BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Life on earth has no intrinsic value.

I completely disagree with your utterly stupid idea in your brain that there is no afterlife. I am not one of those crazy people who believe that man came from a hairy animal and the earth came from a big boom! I am a believer of Christ. Jesus Christ is real, and i am posting this debate more for your sake because you need a wake up call! What you need to do is read the Holy Bible, because i fear for you that if you do not read the Bible and accept Christ into your heart, you will have an afterlife ETERNALLY IN HELL! If you start to read the Bible right now, and accept Jesus Christ into your heart, you will have an afterlife eternally in heaven! John 3:16 says, "For God so loved the world, that He gave his only begotten son, and whosoever believes in him, shall not perish, but have everlasting life." So there is a purpose in life, and that purpose is to glorify God our Savior.
One's poverty is the fault of the individual

I have absolutely no idea what you are trying to debate now. First, let me say this: This is my first time debating in the "formal" sense. So, with that being the case, it could be that I am mistaken in my observations, but I do not think so. Just as you have done in the topic discussion section of this website, you are doing here in this section (debates) also; and that is: making wild and hasty assumptions based on a single and short statement of mine. From my few posts in the discussion section of this website, you have somehow deduced that I do not spend enough time with my children, that I am not very intelligent, that I have insulted every member of Debate.Org by quoting Martin Luther King Jr., insinuated that my father and brother are criminals, and that I am the epitome of the quintessential "angry black man." I stand by my accusation that you have switched the original resolution to suit your purposes. It is clear that you originally stated that you were going to debate that if an individual is poor it is because of their own fault. Then in the next round you stated that this situation can't be dabated because there are too many variables. On your profile page you claim to be an unorthodox debater. That you dabate "dirty" and use a "smoke and mirrors" approach to the craft. That could be the case here, or maybe I am not that intelligent, as you have claimed. Whatever it is, one thing is certainly clear; I have definetely struck a nerve with you and you seem to be dying to beat me in a debate. I have no problem with giving you that opportunity but I feel that you have compromised the integrity of this debate by changing the resolution mid-round. I could be wrong. Hopefully some of the other members will opine in the comment section and give us their take on the situation. I am trying to understand how formal debate works. I am only a music teacher of average intelligence, so bear with me.
One's poverty is the fault of the individual

Kleptin seems to be confused. He challenged me to a debate titled, "One's poverty is the fault of the individual." He wanted to debate the individual's responsibility for their economic situation. Then around half way down his wordy submission he states, "We are not talking about the individual person because there are too many variables." Then why did you want to debate about the individual in the first place? I do not think it is fair to change the basis of the debate just because it will serve your purposes better.
One's poverty is the fault of the individual

Full resolution: Individuals or families who are of the lower class are in the lower class mostly because of poor choices or poor personal characteristics. Other factors are minimally contributory to their poverty and can be easily overcome or bypassed. Both participants should refrain from using semantic arguments, as it would waste a good topic of discussion. Questions about phrasing or confusion about a point should be clarified in the comment section. **************************************************** If you're poor, it is generally your fault. The income tax, minimum wage and the availability of minimum wage-paying jobs makes it possible for an impoverished person to pull in enough money to pay for schooling, which would then lead to better employment opportunities. There is no impenetrable barrier between rich and poor, it is all a matter of how much work and effort people want to put into their lives. My opponent made several points in a forum topic regarding this issue, and I would like to go over them here. I will post my rebuttals in future rounds. I look forward to my opponent's response, thank you.
Rap Battle Royale

Shut the f*ck up, C*nt, I see that you put up a brave front, But I'mma just be blunt. Damn right I'm top notch, You're third-rate, Like a Timex watch, God damn it thot, Quit grabbin' at my crotch. My free fall? What are you hallucinating for? I'm a f*ckin' wasp, Back to sting once more I'm causin' you trouble like Arab Spring, This is war Diss me once? What for? You're a bee, Your inside's will get torn I'mma rip your f*ckin' liver out and eat it at the candy store, I'm a motherf*ckin' condor, Whore, B*tch, I live for the gore! My cap on ice? B*tch, I ain't playin' nice Your raps are bland, Mine add spice, What's not to like? Here's a piece of advice, Quiesce like the mice, Don't stir b*tch, It's almost Christmas, And I out-rapped you twice!
Rap Battle Royale

