies. You see I posed as a very insane person and from there my trail of deciet had begun to see if you humans would not see but still believe you wait till I tell the faireies and leprechauns what you've done till then say goodbye to your precious spiders. I leave you with this http://www.youtube.com...
Unicorns do exist and are hidden from us so we bow down to the the man

How can this even be disproved I mean come on it all makes sense. And I'd like to say that massivedump is a name riddled in the Illuminati as the Illuminati is massive as it rules the world and it's pretty much dump for hiding the unicorns. I'm just scared for my safety it's only time till the people with the laser guns come through the door and take me to a island for knowing too much i'm just sitting and waiting for my doom..... Also unicorns just make sense if there can be a African land animal with a horn and the northern sea dwelling creature the narwhal why can't a beautiful and free creature that is a horse have a horn too I say it's mean to think it wouldn't. Plus I saw it on the big moving picture that cost me my life savings just to see damn the government.
Unicorns do exist and are hidden from us so we bow down to the the man

After getting off work as a pan handler a lovely man offered me a delicious baked good (how nice) than after eating the good it all became apparent unicorns are real and the government doesn't want us to know so we continue working instead of running off to join the unicorns it makes so much sense I don't even know anyone can debate this fact I have stumbled on.
New and improved debate -- "Braveheart" was mostly true

Nope, we've done that already. Simply arguing that some aspects of Braveheart were true or close to true is no the same thing as saying Braveheart was mostly true. We have to have some kind of standard by which to compare the relative historic veracity of films and than see how Braveheart compares.Here's one proposal, although I really think the standard should be Pro's to propose and defend.A. Movies that depict historical people and events with close attention to historic detail. Actors, props, set design, etc are based on careful research of primary sources.ex.United 93The Laramie ProjectZuluB.Movies that depict historical people or events accurately, but with significant artistic or dramatic license.ex.The King's SpeechThe Right StuffLincolnC.Movies that attempt to accurately capture the nature of an historic event through the use of fictional biographies.ex.Saving Private RyanZero Dark 30TitanicD.Movies that employ historic detail, but are clearly not trying to depict events accurately.ex.DickShakespeare in LoveMarie AntionetteF.Movies that pretend to be historic, but knowingly re-write known biographies for popular, personal, or political effect.ex.300BraveheartJFK
New and improved debate -- "Braveheart" was mostly true

Let's start with certain scenes. I'm not here to argue that all of it goes by the movie in reality, but much of it does. For instance the scene where Longshanks discusses his plan to invade Scotland and says that he'll make the kings too greedy to oppose his offer of lands and titles is most definitely true. It was a time of greed and conquest. The opening scene with the murder of the sheriff (http://en.wikipedia.org...) did indeed happen. Now I will say the chances of this happening because his woman was murdered are pretty slim, but that sheriff being assassinated did indeed happen. Now the prima nocte definitely did not happen. It was something thrown in the movie to make the English seem really evil compared to the Scottish.
New and improved debate -- "Braveheart" was mostly true

http://www.debate.org...I am still interested to know the standard by which Pro asserts that Braveheart is "mostly true. " After all, the movie is particularly noted for its lack of accuracy and those inaccuracies have been the subject of a number of critical treatments. Even the movie's screenwriter and director admit that they weren't trying to be historically inaccurate. So Pro's assertion that Braveheart is mostly true flies in the face of conventional critique. In the absence of any standard to refute in the last debate, I offered 7 particularly egregious re-writes of history which Pro either conceded or ignored. We can return to these complaints or we can move on to some rational test by which Pro can argue that the movie's veracity. (I doubt there is a useful test. )Let's begin with my concluding statement in the last debate. Braveheart is a great heroic fantasy, but Braveheart is not history. A student wishing to learn about 13th Century Scotland would learn almost no useful facts from Braveheart. A student watching Braveheart would come away with all kinds of falsehoods about Wallace and class and warfare and Scottish nationalism and English treachery. I would argue that this kind of fantasy, clothed as it is with real names and places and events, but without respect for the truth about those places and people, is worse than just making it up.
New and improved debate -- "Braveheart" was mostly true

