BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Religion must logically be rejected

I would first like to address the fact that my opponent stated that religion is "faith-based". I would first like to define faith. Faith is a "strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof." My opponent says that in order for something to be logical, it must be able to be shown correct, or in other words proof. However proof does not lie in logic, and you can't PROVE faith by it's own definition, therefore this already should win the debate right here. Just in case any judge disagrees I will provide several logical reasons to believe in a god.C1: The Kalam Cosmological Argument1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause2. The universe began to exist3. Therefore, the universe has a causeThe first premise justifies how something can not come from nothing. If something can come into existence without a cause, then why don't we have several examples of this happening? To deny the first premise is to thus deny causal regularity.Furthermore, the second premise is solidified on either side of this debate. If you are to argue that the universe did not began to exist, this is an extreme fallacy and will lose the debate. Lastly, since I just clarified how both premises are logically accepted statements, therefore the universe has a cause.C2: It is more logical that something will come from something, rather than something will come from nothing. This contention is pretty self explanatory, however I will justify how unlikely our existence is to prove it is more logical that something coming from nothing. As we know, we have been unable to prove life in our solar system. I do not deny the fact that life may exist in other galaxies, but we have to look at Earth and the solar system as a perfect example. How many times has life been generated in the billions of years scientists claim the Earth has been around? Once, so far that we can prove. Therefore if you were to calculate the odds of life it would be somewhere larger than 1 in 1^300. We also must consider the fact that the Earth has been around for billions of years. The possibility of one major asteroid crash or a black hole opening is unlikely, but not unlikely enough to the extent that it won't occur in billions of billions of years. Even if an asteroid were to hit Mars, this would cause catastrophical results on Earth. Therefore our existence is EXTREMELY unlikely and thus it is only more logical to believe that a creator could have provided us with such a fine tuned life.Conclusion: My opponent already contradicts himself to the extent that I should already have won the debate. I also provided logical reasons for a god to exist. HOWEVER, the resolution does not state that a god MUST exist, rather that it MUST logically be rejected. An agnostic standpoint of this debate can still negate the resolution. Due to the logical contentions I have proposed and my opponent's complete misunderstanding of faith, I strongly urge a con vote.http://en.wikipedia.org...http://oxforddictionaries.com...
Religion must logically be rejected

Thank you for defining some words. I'll define some more. Justifiable - Able to be shown to be right. So for something to be logical, it must be "able to be shown to be right by reason." That means for any religion to be logical, the religion must be "able to be shown to be right by reason." I will leave it to my opponent to show that "a superhuman controlling power" or "a personal god or gods" is right. Right in this sense meaning valid or correct, not morally right.
mass execution of spiders

Aside from the fact you are obviously oblivious to how many spiders there are (you are almost never more than 3 feet away from one, you just don't usually know it) and the absurdity of your 'solution' to destroy them, your fantasy land idea that 'robots' could effectively replace spiders role in the ecosystem is beyond ridiculous. No man made contraption can replace any species role. Not to mention the sheer number of these 'robots' that would be required, maintenance, etc. being completely cost prohibitive on even a small scale. Quite frankly, spiders perform a much more important role on earth than even humans do (humans are mostly detrimental to earth) so if you wanted a more logical solution, it would be to eradicate humans and let nature do what it does to create a perfectly functioning ecosystem. Of course I'm not advocating wiping humans off the earth, I'm only pointing out that your selfish goal and unrealistic solutions would accomplish nothing positive and a whole lot negative. BTW, I've never seen a 'robot' that can trap and eat billions of insects.
mass execution of spiders

I will agree that it appears I'm not at your 'intellectual level' and haven't been since about the third grade. -'Hating' spiders is not a legitimate reason to exterminate a creature that is CRITICALLY important to our ecosystem. - It is NOT the role of Government to "fulfill the peoples demands". I want a Lamborghini, when should I expect the Obama administration to deliver one to me? The role of Government to secure your safety wherever possible. Eradicating spiders, no matter how much you dislike them, would be BAD for you and all of society, hence Government would be performing a detrimental act by attempting kill them. -Sound waves in the air? Spiders don't "hear", they don't have ears. They feel vibrations on the ground. "Sound waves in the air" would have exactly zero effect on spiders. -Create robots to kill insects? Come on. You're just being silly.
mass execution of spiders

For a ten word opening argument you still left a lot of holes. - "They are hated". by whom? Spiders perform an incredibly necessary function in our ecosystem. Indeed, they keep disease and insect population in check. Without spiders, the number of other insects (that they eat) and the microorganisms that cause disease would run rampant. Spiders play a very necessary role in YOUR health. -"just have the government kill them all". Why would it be the Governments 'job' to kill all the spiders, even if it were desirable to do so? And how exactly do you propose they go about this monumentally impossible task? Considering there can be hundreds of thousands of spiders in a single acre, how exactly would you eradicate them? How would the Government even afford such a massive undertaking that would surely fail, anyhow?
Using human embryos for stem cell research

