BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
The 7 Deadly Sins, if not portrayed in excess, are essential.

"The 7 Deadly Sins, if not portrayed in excess, are essential. " . http://www.thefreedictionary.com... The free dictionary defines portray as either 1. To depict or represent pictorially; make a picture of. 2. To depict or describe in words. 3. To represent dramatically, as on the stage. I won't play semantics in this debate and will instead assume that my opponent is saying that when they are not in excess, the Seven Deadly Sins are essential, as such I will prove that the Seven Deadly Sins are not essential to humans "to get far in life to some degree". If I can show that any of the Seven Deadly Sins are not required "to get far in life to some degree", then I will win this debate. I contend that you do not need anger in order to get far in life. My opponent stated that you need Anger to help you when others try to intimidate or overpower you. "Especially in abusive relationships" Anger is not required for success, if someone is trying to intimidate or overpower you, you can use your intelligence to outsmart them or otherwise convince them in order to defuse the situation. If someone is physically threatening you, you need not become angry to repell them, you need only to act in your own interests and safety. I have shown that Anger is not required for success in life.
The 7 Deadly Sins, if not portrayed in excess, are essential.

I support all sins. I think you need all of them to get far in life to some degree (obviously excess of anything at all is a bad thing). Pride is excessive belief in one's own abilities, that interferes with the individual's recognition of the grace of God. It has been called the sin from which all others arise. Pride is also known as Vanity. Envy is the desire for others' traits, status, abilities, or situation. Gluttony is an inordinate desire to consume more than that which one requires. Lust is an inordinate craving for the pleasures of the body. Anger is manifested in the individual who spurns love and opts instead for fury. It is also known as Wrath. Greed is the desire for material wealth or gain, ignoring the realm of the spiritual. It is also called Avarice or Covetousness. Sloth is the avoidance of physical or spiritual work. You need Pride to have confidence.You need Envy to motivate you to succeed in life.You need Gluttony to not lose out in a situation where many are gaining from resources.You need Lust if you want to have a kid with a person and not a test tube baby.You need Anger to help you when others try to intimidate or overpower you.[ESPECIALLY IN ABUSIVE RELATIONSHIPS]You need Greed to want anything in life.You need to be a Sloth when you're supposed to be resting, the constant fear of laziness causes workaholism and is VERY detremental to health and wellbeing.
Gay marriage should be legal.

okay let start with how completely my opponent has simply been dodging his actions as his liberal mind set... first of all it doesnt matter what kind of liberalism you hold too it is still liberal "general" i have based upon the fact that it is scriptural Genesis chapter 3 of the creation of human kinds revealing that God made aswell seen upon marriage as male and female for my aids it doesn't matter if it increases or decreases it matter that the aids epidemic in the gay community is a problem. obviously my opponent has misinterpreted that for him self.it seems to me instead of talking about the pressing issues he has simply ignored all as reality. i proved evidence of why time and time again all he has shown was facts but yet has not come to deeper understanding that gay marriage is wrong. once more let me illustrate that marriage is between a man and women in which it is sacred . now gays will ruin what the true meaning of that is as man and man and female with female for it takes a man and women to make you. the adoption excuse i use is an example of how in most cases with homosexuals they will use this as a card in which my opponent has i see that this man is completely in denial on what he says. i am looking out for the future of my children country and the world while he does not... im not saying that i will walk up and hurt a gay person im simply saying that it is satanic because it goes against everything that is moral .... i simply just dont agree with their lifestyle and i dont believe it should be legalize for its misrepresenting what is natural and is seen right plus its not like were gnna throw all gays in jail no but we will say no marriages because it is wrong ... its on you . you can side with him cause obeviously he contradicts himself by saying he doesnt take a view or uses any excuse but simply evidences show he doesnt know what he is saying thank you
Gay marriage should be legal.

I shall go through each point my opponent made, again. Seeing as this is the last round, I expect that we follow common conduct and not post any new arguments here.adoption excuseI apologise to my opponent: regarding adoption, he stated "excuse", implying that it is defending against a criticism my opponent made. Actually, it is an "argument", that is, something my opponent needs to refute. The key word was excuse, not adoption. Also, you still did not refute this argument. liberal definitionFirstly, ignoring the masses of difference between a traditional liberal, a Mill Libertarian, and my own position, I never referred to any definitions. Also, you still did not refute this argument. Finally, my opponent's arguments:God Given Right?My opponent has presupposed God time and time again, yet still has not justified God having a position in politics, God existing, that morals come directly from God, and that God believes that homosexuality is still wrong: he has failed to even provide scripture needed to justify his position. I cannot state anymore where he is misinterpreting scripture, due to this being the final round, but my opponent has not justified this claim.AIDS For GaysSimply put, my opponent has shown a correlation, not a causation. I'd like to point out that the increase in AIDS has also came along with the increase of sale of computer hardware, value of the Euro and has an inverse relation with the size of the USSR, and a positive correlation with Bavarian cheese prices. My opponent needs to cite how Same Sex Marriage would lead to an increase in AIDS. Even the antigay supporters admit: AIDS is spread by promiscuity.[1] Marriage leads to lower rates of promiscuity: this is common sense. So SSM would lower rates of AIDS, if we listen to the antigay supporters. To be clear: this is a turn argument. Also, in anticipation of a defence along the lines of "legalising SSM legalises homosexuality", homosexuality is currently legal, and my opponent needs to justify why SSM would increase the rates of AIDS when people have less sex with others. In conclusion, my opponent has failed to criticise any of my arguments, which have all been extended. My opponent has also not created sufficiently strong arguments to warrant him being given victory. I urge a vote PRO.1 - http://www.datalounge.com...;
Gay marriage should be legal.