I am not trying to make a historical reference here. lol What I'm saying is the movie is mostly correct in that the battles and the plots Longshanks made did indeed happen, which compose of at least 70% of the movie. Obviously Wallace was not the true hero people make him out to be. Also, "Braveheart" was correctly named too. The reference was originally to Robert the Bruce, but he was not completely portrayed as a traitor either. He fought for Scotland's freedom. Maybe "Braveheart" isn't the most accurate film, mind you, but compared to "Birth of a Nation," it's way more accurate. Difference between "Braveheart" and "Birth of a Nation," was that "Braveheart" had real events, even if it was over-dramatized to make Wallace look like a hero, but England really did do most of the things shown in the movie. "Birth of a Nation" was done to slander an entire race. The ending, the execution, did indeed happen. A group of Scottish nobles did handover Wallace to the English. Plus historians can be a%$-wrong too. Historians once said that blacks never built anything or any civilization. Were historians right on that? I think not.
should ride create a plan to encourage greater econmic intergration in our schools

1. They have made charter schools which charter schools give more choices to students and charter schools can improve education. 2. Either way if parents care or don't care they will always find a school for students 3. We dint know because in the past when the court got involved only bad things happen. 4. Courts don't have power over what could happen because the court cannot make the people change how they feel about it and cannot change how they think about it.
should ride create a plan to encourage greater econmic intergration in our schools

In order to improve education in RI, should RIDE create plan to encourage greater economic integration in our schools? CLAIM A)When the government gets involved, bad things happen 1.Court ordered desegregation plans do more harm than good questions about schooling should be left to communities to solve. 2.Courts are powerless to combat prejudice 3.Schools should not be used as battlegrounds to address inequality and discrimination. B)Parents should be allowed to make decisions about where to send their kids 1.Frustrated parents, black and white appealed to federal judges to stop shifting children from school to school like pieces on a game board C)We are already doing things to improve education for individual students in RI 1. According to Jecunas charter schools are the single most cost-efficient wat to help ELL students. 2.The advantage comes from flexibility and narrowly focused programs, which allow charters to tailor every aspect of their education to the ELL students. 3.Focus of efforts to improve elementary schools and secondary schools to magnet schools allowing parents" choice to move their children out of failing and most recently to charter schools.
should ride create a plan to encourage greater econmic intergration in our schools

Q: Should RIDE create a plan to encourage greater economic integration in our schools? Claim#1: Charter schools have not been a good plan to create equality in RI. "Central falls has poor kids attending to their schools and in the charter schools; they have wealthy kids attending to their schools. "The highest percentage of children eligible for free lunch was central falls district schools. "Many kids leave local district schools to go to a charter school and the district schools lose money "the money follows the child" "The increasing share of charter schools is leading to segregation "In 2015, the impact of a large # of charter on the surrounding traditional district Claim#2: students should be mixed economically just like they were racially by the courts in the past. "Desecration does not speak to dropout rates that hover hear 50 % for black& Hispanic high school students "White school boards were generously financing schools for white children while leaving black students in overcrowded decrepit building with hand-me- down books and underpaid teachers. "Local schools officials could make racial integration a priority even if it did not improve educational outcomes because it helped" to prepare students to live in a pluralistic society "Average white students attending a school that is 80% white while 70% of black students attending schools were nearly two thirds of students are black and Hispanic
should ride create a plan to encourage greater econmic intergration in our schools

1. Charter schools have not been a good plan to create equality in RI. -It"s no true because any student that wants to go to a charter school can go they"re free like any other public school 2. Students should be mixed economically just like they were racially by the courts in the past. -Your evidence talks about race it does not talk about why the court should mix students economically and how doing that would help.
Medical Cannabis

I completely disagree with making the decision to make marijuana a legal medication. Yes, it does have many benefits as a medical drug. However this can also be labeled as a mind controlling substance. There are different types of cannabis and not all strains are actually used for medical purposes. I believe marijuana should remain under strict watch among doctors, distributors and health professionals. I must also add the criminal and violence aspect of this as well. U.S citizens aren't out causing voilence over tylenol or aspirins. But there are infact doing so over this cannabis, as it is my literal definition of a "drug". I would not stand firm and call this a "medicine" or "medication".
writer's debate