First off, a fetus isn't a human being. It is a group of cells and tissue thats just part of the mother. It is also a parasite, since it obtains its nutrients from the host. Since the mother is getting an abortion to help the research it can also be considered donating. Since the fetus is tissue from the mother and its being given to help research its donating. Stem cell research isnt learning about cells. These cells are vital to humans. Over time they die and researching in them will help find transplant methods, increase life spans, and have so many other benifits. Its going to open doors to new parts of the medical field, creating jobs and more scientific discoveries. Thanks for excepting this debat. Make your next arguments as long or short as you want. I usually make round one short.
Life means God is good

With "good" being defined as "having a favorable character or tendency", and "God" being recognized as the creator of all things, including those things thought to be gods but lesser than God who created them, life means God is good because it shows God's character and tendency is favorable. Con, whoever that may be, must argue to the contrary. . Con must argue that life means God is soimething other than good.. or God is uncaring, or God is bad. The debate is about the meaning of life, not the existence of God. For this debate, the existence of God is recognized by both Pro and Con. There is no burden of proof for either Pro or Con, due to the fact that one's faith determines what he will accept as proof of things not seen.
Life means God is good

The plants in my yard and the cactus on my table gives me the air I breathe. It takes in the carbon that I can't breathe, turns that in to O2 and that allows me to breathe. God has little to do with it. God has little to do with the status of our world. Well, except for all the death because we are pretty sure the number one motive for killing and war is religion. God likes war. Obviously, because he told 3 different religions to kill the ones who didn't agree with their religion. He must have been entertained by the crusades. He is evil, not good. Compared to the devil, God is a true monster. I sure hope if there is a heaven, God isn't running it. I'd rather be in hell if the biblical God is the God running heaven. Now, if George Carlin was running heaven, that would be a fun place to go! God is not good, and even if he was, my opponent failed to meet the burden of proof. You have to prove your claim. May George Carlin bless you all. Remember, worship the Sun, and pray to Joe Pesci
Life means God is good

Con, you are going off on a lot of tangents trying to prove to yourself that you do not have to submit to God's rule and you really can't be sure what is true. Life means God is good. He gives air to breathe to all. If God is not good enough for you, it is not God's fault.......it's because you want to replace God with a god who will allow you to do whatever you feel like to please yourself. Only the Creator has that right. Your refusal to thank Him for creating you does not mean He is not good. He will fix everything when He is ready, but if He fixed it all now, you and all the rebells like you would have to be shut up in hell now and forever, becasue when He removes all the bad things that abuse of free will brought in to His creation, that is what is going to happen. People and devils like you who insist God is not good will forever be put away where the fire burns like their passion of self-exultaion against God's rule over them. God is good because He gives free will, your life in free will shows that God is good. He will not allow your hard words agaisnt Him to remain floating around in His creation, He will have it put away from Him and His heaven forever. He Himself died in your place to pay the price you owe Him for the abuse of the free will in time He gave you. He loves you and paid with His own blood so you would not have to pay with your own eternal death in the Lake of Fire........but if you do not recieve Him as your Saviour, who is the gift of God which is eternal life to all who call upon the name of the LORD, you have nobody to stand between you and God to say your price has been paid and you can be forgiven. No religion of the world can get you anything other than death. God is a person who speaks, and He is knocking on your door now wanting to come in to you and be your life, Jesus Himself is knocking on your door. He is reality, He is God, He is the Truth.
Life means God is good

Usually, when a prophet was written down, people would work towards those prophecies to be fulfilled. People noticed that part about Israel and worked for it. It's not a prophecy if it can be done by human who have access to the prophecy claim. Also, the Mayan's supposedly predicted the future accurately, too. How are they not the right ones to follow? Proof is tangible. It has to be measurable in some form, and it has to continuously be proven right for us to accept it as true. What exactly makes the stories true? Or for that matter, different? You realize how many Greek and Roman and other gods of the past have had similar stories to Jesus's story? Do you also realize that the Christians stole Christmas and Easter from the Pagans? The Pagans celebrated the winter solstice. The Christians stole it, fancied it up, and made it theirs. Historical, philosophical and even biblical evidence will point to Jesus being born in a time that is not during or around the time of Christmas. Also, Easter was taken as well from the Pagans. They celebrated spring, as the sign of new life. That's why rabbits, which come out in spring for the first time of a year, agree associated with Easter. Another thing, there is much lack of proof of many biblical claims. A big problem is that the Egyptians recorded just about everything that went on. They never recorded anything about owning slaves, and never had a single Hieroglyphic character relating to a large global flood. Let's address, first of all, what we mean by life in this debate. This should of been established first. Are we talking about our lives individually or collectively? Because let's take a stroll in to Africa, where children are born, starve, and die. God isn't too good to those people, is he? God wasn't too good to those people in the World Trade Center, was he? God wasn't so nice to the life of the Jews a few decades ago, was he? If God allows this too happen, then logically speaking, life is not affected by any God.
Life means God is good

