BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Creative Writing Debate

Chapter 2Josh waited. He sat at the door, waiting not moving, staring at the door. Everything had beed strange at the house, all possible coincidences, but now he couldn't leave the house. So he sat at the door and every 10 minutes or so he would get an idea, try it, and fail. Then he would sit back down and think. Everyonceandaw hile he thought he saw something or heard something, but there wasn't anything he could find to help him get out. Then they messed with him. He felt queezy then had a headache, but never did a presence go away. Sometimes he got the feeling he was being watched, but never was anyone there.Then he got an idea. He wanted to believe there was another way, but he decided to go out a window.He went over to a window and it opened. He grabbed the bottom part of the frame and twisted around, still facing the window. He could see back inside the house and he smiled turning around.And he froze. He was still in the house. He turned around and the open window led back outside.Josh wasn't safe, and he would have taken his own life if he didn't have to warn his family. He knew they were coming soon, so he grabbed the axe from the closet and hunkered in a corner.No one would be safe.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Josh waited for over a day of torture, voices in his head, and he had grown used to obeying. Anything to get out.Then he heard the car. He got up to yell for them to stop, he waved frantically, but he couldn't get their attention and they kept walking to the door. You cannot leave. They cannot hear you. Anything to get out. Josh was entranced by the voice.His wife walked in the door."Honey, what happened? You look pale.""Nothing." He whispered, eyes blank and staring at open space. His wife and son walked past him and into the kitchen to unpack. Josh stood there, exactly like he was when the door opened. Anything to get out. "Hehe. He he he." Josh chuckled, his town sounding more and more hysterical with each breath. "Everything will be just... fine."And with that Josh went back up to his room.
Human Cloning should be Banned

I stand in negation to the resolution, "Human Cloning should be Banned. " Human Cloning- the movie presented by Frankenstein Science . http://www.ask.com... should- must; ought . http://dictionary.reference.com... ban- to prohibit, forbid, or bar . http://dictionary.reference.com... Here is a quick overview of the movie, Frankenstein Science: Human Cloning: "Explore the strange world of cloning in this unsettling documentary that gives the straight scoop about the ramifications of the controversial technology and explains exactly what cloning is. Although some animals have already been cloned, many complex technical and ethical issues surround the notion of cloning humans. The film presents a series of interviews with scientists, theologians and others who voice their opinions about the practice. " Looking over the summary of the film, the audience will except a straightforward, honest, educational film that will help people realize all of the controversies that are brought up with human cloning. My opponent must prove that the movie, "Human Cloning", should be banned. It does not show any dishonest or biased ideals, the movie gives great detail and provides background for the viewers. There is not a logical reason as to "Human Cloning" should be banned. It does not break any rules or try to deceive the public. I heavily urge a Con vote. I thank my opponent and await a rebuttal. Source for overview: . http://www.ask.com...
In vitro fertilization

The Advanced Fertility Center of Chicago illustrated the IVF procedure is simple terms: basically, a woman"s eggs are harvested and then mixed with harvested sperm from either a donor or the significant other of the woman. In same sex couples, the genetic material from eggs and mixed together in one egg. In both couples, the embryo is implanted in the uterus and then the mother gives birth to their child. This will always raise an issue about whether or not we are playing God or if it is religiously right, but the truth remains that is unethical to hold others to your personal beliefs. IVF gives more much opportunity to those whom nature has been cruel to being deeming them infertile- this isn"t debatable-and it isn"t up to others to make decisions for someone"s body and choices for their life.
In vitro fertilization

Multiple Pregnancy is a very plausible situation that a mother can find herself in from an IVF operation. This is because of all of the embryos that are implanted have a chance to mature into a fetus. Multiple births can be extremely painful for the mother and result in having far more kids than couple wanted. The average amount of eggs inserted is 2-3 so if the mother is only planning on having one child she can instead have triplets. With having a multiple pregnancy the children are 60% more likely to be born prematurely, gives a 3 times higher chance of preeclampsia, and if they are triplets then the rates increase even more for birth defects. If the risks are too high for the other babies, or the couple believes that they will not be able to keep and healthily support all of the kids, they may have to abort one or more, which can lead to damage to both the mother and other embryos.
In vitro fertilization

