BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Incarceration vs Treatment

1.I agree that incarceration is the state of being in prison. 2.I also agree incarceration is form of punishment for someone who has done something wrong or illegal. 3.I do agree punishment is the infliction or imposition of a penalty as retribution for an offense. However it is so used for handling and treatment. 4.Yes it is wrong to punish someone for something they couldn"t help, but you cant tell who really cant help themselves from the ones that can 5.Pedophilia can be considered an illness and not a crime I have to disagree, not all pedophilia have a mental disorder. 6.I agree we would be acting unreasonable. 7.It"s only unreasonable if we are punishing the right ones. 8.Treatment is giving to the offender due to the offense that was made. 9.Treatment is medical care given to someone for an illness or injury. We have people who refuse to get help. 10.Yes treatment can help pedophilia by reducing or preventing. 11. Should we really take the time to treat pedophile or just punish them all together especially for the reoccurring offenders I agree that treatment can put the pedophile on path however, we need to focus on the issue of putting them back into treatment once relapse occur. 12.Yes preventing relapse and reducing re-offense is good 13.Some pedophiles deserve to be confined for a set period of time, because some will act like they need to get treated just to be helped and go back into the community and repeat the pedophile act 14.Pedophiles do not belong back in the community nor do we need to treat them and waste our time. 15.Another occurrence of pedophilia is bad 16.Other negative consequences are acceptable in the light of treatment such as more money being spent and time consuming in the light of pedophilia benefits. Abuse treatment usage. 17.Therefore, persons convicted of pedophilic crime should not be treated but incarcerated in all instances. Non-controversial: 1,2,3,4,6,7,10,12,13,15 Controversial 5. It doesn"t justify their act. We have laws that make it clear that pedophilic is illegal and wrong, and they have a choice to commit or not commit the act. 8. Treatment doesn"t work for everybody and some could abuse the power and say they need treatment just to pass on getting incarcerated. 9. Not all offenders have a mental disorder some actually like committing pedophilic acts. Treatment can only help for a short period of time depending on how far the person is on their pedophilic act. 11. Sex offenders have the lowest rate of recidivism of all crime categories. Evidence "based programs can reduce recidivism by up to 15 percent after prison intervention. Just because something is evidence-based doesn"t mean there aren"t assumptions. 14. Sex offender should be registered to protect others. By not having them registered, we wont be able to keep an eye out on those who have or haven"t been treated. People have the right to know who lives around them. Sex offenders are extremely dangerous and should be watched all the time just to make sure pedophilia didn"t get worse.
Incarceration vs Treatment

1.I agree that incarceration is the state of being in prison. 2.I also agree incarceration is form of punishment for someone who has done something wrong or illegal. 3.I do agree punishment is the infliction or imposition of a penalty as retribution for an offense. However it is so used for handling and treatment. 4.Yes it is wrong to punish someone for something they couldn"t help, but you can"t tell who really can"t help themselves from the ones that can. 5.Pedophilia can be considered an illness and not a crime I have to disagree, not all pedophilia have a mental disorder. 6.I agree we would be acting unreasonable. 7.It"s only unreasonable if we are punishing the right ones. 8.Treatment is giving to the offender due to the offense that was made. 9.Treatment is medical care given to someone for an illness or injury. We have people who refuse to get help. 10.Therefore, pedophilia people should not be treated but incarcerated. I conclude that Treatment has its flaws it won"t work for everyone. It doesn"t work if they get kicked out or if the person decides to drop out. That"s money being wasted because you"re spending thousands for each person, whereas when being incarcerated, they"re in there for their time or for good and not only are you not wasting money (because we know the person is not allowed to leave the prison of course) but you are also keeping that person off the streets and preventing them from committing another pedophilic act. Treatment isn"t forced you can"t force anybody to get help they have to want it. We have thousands of men and women, who are sexually attracted to young kids and they need to be punished for that. Treating a pedophilia, as an illness isn"t going to help with recidivism.
Incarceration vs Treatment