Yes Con, what is righ and wrong is objective. You said that well. In your eyes, right is subjecive to your own feelings and beliefs. Your eyes can be wrong. Doing as little damage as you can does not make it ok to do wrong. Yes, that is enough...it is more than enough to end in death. Saying God does not have the right to kill us all seems dumb since we are all under death penalty. I'm sure you are not that dumb. It seems you are insisting God is not good because He will not allow you to do whatever you feel like doing forever. Obviously you know what is right and what is wrong by the length of time you spend trying to say it's not wrong for you to act however you wish as long as you try to minimize damage you cause while getting your pleasure. The One who created and sustains all life has every right to destroy everything He created, the same as you have the right to knock down a snowman after you build it. Only He did not build snowmen, he made living men and gave them free will. He did this because He is good and He shows He is good in doing it. It is good to know He will purge His creation and put away all of the bitterness against Him which comes from the pride of His creatures who insist He does not have the right to rule over them.........and all of those of His creatures who finalize their death in rebellion will no longer pollute the air with their hard words agaisnt Him. Life means God is good 1) because it shows He is giving and 2) it shows He is patient and does not want to bring the final judgement upon you.......though He could at any moment, maybe even before you can post another round in this debate. You are calling Him all kinds of evil names when He is nothing but good. How long do you think He will put up with you who gives Him no thanks for all the things He gives you? Using the time He gives you to insist that He is evil is a mistake. Life means God is good. Hating God cries out for fire of Hell.
Life means God is good

What is 'right' and 'wrong' is objective. In my eyes, 'right' is being kind and doing as little damage as you possibly can. That should be enough. God does not have the right to kill as all. We have not all done wrong. What is REALLY wrong with premarital sex? Nothing! An action such as sex has as much meaning as you give it! What's wrong with gay marriage? It's not traditional? Oh, well the biblical idea of a traditional marriage is the father of a woman and a guy that wants her have a conversation, and agree to allow the guy and daughter to marry without the daughter having a say in the matter. So, if that's the case, then I know a lot of people who are illegally married because their fathers don't approve. What else have we done wrong? Not go to church on Sunday, or any other day? Oh, well isn't that a bit PRIDEFUL of God? You know, something God does not want people to have? He doesn't want us to think so high and mighty of ourselves. That's his job. So, basically, God has the right to kill us all because he is selfish and arrogant. Both statements are supported by God. Life doesn't have to be here, but if it's supposed to be run the way God wants it to be ran, then I have no problem not being apart of this life. Why, I'd rather sit in the deepest darkest parts of hell slowly roasting for all eternity instead of looking at such a selfish arrogant God who has the balls to send me to hell simply because I have not been convinced by his oh so perfect creations that he exists. In my eyes, God is a big punk, and a big bully. And if he created life JUST for us to fulfill what he wants, then he arrogant. So full of himself. Does he deserve to be? Well this is turning in to one big circle argument.
Life means God is good

Thank you Con for arguing within the parameters as requested. I'm more than happy to show why life means God is good and why the way you are looking at things is skewed so you can't see God's goodness. The big round object you say is full of death and destruction is the Earth on which our lives are sustained. If the earth were full of death and destruction, neither of us would have time to debate. God gives us time, and God gives air to breathe, and God protects His creation from destruction. The fact that God gave us life and free will to do as we see fit shows that God is good. Giving is good. God gives life. It is the things we did violating God's law that have brought the problems which you seem to be saying prove that God is not good. God could destroy us all now, and He would be righteous to do so because we have all done wrong, and all wrong is offensive to Him. He did not create us to do wrong, He created us so He could enjoy us. Con, you are saying life is not good only because you are trying to blame God for problems He did not cause. This is why your negative take on life is a skewed one. If God does not punish rebellion, how could He be good? If rebellion is not punished, what benefit would there be in obedience when there is pleasure to be found in rebellion? It is good to know God will put an end to all rebellion, and it is good to know He is patient and does not end it all now. The argument here is not "life is good", it's life means God is good. Life has gone bad, your life has gone bad, into death, because of your sin. God gives you time because He is good. He wants you to go to heaven, but He will not force you to trust Him. He made the way for you to go, but as He gave you free will, He cannot force you to go His way. Giving you free will was an act of His goodness. You cannot blame God if you choose to go your own way. You cannot blame God if you are cast into fire of hell.
Life means God is good