Options of what to do with excess embryos are numerous. According to CT Fertility, frozen embryos can be discarded, used by others, used in the future, or donated to science. The donation to others is probably the most admirable option for the simple fact that usually inn this case, it"s for a couple who can"t afford the entire IVF process and can only afford implantation. The donation for science allows scientist to find cures for ailments, perfect IVF, and overall advance scientific technology. Having embryos stored for later use is a very logical option, and allows for the parents to give their child more siblings and avoids the controversial topic of what is considered life. By religious standards, the destruction of embryos is equal to murder. However, the embryos haven"t been born yet, they are nothing more than a tiny seed. Also, others shouldn"t be held to religious standard that they don"t necessarily believe in. The issue is an ethical one, and due to the embryos not feeling pain when they are responsibly discarded, it is ethical to do so.
In vitro fertilization

While an IVF procedure may be beneficial at the time later there are serious issues on what to do with excess embryos. There are three major ways you can deal with the embryos: you can destroy it, you can freeze it, or you can donate it. This is an extremely difficult decision for infertile couples because these are basically their kids, their future. The IVF operation is very expensive and it"s highly unlikely that a family would be able to afford the procedure again. In a CNN interview Andrea Cinnamond said," "I thought I was going to be calm and casual." And she was, until the first bill arrived to keep the embryos frozen. "I was petrified," she says. "There was no practical reason to keep them. I just wasn't ready to make the decision not to keep them." She paid the $600, hoping that her thoughts would crystallize as time passed. This year, she's paying the bill again" according to studies 72% of infertile couples are unsure about what to do with left over embryos. If the family donates the embryos to science or destroy them some feel that they basically aborted the babies and prevented a life from coming into the world. If the family decides to donate the embryo to another infertile couple then the question pops up if that child will be neglected or not truly loved as much because they are not the couple"s real child. The last option is to keep the embryos in storage under ice but this costs an expensive $40 an month and can be a heart breaking decision to have to let them die off if they cannot afford to keep them alive anymore. Deciding what to do for the embryos has been described as,"the hardest decision I"ve ever had to make" and is rightful so because they are determining the future of their offspring.
In vitro fertilization

The genetic screening of embryos can be extremely beneficial. It allows for a healthier evolutionary change of the human gene pool and spares some of a genetic mishap that may leave them with a devastating disease. People who are born with dwarfism often worry that when they have children with others like them, their child will have a double dominant gene that would result in the child dying. a genetic screening of this would spare the heartbreak of parents losing their child, as well as the pain and suffering of the child as they died. The first baby born after a genetic screening of IVF potential embryos was a boy named Conner (Linda Geddes, New Scientist). His parents had their batch of embryos testing so that they could choose the healthiest one. Obviously, parents always want the best for their children and tis provides them an opportunity to sway nature in the favor of their child. In addition, it eliminates any guilt a parent would feel by passing on a disease to their children.
In vitro fertilization

While it"s true that science and technology will always be advancing, what is not true is that the progression will stop. There are ethical considerations that will be looked over because there will be money in the procedure. The average cost for an IVF procedure is about $12,400 and that is with all of the current issues with the procedure and pregnancy, when we are finally able to eliminate all of the fatal and scaring obstacles that IVF procedure is suffering from, how much will it cost? As the technology progresses so will the corruption within the ranks of the soon multi-billion dollar company that people will be able to buy designer babies from. The company will be playing God in a situation that I believe humans have no business meddling in. With all the power that designer babies have, society will be unfair to anyone who cannot afford to be born in those conditions as displayed in the movie Gattaca. Along with designer babies comes genetic modification, where geneticist will have to replace DNA from the parents to make the perfect child, who will eventually look nothing like the parents and further limit the gene pool for its offspring. Although this may seem like an odd example to use, the entire series of Jurassic Park is based of in vitro fertilization of dinosaurs and clearly pointed out that in the movie anything bad that could happen did happen, they couldn't control this new breed of predators and proved how unpredictable life is. Humans have yet to edit the Human genome to the extent of making a perfect human being and that is exactly what the progression of power and corruption will lead to. The first batches of designer babies will be abominations due to inexperience in altering human genes but when the product is perfected those "humans" will be on top and control everything while the "imperfect" humans will be segregated and shunned.
In vitro fertilization