My crew stay strapped like a Blacksmith The gun armed come get your lip balmed like chap stick Think he flyer till his cap on ice, Thats a hat trick First you was 101 now you're 16, You a cat fish Me copying off of Nicki? Wow that bar was real tough If you think you can beat me, You're gonna have some bad luck You stupid little bitty chicken bitch cluck cluck I write my own damn bars you little dumb f*ck "My girls bad with real titties and no a** shots" I said my girls not myself wow you're top notch Keep up with that BS and you'll hear the glocks cock Special delivery at your door b*tch knock knock Since words can't kill guess what happens after you battle me son The guns you gone face real long b*tch, Natalie Nunn Everyone gone see your top drop, This gone be a free fall When I roll up through your circle with rounds like skee ball - Your turn
Rap Battle Royale

I agree - you're a f*cking crackpot, Just not dope My rhymes are out of this world, Get a telescope. Pure talent, Really? That why you copy Nicki? Like Em not signin', That's pretty sh*tty Talkin' about your *ss and tits, How original, Dipsh*t, Your lines were a waste of my time hoe, Here's a chit, You better pay what you owe, 'fore I bang my gun and grab your throat to slit And one more thing before I split, I know it's been a while since I've done a lot of rap sh*t. A word to the wack is sufficient, Go crawl in a pit. Because I'm back n' omniscient, You're suckin' Minaj's d*ck, Just admit it. Pick your *ss up and haul, 'fore I nip it in the bud, Quick You slipped, Trick, You were easy to outwit I'm waitin' to kill you, I'm trackin' your activity, Chick, Now don't have a fit, B*tch, Just quit.
Rap Battle Royale

Ayo Im so dope you can find me in a crack pot Check the wrist my whip real f*ck a match box My girls bad with real tiddies and no a*ss shots All them b-tches average, Straight 7's like the Jack pot Any beef that you pickin you know im rippin' No actin' you hear these bars they try robbin' on what im givin' Words come back like a boomerang But they aint sayin sh-t like Pootie tang I'm full of pure talent and potential I'm a savage pitbull my hometown is the kennel Got that dope sh-t that's clenching jaw's, F*ckin up they dental What I'm whipping I aint gotta bring it back, It aint a rental Chitty chitty bang bang this gun don't click click I let it flow like water take a quick dip I'm tryna be big like bigger than big gets On that road to success lets take a quick trip Pink car, You gone see that drop top like a nip slip Lightest round
Rap Battle Royale

Since you wanna try me hoe, I'll hit you with this computer flowI'll splatter your icons on your desktopI'm software till I run in your windows and you lose your domeBut let me backspace, If you don't have my PC, I'm bringing all macs that'll make your body shiftSo to catch a lower case, Imma give you all capsYou better dash before I get the semi to your colon, Blow you open now you equalUnderscore, Backslash you bout to have a seat hoe The bars I add dishin' (addition) out a bigger fightWe can multiply these shots long as the clippin' rightSince you throwin' subs, I'll subtract this b*tch lifeYou'll be a line between two dots if the vision (division) right You tryna hype yourself like you on my level well my brackets deceitfulYou should've known the risk about taking me, period I'm lethalYour bars leave me with a question markMy bars are 100%, Them shells swarm like asteroids it'll blast the chartsIt'll leave you in a shock like an exclamation mark
Global warming is a hoax

I'm sorry to hear about my opponent's legal troubles, although I must confess to having far more sympathy regarding the possession charge than the driving one. My opponent has made no attempt to prove his resolution and has ignored all my arguments and evidence. He claims to be among a number of "scientists" who reject the standard hypothesis of human impact on climate change but provides zero evidence to back up his assertions. He says the notion that co2 can "affect" temperature is a "ridiculous belief" but doesn't touch on any of the evidence supporting it I provided in round 1. He claims that "The cause of all global warming is the sun. period." This is factually incorrect. Warm air currents, different rates of heat refraction and humidity can all create increased temperatures. http://www.bbc.co.uk... My opponent's only source in this debate is a big yellow circle. This is an image of the sun provided by NASA, who I have already sourced in support of human impact on climate. The image comes with no text to support my opponent's position or to contradict my earlier quote from NASA. Most crucially of all, TOMlive has made no attempt to support his assertion that "global warming is a hoax" or deliberate deception. The resolution is completely negated and no effort has even been made to affirm it. Due to my opponent's forfeit, this debate won't show up on the front page. I can't vote myself so I can only request that my opponent also abstains from voting and that anyone taking the time to read this will be kind enough to cast their vote according to DDO guidelines. Thanks. Con.
Global warming is a hoax