My opponent's entire case comes down to believing in the Bible as an accurate source of moral conduct, the only source of moral conduct, and requires that the Bible dictates how our law should work. He states that Marriage is only between a man and a woman, but does not justify this.My opponent states that I am using a liberal definition of marriage, but does not justify this.My opponent states marriage is a gift of God, but does not justify this.My opponent states that homosexuality has caused HIV and AIDS. Of course, he has not justified this.He states Gay marriage is an abomination. He does not justify this.He's claiming that he is right, but never justifies any claim.Some actual points: "for if man and man and women and women was stranded on an island the population growth would die out because one thing they cant reproduce"This claim has no justification: my opponent needs to state why legalising gay marriage will cause all people to suddenly stop being straight. Bearing in mind there are countries and states with SSM legalised without a 100% gay population, this claim is blatantly false.My opponent states that there is a "divorce rate or adoption excuse", yet I have not used one, so I suspect that he refers to himself. He has not made any points.But the important issue...None of my claims have been refuted: in fact, all have been dropped. For this, I urge my opponent to specifically address these claims.
Gay marriage should be legal.

okay well as you can see my opponet has done his research now he shows charts and graphs but what really caught my eye was how off you was on the marriage part. obviously you must not be married or if you are then you clearly dont understand the word marriage now yes judicial yes your court as a right but thats not what should be expressed in this matter so response one what is marriage Marriage is a relation between man and women now he has pointed out none of this in full detail he just gave some liberal sense to the meaning by which you missed the point for it marriage is a right correct .. but only for men and women in the bible it says a man was to leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife as one one clearly reveals there love , relations est est.. but clearly represents the type of bond there were to have . now . not only is this satanic but obviously revealing once again your lack and care of the future and world our children must live in.. as marriage is a gift of God given to a man and women it is seen a moral and natural while we see when a man and a man is married reveals the desception of what marriage is all about for one that act is placed upon lust and sin sin so much that has blinded there thinking in which many today among the gay community has developed hiv and aids not only is this a risk to personal health but of the wellbeing to others they take what is holy and sacred as marriage and ruin what it truly represents now this man is as far continuing to support the failure of the future and adding to the ruining of my country and is enveloped in satanic beliefs that will one day lead to the ruining of the world and belief for me it isnt about pie charts and about how i can pursued people it is about this gay marriage is an abomination it is taking the sacred acts of marriage of man and women and destroying it when God created he made man and women because that is natural for reproduction he can use the divorce rate and adoption excuse but when children are raised in an inviroment as gay fathers or mothers you are saying its okay but its wrong and even if i dont have kids yet i dont want that or this to be somthing they deal with for if man and man and women and women was stranded on an island the population growth would die out because one thing they cant reproduce......
Gay marriage should be legal.

i guess ill be on the apposing side of this debate. I feel that gay marriage should not be legalized upon the basis as it is immoral there are many homosexuals that do practice such lifestyle that is un common to human nature now human reproduction is between man and women it is thus natural to have this kind reaction that is seen as natural conception for a man and a man can not reproduce or women and women ( it still be needed as mans sperm to produce a baby.) not only is man and man and women and women is forbidden and frowned upon in society but this has reached a point in time where present and future will be taught to young children starting at the age of five. for my opinion i feel culturally the world has accepted this type of thinking as normal while yes in the 1950`s there were homosexuals in that culture but it didnt become apparent until the late 70`s 80`s and 90`s these outburst of immoral acts has left the culture in the present state that is seen today. i feel the law should abolish this right as well all public presentation of unhumane acts between man and man and women and women not only is this immoral but satanic we look at biblical scripture where in the Genesis where God destroyed the cities sodom and Gomorrah not because men and women but because of the immoral sexual and ritualistic activites that was taken place there i feel now that if america continues in these ways just as sodom and Gomorrah willl be destoryed now many homosexuals will say it is a choice that they have to constitution but ill say it is not apart of it for when the fore fathers founded america they were Godly men who stood by what the bible represented against all ungodliness continuing some say that they were born of it now it is by choice for when God created a man he created a man.. not a girl if he wanted you a girl you would have been one same on both sides it is but your sinful nature that you have come to a place where you beknown of homosexual relations in which God had nothing else left to do but turn you over to your sin i feel that america is far off from when i grew up to what it is today if this is about the okay on people unmoral and ignorance aswell disobedience for some stupid excuse to do these things then i say you might as well throw away the america that we have and rename it../. anyone that apposes for gay marriage to be legal well be shown as destroying our future and the kids that we will raise thank you the choice is yours but i rather choose right for my kids and the america and beliefs i have as morally Good I vote NO for Gay marriage today
Gay marriage should be legal.