According to to an article in the Times titled How Healthy are IVF Babies?, a study conducted in Sweden showed that only 7 out of 100,000 more IVF children experience cognitive deficiencies. The article suggests this has to do with the unnatural manipulation of sperm into egg in a petri dish and to resolve that problem, doctors are finding new ways to combine the genetic material in a more natural manner to reduce the risk of neurological issues down the road. Science is never perfect, however the IVF procedure and outcome is safe. As more and more procedures are done, doctors will find improvements that can be made so that only a few years from now IVF procedure will be as near perfection as any human can make it. About 5 million kids around the world were made in a petri dish and are perfectly healthy. Others may have not have been as lucky, but that is no different from how some naturally conceived children have disorders and some don"t. In fact, "in a study from March, for example, researchers reported that neurological problems among IVF babies were more likely brought about by factors related to infertility and not the treatments themselves". In making any medical decision, one must weigh the risk against the reward. In this case, IVF has a slight more chance for issues for the child and mother, however the reward of having the child far outweighs the off chance of these issues occurring when in fact it isn"t unheard of for a naturally conceived child to have them as well.
In vitro fertilization

Although IVF sounds like a relativity safe option for couples that can"t conceive naturally it can lead to a plethora of problems later down the road. Studies have been conducted that show that in vitro fertilization can lead to multiple ailments and disabilities in both the mother and the child. The mother has an increased chance of high blood pressure while pregnant that can lead to preeclampsia, which is a complication that pregnant woman gets due to high blood pressure, that in turn effects can organs and can lead to death if the baby isn"t delivered, and is 2 to 3 times as likely to develop gestational diabetes, which is when a pregnant mother, how hasn"t have diabetes in the past, gets diabetes during birth because the hormones that are being used during growth and development inhibit the mother insulin from working properly leading to both the baby and mother having extremely high blood pressure, prompting a lack of infantile development and possible childhood obesity. The mother can also experience a great pain with an IVF, higher than a natural pregnancy, because she can develop OHSS, or Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome, that is caused by an excess of hormones being introduced into the body, from hormonal injections for in vitro fertilized ovaries to allow them to survive, causing the Ovaries to swell up and become extremely painful. The mother can also have an ectopic pregnancy, meaning that the ovaries don"t go all the way down into the uterus to develop and start maturing in places like the Fallopian tubes or cervix causing internal bleeding and death of the mother if not treated quickly. The children are also severely affected by IVF, according to Professor Michael Davies, from the University of Adelaide's Robinson Institute, "Compared with spontaneous conceptions in couples with no record of infertility, singleton babies from assisted conception were almost twice as likely to be stillborn, more than twice as likely to be pre-term, almost three times as likely to have very low birth weight, and twice as likely to die within the first 28 days of birth." along with an increase in a chance of mental retardation. With IVF the couple isn't guaranteed a perfect child to how they want it, in fact they are not even given a guarantee that they will even have a baby. In vitro fertilization is not perfected and leads to too many maternal and infantile complications.
In vitro fertilization