I apologize to my opponent as i was actually in jail for a dui i got six months ago. lol. Actually i went to court every time i was supposed to, and they kept just pending the charges. Finally on the last court date, they told me that all i have on my record is a MJ possession charge. Little did i know the day AFTER my last court date the dea filed the DUI and never notified me, so when i payed the mj charge the next month i found out i had a warrant for my arrest and i has to urn myself. ANyway someday i'd like to finish this debate, im sorry for not being to clear about what i want to debate. Basically i (like many other scientists) do not believe in anyway humans have any affect on the climate, not do i think that co2 Has any contribution to the temperature of our earth, that is just a ridiculous belief. heres a little excerpt If you think humans are the cause for the earth's rise in temperature about 10 years ago you are sadly wrong. The cause of all global warming is the sun. period. Right now our sun is experiencing very mild solar activity, expect cooler temperatures! Near real time NASA image of the sun (SOHO MDI Latest Image). http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov...
God Exists (nonsensical debate)

In this round, I will attempt to refute my opponent's arguments for God. The argument from obvious obviousness Pro claims that God's existence is obviously obvious, but since it's obvious that nothing can be obviously obvious, then obviously God can't exist. The Bible Pro has taken Tommy 1:17 out of context. It's true that it says, "I am real, you must believe in me." However, Pro mistakenly implies that God is the one who is speaking. In reality, it's Dog. And as we saw from my opening, Dog prevents God from existing. Mark 2:10 does, in fact, warn against abortion, and it's true that there were no professional abortions in the time of Christ. However, this is no proof of God because the command was intended to apply to humans living another thousand years from now, not today. So Mark 2:10 was wrong after all; therefore, this is no proof of God. The argument from John 4:21 is unsound due to false premise. There are still atheist. Dog, for example, is an atheist. 1. Optimus Prime. While it may be true that Optimus Prime requires the existence of God, he is also inconsistent with the existence of God. So Optimus Prime actually renders the whole concept of God incoherent. 2. Gay people I don't know why Pro thinks gay people require God. Considering all the vitriol people spew toward God, it seems like they'd be quite gay if it turned out God didn't exist. 3. Church If there were no God, we'd live in a world without liars. Then one day Ricky Gervais would tell the world's first lie.[1] That would result in a church. So Pro is wrong. 4. Scented candles Without God, we wouldn't have logic, and without logic, all the candles could melt even though there were no candles, and once the candles melted, God would no longer exist. Therefore, scented candles do not prove God. Argument from shotgun Some shot guns come with two barrels, which resembles a forked tongue, which is a metaphor for lying. Therefore, shotguns do not prove that God exists. Conclusion Darn the luck! I forgot my strongest argument against the existence of God. I'm going to add this for informational purposes alone. This should not count in the voting since it's in the last round and Pro won't have an opportunity to refute it. The argument from rock paper scissors lizard Spock Disagreements among friends can be settled by recourse to rock paper scissors lizard Spock.[2] Notice that God is absent from the equation. Since God is unnecessary in conflict resolution, the parsimonious conclusion is that there is no God. Second conclusion Thank you for coming to tonight's debate. [1] http://www.imdb.com... [2] http://www.youtube.com...
God Exists (nonsensical debate)

“Argument from a monkey's uncle” My opponent has notprovided adequate proof that he is not a Monkey’s Uncle, therefore, he must bea monkey’s uncle. God said that all humans evolved randomly through a processcalled evolution, he said that if creationist ever tell you to believe that aGod exists, to ignore them, and so I shall. Since we evolved from monkeys,there is a 97.8% chance that my opponent was in fact a monkey’s uncle. I sureknow I am! “Argument from Chuck Norris” 1) If Chuck Norris says there is a God, there is aGod. 2) If Chuck Norris told me I was a girl, I would bea girl. 3) If Chuck Norris voted on this debate, he wouldvote in favor of God. 4) Chuck Norris is never wrong. 5) There is a God.
God Exists (nonsensical debate)