Although I agree with you explaining the diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, yes that"s fine cause you have information to back that up. However, you"re not getting what I"m trying to say maybe I wasn"t clear. Yes a mental person can"t think straight, but what about the ones who can help themselves but use the whole "mental disorder as an excuse. You said that about half of all molesters are not sexually attracted to their victim right? So because of that are you telling me its fine to commit the act then? You must be out your mind. At the end of the day they are having sex with underage children and it is completely wrong no if ands or buts. Its wrong and they need to face the consequences. Treatment is giving them the green light because you don"t know who really needs the "treatment as appose to those who are faking it just to get a pass. I"m sure nobody has the time to sit down there and analyze each person and figure out who needs treatment and who doesn"t. We shouldn"t be wasting are time treating them we should be treating all the victims. Yes tax payers pay for prisoners that are incarcerated because it"s a place for "punishment" to "serve time" you"re not helping the victim by treating the person who committed the crime. I don"t know why you seem to be confused about them being isolated when you yourself said that during treatment they would be isolated from the community until they get back on their feet, which is why I said it"s a form of punishment just like being incarcerated because in both situations we are prevented them from the outside world. People are afraid of all criminals lets put it that way, but yes people especially mothers would not want their kid around a person who desires children. What makes you think that once they receive treatment, do you seriously believe the world would be okay now that treatment helped them? I don"t think so they will always be judged for that. It doesn"t have anything to do with how you or I feel I simple pointed out that if you were in that situation you yourself would want that person in prison. At the end of the day this problem didn"t come through the sky, its obvious that some one in our society feels a way that they should be treated and you have others who say incarcerated. Nonetheless, incarceration is the best thing for people who have committed pedophilic acts. Treatment has its flaws it won"t work for everyone. It doesn"t work if they get kicked out or if the person decides to drop out. That"s money being wasted because you"re spending thousands for each person, whereas being incarcerated they"re in there for their time or for good. Treatment isn"t forced you cant force anybody to get help they have to want it. You don"t have to worry about losing money when the person is incarcerated because they have no choice once there are sentenced. Nobody wants a gamble; everyone was the deal at hand and therefore, disorder or not the only way to help them and keeping our streets safe is incarceration.
Why do we live in a society full of zombies? Yes, I mean zombies. The "living dead"

Yes, you're right. Your question is a better version of mine and is essentially what I am asking. Why has the world developed into zombies? That is my question to put it plainly. And to prove my point is a quote from Morrie Schwartz "So many people walk around with a meaningless life. They seem half-asleep, even when they're busy doing things they think are important. This is because they're chasing the wrong things." Does this answer your question?
Why do we live in a society full of zombies? Yes, I mean zombies. The "living dead"

I think the fulcrum of this debate is how we will both define "nothing" in the statement nothing in the world. If you posing the argument that the world is not perfect in every conceivable way, that would be nearly an unarguable topic. I would however have a slant on that which would flip it like a good plot twist and leave you saying "oohhh, that's what happened. However, I don't think someone who respected Sean Connery for being such a good and bearded man would make such a statement. Surely you know that posing a topic to explain why anything isn't perfect would be a senseless debate, as nearly everything alive on earth, and everything made by anything that was alive could be in some way be found to be imperfect. You are imperfect, in which case your existence would be adding to the deficit you claim to be sickened by.I'm assuming that the question that you are posing is, I believe that the world is gone bad given the deteriorated status of society today, prove to me that society and the world are not completely askew.Is this a better rewording of your argument. If not, please rewrite and define your exact position?
Why do we live in a society full of zombies? Yes, I mean zombies. The "living dead"

I have pondered about this question time and time again, but I just don't get what this society has developed into? If anyone noticed my profile picture it is of Sean Connery playing Allan Quatermain in The League of Extraordinary Gentleman. Sean Connery is one of my favorite actors, reason(s) being, (1). He has a beard and (2). He is a REAL man. Now, if anyone is up to the challenge of trying to prove to me that there is nothing wrong with the world's population of people. I beg you, please step forward. I would love to hear your arguments. Thanks You.
Suicide should be legalized.

(You're welcome. I had a difficult time with my rebuttal, because you made some very good points. Kudos) 1. Suicide is often linked with many mental illnessess, however, this person may never get over these illnessess. This person may be assigned to suffer in an asylum, hospital, or some other thing. It is inhumane treatment to make someone suffer. 2. The causes may be treatable, but does the pain ever go away? Pills can not take back the memories of the trumatic event, they just FORCE you to feel a certain way. I do not think it's right to force someone to live an force them to take pills so they can not just be themselves. Like a plastic Barbie doll....unfeeling. It takes away from life and if I can't enjoy life without my real emotions, why live? 3. Many people think that the death penalty is unacceptable, because it takes away life, and yet many states allow it. It does not have to be accepted by the public for it to be allowed. 4. People with mental illnesses are very likely to commit a crime, and if they are sucidal, then they could be a time bomb waiting to go off....literally. Why risk the public's health? You did not answer that I might commit murders just to get the death penalty. (sure they could kill themselves, but they may want attention or something)
Suicide should be legalized.