I am not yet sure my opponent will be active enough to respond to my debate. I noticed the profile was new. I will re-frain from posting a story in this round, as i am un-sure whether my opponent will get back to this debate or not. As of right now i will post the rules and let my opponent start in the next round. If any of you have read my other debate with Vi, then i hope you enjoy this one as much as the last. RULES --------- 1. Each story must exceed over 4,000 characters long. 2. There will be One main character (Sam in this case. Sam can be either a boy or a girl, depending on how my opponent chooses to describe him/her). Each writer is allowed to bring up to 4 extra characters in their story. They may not make any more than four. (crowds, and large groups of unknown people are the exception). Each writer may describe the character in whichever way they like, but there is no changing any character personality traits, or appearance. That of the appearance left out by one writer, may be filled to the other writers liking in any way they so choose. 3. There will be two general settings. In this case, it will be A work office (Pro may choose to describe in detail this work office in any way) and a public library. Each writer may create up to 5 extra settings. The same rules apply with this as the characters. You may add any details not added by the other writer. 4. All character brought up by the opposing writer MUST be used in in each round by each writer. (exceptions apply with character or setting death). 5. This story will be written in first person point of view. This means each writer will use words such as "I". The writer will BE the writer in essence. 6. This story will be fiction. This story should re-frain from being horror related. (meaning, romance, drama, comedy, action, mystery, and other genres are allowed. This is to keep all of these debates from being generally the same. I will let my opponent choose the genre for this particular story. 7. Pro MUST present a problem within their story, and Con MUST present a solution, as well as a problem of their own for the Pro to solve. The Last round will be up to the Con to give a decent ending to, after fixing the formally presented problem. I would like to thank ghost writer for challenging me to this awesome debate. I wish her the best of luck! Thankyou -philosophical
Parents have the right to decide their child's future.

Hello. I am glad I have the chance to debate this opponent, and I look forward to this, and the following rounds. Without further ado, I will Affirm the resolution, as is my role, and attack the theory behind Con's presentation. *Parents have no right* Have no right? By who? Who determines who has what rights? Are you truly certified to bluntly say that it is not right without any evidence? If you are, then you must be special, because most people can't bluntly say something and make it true. *shouldn't come across a caring parents mind* So a caring parent is one that does not interfere with their child's life at all? What makes a caring parent? I'm pretty sure my parents care for me, but they don't just let me do whatever I want. They are there for a reason. My Points 'parent's are necessary for success' If a parent even remotely cares about they will decide mostly what their children do. According to a mass of sources [http://en.wikipedia.org...], single parent's children are extremely likely to have a negative future, as opposed to if there are two parents. The point of that is that if a parent does not do anything in the child's life, it is just like having a single parent or, perhaps, worse. If we expect our children to have any success in this world, we must guide them in the right way. 'children are the future' It is known, that humans will eventually die, and be replaced by the children. Children are the future of our country, of the world and no chances should be taken. Why should parents let the child do whatever make him happy, when that could sacrifice the future. A child is a very delicate thing, and is not to be played with. So a parent should decide his child's future, until they don't become a child anymore. Then, grant them freedom, and allow them to take control of the future.
Parents have the right to decide their child's future.

Since my opponent was unable to respond to my previous arguments I don't really have much else to say. My main point in my last argument was that my opponent had overexaderated my stand on this topic by thinking I supported no parental involvement whatsoever. All I did in round 2 was explain that there needs to be parental involvement, but there is a point to which it can become absurd and unnatural. That is all I can say at this point and I have enjoyed this debate thoroughly.
Parents have the right to decide their child's future.

Alright, first I will refude attacks made on me and then point out a few flaws in my opponents points. *who determines who has rights?* You're right no one can force you or tell you what to do or how to raise your children, but few in a modern society force their children to do what they want them to do. It just goes against the human conscience. You said it yourself that children are delicate, if they are forced to perform a task that they are unwilling to perform, it is not healthy for the child. *So a caring parent is one that does not interfere with their child's life at all?* I never said that the parent(s) should not enterfere at all. In fact, every child needs guidence from someone more experienced in life and you did a good job of pointing this out in one of your points. All I said is that the parents shoudn't/don't have the right to force their child to perform a task or hold their child on a leash, if you will, if the child is unwilling. What I meant when I said that the idea shouldn't come across the parent's mind, is the fact that that behavior is not natural or normal in a human being. Now moving on to my opponents points: The first thing I would like to point out is that wikipedia is not a source because anything can be said there, and I would like you to keep this in mind. 'parents are necessary for success' I agree with this comppletely as I have said before. The child does need parental support, but there is a line that can be crossed. Also, just because there is a single parent doesn't mean that the parent does nothing in their childs life, in fact the bond is a bit stronger in some cases because of the absent parent and the emotional bond is stronger. 'Why should parents let the child do whatever make him happy?' I never said that the parents should have no influence in their child's life and let him/her run rampid through the world. There has to be parental influence in order to guide them the right way.