This debate is as simple as the title makes out. Gay Marriage, or SSM, is defined as "a legally recognized union of a same-sex couple". Civil union is defined as "a legally recognized union of a same-sex couple, but with less benefits than a Gay Marriage".First round is acceptance and definitions. Copy and paste of contentions is not allowed without citation, unless one is copying and pasting from one's own material (which needs to be cited clearly as your own work).
Skrillex is real music.

Excuse me but I haven't been on in a while, Skrillex is real music, you pay attention to what is heard rather than going deeper and listening to the rhythm and style. And call me Gamer if you please. I am not married nor in a relationsip, I am not an adult, I am 14. I listen to Skrillex everyday, everyone has opinions but you shouldn't have named this "Skrillex Is Real Music" That shows that you are saying he is. You would've wanted to say "Skrillex isn't real music" for the title of the debate. You aren't very bright if you think this. I bet that more people listen to Skrillex than classical. Classical is what sucks. I would have enjoyed this debate better if I would get alerted on my phone. I thank my opponent for debating with me. I am sure that most people will think this debate was useless and this has been the first debate I never responded to in any of the rounds. Thank you for this waste of time. Skrillex is music, dubstep music.
Skrillex is real music.

Mr. 1998 sucks because he forfeit. Skrillex isn't real music, because he gets no groupies, he has not skill, and he has gauges. Ear piercings are really the farthest one can go (nipple piercings are for those rockers who have gone over the edge) but gauges are just awful. What is really the purpose? So people can finally see that you clean behind your ears? Keep listening to too much dubstep at full volume on your iPhone Mr. 1998. Even though it is the result of a dryer on tumble dry attacking thousands of cicadas.
Skrillex is real music.

I agree with you, country is not the most favorable type of music, by any means. However, you broke the rules of this debate, you went off topic and it wasn't funny. Nonetheless, we will continue to debate because it greatly amuses me. First, have you ever seen the women who like Skrillex? Most usually have strange piercings, awkwardly short and dyed hair, or gauges. These simply do not count. Out of complete disregard of your wishes, I will continue to call you Mr. 1998 out of a sort of condescending tone that I have developed throughout this debate, Mr. 1998. What do you mean do not listen to what you hear and listen to the rhythm? Isn't the rhythm exactly what I am hearing? Should I completely disregard the harmony, and melody? Do you know what these words mean? Lastly, I would like to congratulate Pro. Pro is soooooo cool, that he listens to more Skrillex than he should on his phone at FULL VOLUME. Rock on Pro keep listening to Skrillex at full volume.
Skrillex is real music.

You have read my information wrong, one of my favorite movie series is Harry Potter, not books, books are different, and he does not always wear black, but if you go to one of his concerts, you will understand why people like him, he is famous, not evil. You are starting to sound evil yourself, though I do not believe that you are. I believe in many things, including the rhythm of music, I like many genres, Skrillex happening to be one of them. You should listen to the rhythm he uses rather than what you actually hear. And please call me Gamer, not Mr. 1998. I would rather listen to Skrillex than country. My mother will play country in her car all the time and after a while, it gets annoying. Skrillex has a lot of fans, many being women. I would like to point that people have their own opinions on music, yours being that Skrillex is not good with music. Mine is different, I listen to more music than I really should, I even listen to it on full volume on my phone.
Skrillex is real music.