My opponent makes an interesting point. We have the right to life, but not the right to death. This is a very compelling and interesting statement, but I believe there is several reasons that make this statement negligible. 1. Suicide most often goes in hand with mental illness. Suicide is not an option most people with a stable emotional life and mental capacity consider. Suicide is most often the result of prolonged depression or an extremely traumatic event. It is rarely taken under consideration in normal circumstances. For this reason, suicide is not a legal option that can be considered by a jury or judge. 2. The causes for suicide are treatable. Depression, PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) and many other causes of suicide are treatable. Given time and effort, people may be able to get over these afflictions, and therefore suicide may no longer be an option. If suicide is legalized under law though, it can be argued that helping people get over those afflictions is actually a violation of their legal rights. For this reason, suicide should not be considered a legal option, for it will only dissolve the chances of preventing the tragedy. 3. The cultural impact would allow people to think suicide is acceptable. Legalizing suicide would only allow the culture of teen suicide to grow. Suicide is not an acceptable means to escape your problems. Counselling, pharmaceuticals and support are the way to help get over depression and many other issues affecting lives. Suicide only allows for family and friends to dissolve into tragedy, and possibly even break apart. For this reason, suicide should not be a legal option. Thanks again to my opponent for this topic, and I await his rebuttal.
Suicide should be legalized.

If I no longer want to walk the earth, I have the right to kill myself. Otherwise, I might commit other crimes just to get the death penalty. I feel like that'd be doing society more good than bad. I have the right of life, but not the right of death? Come on... (thanks for the debating thing. I'll be on for a while, so I want to finish this debate today, so I'll answer quickly)
Abortion

"Who defines it as a baby? You never talk about who far along the abortion would be taking place. Whenever an abortion takes place it is wrong. Morals are what drive humans. Morally, abortion is killing children. My opponent doesn't argue the good of an abortion. It provides guilt for the mother. In Ohio, a girl got an abortion, but the aborted fetus was still alive. AGAINST THE MOTHER'S WILL they killed the fetus. If we give women the option to have an abortion they should have the right to save them." Maybe to you abortion is wrong but to the women who wants to have one it isn't. Who said it provides guilt for the mother? This is an open statement with no warrant or evidence and should be dismissed. My opponent's argument is about giving women rights. I f the lady in Ohio wanted her child back, is that not her right. If women are allowed to kill a life they should be allowed to save a life. My opponent does not refute this. This is my biggest voter in the round -------------------------------------- "Who is suing anyone? How is giving black their rights even relevant to this topic? My point is that we are allowed to do anything in protection of our rights. We don't need rights to survive. My opponent refuses to attack abortion just the flaws of my case. He doesn't talk about abortion." I am pro abortion. You are against it. In this debate my job IS to attack the flaws of your case... And as to "My opponent refuses to attack abortion". Why would I attack someone I believe is right? This whole contention is irrelevant. He is not talking about abortion. He is trying to avoid this argument. That is why he can't argue it because he does not know how to refute it. So, my argument still stands. This is why this argument goes to the con. ------------------------------------- Ok... So it might live later. But you agree to the fact that it's not alive at the time so it's not murder which goes against your 1st cont. My point is just because we can't hear it feel it or see it doesn't mean its not alive. Horton hears a who quotes, " A person is a person no matter how small". People believe in god even though we can't see it or feel it. Should we ban the worship of god too." You seem to be arguing my side for me... Plus you never argue the fact that it DOES go against your 1st contention so this point should go to Pro. My opponent again is trying to avoid the arguments. He doesn't talk about abortion. He says "plus you never argue the fact that it DOES go against your 1st contention so this point should go to Pro." Why should this argument win the whole round. He doesn't argue for abortion, he is arguing against the flaws of my case. -------------------------------------- My opponent has to prove that abortion is not murder. He hasn't. He has to prove that abortion takes away rights. He hasn't. He has to prove that a fetus is not alive. Again, he hasn't. For these reasons I can only see a con ballot.
Abortion