Argument from a monkey's uncle 1. If God exists, then I'll be a monkey's uncle. 2. I will never be a monkey's uncle. 3. Therefore, God does not exist. Ontological argument against God. Dog is a being than which none worse can be conceived. If Dog only existed in the mind, but not in reality, then Dog wouldn't be the worst conceivable being because a worse being could be conceived, namely, one that exists in reality. Therefore, Dog exists in reality. God is the greatest conceivable being (GCB). A being that could prevent the GCB from existing would be worse than a being who could not. Since Dog is the worst conceivable being, he must have the ability to prevent the GCB from existing. And since he's such a nasty unscrupulous fellow, that's exactly what he'd do. Therefore, God does not exist. Argument from Chuck Norris 1. God does not exist. 2. Chuck Norris. 3. Therefore, I am right, and you are wrong. Argument from the horse shoe 1. Since the nail was lost, the horse shoe was lost. 2. Since the horse shoe was lost, then the battle was lost. 3. Since the battle was lost, the war was lost. 4. Since the war was lost, then atheists were right. 5. Since the atheists were right, there is no God. 6. Therefore, since the nail was lost, there is no God. 7. Therefore, there is no God. Argument from unchangeable cats 1. If there were a God, then he could turn cats into dragons. 2. No cat has ever been turned into a dragon. 3. Therefore, there is no God. Argument from yesterday 1. If there had been a God yesterday, then he would've known that there was a God today. 2. Since there is no God today, God could not have known yesterday that there was (after all, knowledge is justified true belief). 3. Therefore, there was no God yesterday. If there were no God yesterday, then there couldn't possibly be a God today because gods cannot pop into being uncaused out of nothing. Only a god that already exists would have any hope of bringing a God into being, but since there was no God yesterday, there can't be a God today either. Therefore, there is no God yesterday, today, or forever.
God Exists (nonsensical debate)

Most people ask me how I know a God exists, and I always respond, because of the bible! TheBible The bible has various excerpts which prove without a doubt there is a God. Here are a few examples:John 4:21 states that "On December 21, 2012, I will condemn all atheists to eternal torment in hell. " If God didn't exist, then we would still have atheists! My heart goes out to the theist relatives of the poor atheists who were killed on December 21. Mark 2: 10 states that "Abortion is bad, bad people have abortions, and abortions kill babies! Amen I say to you, do not have an abortion! " Since there weren't professionally done abortions in the time of Christ, how else would the Bible have known that an Abortion is so easy to have these days? Even Pope John Paul the Third agrees that God exists! That certainly proves it! Tommy 1:17 says that "I am real, you must believe in me! " God is real because God said he is real, and those who say God isn't real can go jump a bridge. Other Proofs of God's existenceWithout God, we wouldn't have several things we have!1) Optimus Prime! If we didn't have a kind and loving God, then the Autobots would have undoubtedly joined the decepticons, seeing as how there would be no moral right to freedom!2) Gay People! Without a creator, we would probably all be straight, seeing as how there would be no anti-Gay movement to rebel against! Which is really the only reason we have gay people!3) Church! Everybody loves church, and without a God to worship, we wouldn't be able to worship a God. Especially after the war of 1999, where we fought for freedom against the evil Mexican Jews of the southern pacific! God bless the Americans who dies to triumph over the Mexican Jews!4) Scented Candles! Without God, we wouldn't have scented candles, because in the Bible, Moses said, "The Avengers have protected your home, but they have not provided you with scented candles! Worship me and you will receive an endless supply of scented candles, and we certainly have! ConclusionNot enough people believe in God, and it is quite sad after all the things he has done for us. Join me now in a belief in God, to abolish Christian Slavery in Montana, and regain control over the Capitol city from the Mexican Jews!1) See this shotgun?2) Therefore, God exists.
The Death Penalty- Good thing (pro) or bad thing (con)

Unfortunately, I am able to rebut any of my opponent's points, but I shall carry on to make my final arguments. Everyone has an inalienable human right to life, even those who commit murder; sentencing a person to death and executing them violates that right. This is very similar to the 'value of life' argument, but approached from the perspective of human rights. Everyone thinks human life is valuable. Some of those against capital punishment believe that human life is so valuable that even the worst murderers should not be deprived of the value of their lives. They believe that the value of the offender's life cannot be destroyed by the offender's bad conduct - even if they have killed someone. The main argument that retribution is immoral is that it is just a sanitised form of vengeance. Scenes of howling mobs attacking prison vans containing those accused of murder on their way to and from court, or chanting aggressively outside prisons when an offender is being executed, suggest that vengeance remains a major ingredient in the public popularity of capital punishment.
The Death Penalty- Good thing (pro) or bad thing (con)

The Death Penalty, also known as Capital Punishment, is the ultimate form of punishment and can work in many different ways. For example, criminals can be sentenced to death, and then killed by the electric chair, lethal injection or a firing squad. Either way you put it, by sentencing a criminal to death, you are taking away one of the most important human rights: life. Also, by executing a criminal, you are therefore a murderer. The Death Penalty, when carried out, is most indeed a sin. It goes against the sixth commandment, "Thou shall not kill". People say it is justice, but in fact it is revenge. Retribution is not the best form of punishment, especially if you are a Christian. "Do not repay evil for evil, do not take revenge." Romans 12:17-19 Finally, there have been many people who have been wrongly accused of committing a crime, and then convicted. If that were to happen, and that innocent person were to receive the punishment of death, the government would have killed an innocent man or woman, and what good would that do?