Excellent points Mr. 1998. Because some of your favorite books are in the Harry Potter series, I would like to make a connection to that. From my point of view, which stands in the Classic Rock section, I see a man dressed in black that says he is evil, has part of his head shaved off, has really creepy followers, and everyone in their right senses avoids him. This much reminds me of the one whose name must not be mentioned. (A.K.A. Voldemort). That is right, Skrillex is Lord Voldemort in our society, Simon Cowell is the v-neck sporting Dumbledore, and (insert any artist that does not go by the name of Ke$ha here) is Harry Potter. To follow that awful work of figurative language, I will provide some imagery. When you watch any other concert besides dub step, you see a lead singer, possibly some guitarists, a bass, and a drummer. In a dub step concert, you see the scariest looking motherf*cker you have ever seen dance like a white man behind his MacBook Pro. This guy usually has gauges, piercings, SHAVED HEADS, a mouse head, fingerless gloves, and about fifty bracelets. It is also assumed that he smells terrible. First of all, what groupie would want to be with that? As we all know this is the first test of a real musician, sleeping with all the groupies you possibly can. One yes the fails. Skrillex, unlike every other person ever to make it in the music industry, lacks a talent. This man has no talent. Trust me, I am not saying everyone in the business is talented (E.G. Brian Johnson, ACDC) However those people know a better skill. People like Brian Johnson know how to entertain without being good. This is even more difficult to master than actually learning a skill. Bringing this back, Skrillex has no talent for anything. He orders the computer to make sound, presses play, and plays minesweeper while bouncing to make him look not half-asleep. I beg you, listen to Pink Floyd, Guns and Roses, Aerosmith, ACDC, Def Leppard, or anything else so this dub step fad can die.
Skrillex is real music.

Somewhat of a serious debate, wether Skrillex is real music or not. I personally think it sounds like a dishwasher fornicating with a garbage disposal and 5 air conditioners, but others think differently. Anyway, no real rules, just talk and try to stay on topic. If you go off topic it must be funny. A good sense of humor about yourself is needed for this debate. Take as many shots as me and my profile pic as you would like. I also sing, have a band, and enjoy eating. Have fun.
Hell is immoral and unjustified.

Introduction/rules There are usually 4 different main views of hell that the majority of Christians believe, being: A. Everlasting conscious torment B. Everlasting metaphorical mental pain from the separation of God C. Annihilationsim (soul is destroyed in hell) D. Universalism (everybody gets to heaven eventually after purgatory or hell) I will not argue against the last three, but instead I will argue that option A is unjust and immoral. If you take this debate as Con, you must believe the following: Those who do not convert to Christianity before they die will go to Hell. Those who go to Hell are in conscious pain for the rest of eternity. Those who go to Hell will never escape. I recognize that the burden of proof rests mostly upon me. Rounds: Round 1 will be acceptance and any courtesies either wishes to administer. Round 2 will Pro's opening argument and con's rebuttals Round 3 will be rebuttals and whatever new arguments either side wishes to add Round 4 will be a conclusion, each side summing up their arguments for their position. No new arguments may be given With that out of the way, I wish to say that I am looking forward to debating whoever will accept this challenge. Please do not take this debate if you disagree with the rules specified above and please do not forfeit.
Hell is immoral and unjustified.

I accept the terms of this debate with one adjustment. I will be arguing that people only suffer in hell for a time, but will afterwards suffer eternally in another place known as the lake of fire. I will show that Pro's case against eternal, conscious torment is flawed, and also show why such a punishment for unbelievers is justified. Please do not forfeit, Pro. I'm looking forward to a stimulating, intellectual debate.
I Bet I Can Make You Mad!

I watched the entire video, including the ending which was quite bloody. However, it did not make me mad or angry, so you have not fulfilled your burden of proof. The fact of the matter is, this is a video from a fictional movie with, indeed, very high stakes of survival. One can only survive at the other's failure. It's quite a devious dynamic that only a truly evil mind could devise, but it did not make me mad because this is not real. The clip actually made me want to watch the movie.
I Bet I Can Make You Mad!

This debate will centered on your response to this debate! RULES: 1) Please watch video/link FIRST before replying 2) Reply - present your counter - argument 3) You cannot get mad or forfeit or you will lose the debate Let's see how well you can do (Hint: you do not need to watch the whole video). Required Link/Video (Must Watch First): . http://www.youtube.com...
The Theory of God

I don't believe in god, and I certainly don't believe that anyone know anything god has said, unless someone spoke to him personally and if someone said they did I wouldn't believe them anyway. But I do believe a god could exist. If we can agree that there may be things that completely go against science, then an all mighty eternal holy creator could exist, and even his most faithful followers would be unable to comprehend his being. Unless you disagree and u think man's earthly observations that lead him to conclusions that he called fact are the only possible truth to the world, which I would say is rather closed-minded, then it is not illogical that a god could exist. And i never said god works in strange ways
The Theory of God

Thank's replying, I never said scientific logic applies to everything there are some things that cannot be explained. Nobody knows everything. especially the huge things that are so complex. Which leads me to discuss my point. The majority of scientists do not believe in god. It has been proven that the more we advanced in technology and intelligence the less scientists believe in god. Another thing you said is god works in strange ways we cannot understand, well than how is it that the majority of Genesis describes what god is saying, BEFORE WE EXISTED. How did humans know what god said if he has never communicated with us? I await your reply. Bye (http://idpluspeterswilliams.blogspot.com...)