To start my computer broke so thats why I have forfeited." This is a lie, you've had plenty of time in our debate class to do this. -------------------------------------- "Who defines it as a baby? You never talk about who far along the abortion would be taking place. Whenever an abortion takes place it is wrong. Morals are what drive humans. Morally, abortion is killing children. My opponent doesn't argue the good of an abortion. It provides guilt for the mother. In Ohio, a girl got an abortion, but the aborted fetus was still alive. AGAINST THE MOTHER'S WILL they killed the fetus. If we give women the option to have an abortion they should have the right to save them." Maybe to you abortion is wrong but to the women who wants to have one it isn't. Who said it provides guilt for the mother? This is an open statement with no warrant or evidence and should be dismissed. -------------------------------------- "Who is suing anyone? How is giving black their rights even relevant to this topic? My point is that we are allowed to do anything in protection of our rights. We don't need rights to survive. My opponent refuses to attack abortion just the flaws of my case. He doesn't talk about abortion." I am pro abortion. You are against it. In this debate my job IS to attack the flaws of your case... And as to "My opponent refuses to attack abortion". Why would I attack someone I believe is right? This whole contention is irrelevant. -------------------------------------- "Ok... So it might live later. But you agree to the fact that it's not alive at the time so it's not murder which goes against your 1st cont. My point is just because we can't hear it feel it or see it doesn't mean its not alive. Horton hears a who quotes, " A person is a person no matter how small". People believe in god even though we can't see it or feel it. Should we ban the worship of god too." You seem to be arguing my side for me... Plus you never argue the fact that it DOES go against your 1st contention so this point should go to Pro. -------------------------------------- My opponent has failed to post anything during rounds 2 and 3 so this should be taken into account. -------------------------------------- Please vote Pro for the arguments I have made above. Thank you.
Abortion

To start my computer broke so thats why I have forfeited. I will defend my case. Cont 1 Who defines it as a baby? You never talk about who far along the abortion would be taking place. Whenever an abortion takes place it is wrong. Morals are what drive humans. Morally, abortion is killing children. My opponent doesn't argue the good of an abortion. It provides guilt for the mother. In Ohio, a girl got an abortion, but the aborted fetus was still alive. AGAINST THE MOTHER'S WILL they killed the fetus. If we give women the option to have an abortion they should have the right to save them. ............................................................................................................................... Cont 2 Who is suing anyone? How is giving black their rights even relevant to this topic? My point is that we are allowed to do anything in protection of our rights. We don't need rights to survive. My opponent refuses to attack abortion just the flaws of my case. He doesn't talk about abortion. ................................................................................................................................... Ok... So it might live later. But you agree to the fact that it's not alive at the time so it's not murder which goes against your 1st cont. My point is just because we can't hear it feel it or see it doesn't mean its not alive. Horton hears a who quotes, " A person is a person no matter how small". People believe in god even though we can't see it or feel it. Should we ban the worship of god too.
Abortion

I thought I said no to accepting this? <_< I'll start with attacking his case. Cont 1 Who defines it as a baby? You never talk about who far along the abortion would be taking place. Cont 2 Who is suing anyone? How is giving black their rights even relevant to this topic? Cont 3 Ok... So it might live later. But you agree to the fact that it's not alive at the time so it's not murder which goes against your 1st cont. My only argument is how can we have the right to force a women to have a baby that she doesn't want? It's her body so it should be her choice.
Abortion

Abortion is wrong for 3 reasons. You are killing a life. The government is not violating rights. There is faulty proof that there is no life before birth. Contention 1 You are killing a life. My opponent will argue that a fetus is not alive. I will get to that in my 3rd contention. Killing is against the law, so why are we killing babies. What is the good of abortion? The preservation of rights? We have become too touchy on rights. CONTENTION 2 We allow kids to sue their parents and allow people to sue fast-food for obesity. We think that just because we are american citizens we can escape the guilt of pregnancy. We have to see that we are truly chary when it comes to our rights. My opponent will argue that we need rights to survive. We have lasted 150 years without giving blacks rights. Contention 3 There is faulty proof that there is no life before birth. The only way scientists have so called proven that fetus are not alive is by hooking an aborted baby to a machine and it didn't show vital signs. That is their only proof. Here is an analogy. If I roll a ball down the hill and someone stops it it doesn't mean that it wasn't going to stop rolling if there was no one there. Just because it doesn't shows signs of life doesn't mean it won't live later. For these reasons I urge a con ballot. Thank you