Life does not mean God is good. God created a big giant round object that is full of death and destruction. Also, in God's eyes, you can clearly read in the bible that something is wrong with life. If it wasn't, God would not have to restart this whole ordeal. Flood the earth and kill every man, woman, child and animal except for one family and two of every animal (although I'm curious as to how Noah got 2 kangaroos that live 8000 miles from the Middle East in Australia, seeing that kangaroos are only found in Australia), and then we say that life is good? If it was so good, then it should have never been abruptly ended, regardless the reason, too because if it was good, then it should have never been ended, and it shouldn't end again abruptly when the rapture comes and everyone dies and goes to heaven or hell. And again, hell. Life is not good if there is a place specifically designed for people to be sent to burn and choke and scream and cry, again regardless the reason why. No one deserves that sort of punishment, not even a murderer because a murderer put an end to a life that was finite to begin with, so that murderer should only serve a finite sentence. But that's not the point. If life is good, then Hell should not exist, period. If it was good, then there would be no reason for a Hell.
Life means God is good

Calling me "boss" could be flattering, but i'm not the boss, I'm a subject the same as you. We are both subject to death, that's the rule and neither of us made the rule so neither of us is the boss. Life shows God is Good because He gives and sustains life. He did not have to create life, He does not have to give anything to sustain it......but He does. This shows He is good. "The best way I can" will not be accepted as an exuse for violating the guiding terms for the arguement. If I violate the terms, feel free to point that out as I surely will if you violate the terms. The terms of the debate are meant to be boss.....I'm not the boss. Let's try to keep this in focus. Life means God is good is Pro, Con is that life means God is not good. Please tell my why you are arguing that life means God is not good.
citizen charter : is it beneficial in india to curb corruption

in your first point it was seen that the graph of paying bribery came down from 65 % to 40% ,, this was the results of many bills like RTI so like them CITIZEN CHARTER is also one of them an also may help in bringing down bribery even more to negligible .but can you explain how caste system is related to corruption there has been no link of caste system with corruption yet...
citizen charter : is it beneficial in india to curb corruption

Curbing Corruption in India is dependent on the party an individual represents. In India, as we all know , a political Party, has the ability to hold boycotts, create riots and overall control the minds and actions of their supporters. With polls like these: 1. http://www.debate.org... 2. http://www.debate.org... 3. http://www.debate.org... Where from research it was stated that : 1. " A 2005 study conducted by Transparency International in India found that more than 62% of Indians had firsthand experience of paying bribes or influence peddling to get jobs done in public offices successfully. In its 2008 study, Transparency International reports about 40% of Indians had firsthand experience of paying bribes or using a contact to get a job done in public office. " 2. " As long as the caste system influences things there corruption will continue to be rampant" 3. " For years India has been corrupt and it doesn't seem like it's going to change anytime soon. Unfortunately, many of the citizens seem perfectly happy with this system and have just accepted it as part of their every day life. India will stay corrupt until both the citizens and leaders are on board with change." As long as the Caste System and the ability for any man ( specifically criminals & mob/gang bosses ) to be allowed to participate in the works of the parliamentary and the control of the police forces, it will be merely impossible for corruption or anything to be done at all. That could not only rid corruption but also give back to communities and educate the young.
citizen charter : is it beneficial in india to curb corruption

I do believe that there will be some significance to this bill, however the trust the people of India had with the Government of India has truly dissipated overtime. After many grueling events like that of the Coal Ministry ,where even our PM Manmohan Singh indicated that corruption in India is evident and it has always been there : http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com... It will be hard for the people to even believe that action will be taken, on the corrupt officers and politicians that control most India's local economic trade. Not always will they be caught or even forwarded to the tops of the Corruption agencies in India. When you said : " transparency and this will build faith of people on its government." By that time and perhaps the past , corruption was evident and known throughout the Indian government, even by our PM , who was rather upset that it was there and that the exposure that lost the governments credibility. It doesn't take a whole group to credibility but rather only one person to ruin the name of India. India was built on the sweat, blood and connections / power/ handwork. Yet along with these advancements arose Corruption. It is now part of the foundations of which India has built its emerging superpower upon. And for India to eradicate this problem , not only will it be hard, but it will also change the way Indian do business, rock it and put into jeopardy the work that has been done to make it so successful.