In a 2010 census conducted by the Columbia Doctor's Center for Women's Reproductive Care, more than 111,000 same sex couples are raising adopted, step or biological children. Having a child is a huge milestone in any couple's life. Thanks to the science of in vitro fertilization, same-sex couples don't have to miss out on that. Not to discredit adopting or having step children, but there is a special something about having a child with a mix of both parents' genetic codes and raising it from birth. In vitro fertilization gives same-sex couples that opportunity to be able to say "oh her nose looks like yours" or "you get your athleticism from your dad". But this technology is not just for these couple, they are also for the many couples who find it hard to conceive. According to Leslie Goldman who was formerly infertile herself, "one out of eight couple battle infertility." Normally the emotions running through the couple are feeling guilt as if it was their fault they weren't on track to becoming pregnant. That devastation is easily remedied with in vitro fertilization. Overall, in vitro fertilization provides an opportunity unlike any offered to generations before to start a family and have a beautiful experience as parents.
advanced interrogation methods should be implemented on anyone who breaks the law

Your motion does not make sense.By directly following the motion, due to the lack of an argument, you are saying that anyone who breaks the law should be effectively tortured after trial. Simply because you stated, anyone who breaks the law, but people are only innocent until proven guilty and given a fair trial in most western courts, so we only know someone has broken the law after a trial. And to state anyone who breaks the law implies any sort of perversion from the law, from littering to murder counts. Do you already see the problems? Firstly, what is the point of this after someone has been caught? Surely the purpose of interrogation is to find out whether they did a crime, so afterwards, I can only assume data extraction. But if someone littered, then what data can there be to extract? I do not need to delve into the absurdity of interrogating after a trial, or after someone commits any crime, also because secondly, you will be torturing petty thiefs, pickpockets and those who litter. For what? As a deterrent? Well surely other than a deterrent there is no arguable moral reason to torture one who litters. And as a deterrent it is brutally immoral. As it is any crime, I can assure you that there will be a large number in the falsely tortured, which then has no justifiable reasoning. Also, the monetary and social practicality is minute. For every last crime to result in a torture, the amount of places for torture needed will be outside the budget of any Government, and not to mention that torture hostels will need to be common. And the backlash from the public will be too much of an issue.I urge the floor that this is not semantics. He did not explain his case so making any assumption on when to use it or how would be stupid, as these are subjective issues. The only thing I can argue this point by is by the motion defined, which is "advanced interrogation methods should be implemented on anyone who breaks the law", in which everything above applies to this exactly, so I urge you to vote for me.
Communism

Pro says: "The main thing I need to point out is I still think it is fair in a way." Counter: I believe I explained in my previous argument why Communism is not a fair system at all. If you work hard to do a job you love, it does not matter. You get paid the same amount as a person who works at Starbucks or McDonald's. And it is even worse how it plays out in real life situations. That doesn't sound too fair to me. Could you perhaps clarify that? Pro says: Some people can be more skilled than others, and should the people who aren't as skilled get lower pay? I don't think that's really fair. Counter: Yes, they should. That is how economy has played out for 3000 years. To get more skilled, you can get more formal schooling. Then, you get higher pay. This is the way it has worked for thousands of years. You can not get a reward for something you didn't work to get. Pro says: I do agree that Communism is flawed for a reason, greed. Counter: Correct, the whole system of Communism is pretty much controlled by human greed when it is enacted in society. Communism allows a loophole that creates a corrupt leadership and government since the leaders in power can control the wealth and regulate it. Pro says: Also, people get a share of food. Counter: Well, that doesn't make Communism right. (Thank you. I love my profile picture too)
Communism

(Yeah, this should be the last round, by the way love your profile picture. Also, sorry for really late response) The main thing I need to point out is I still think it is fair in a way. Some people can be more skilled than others, and should the people who aren't as skilled get lower pay? I don't think that's really fair. I do agree that Communism is flawed for a reason, greed. (Yes, I saw the comment and I was actually going to point that out in the next round before they said that.) Also, people get a share of food. (Yeah, we probably shouldn't have 5 rounds in this. Also, even if we have different opinions on this, I think we probably could be friends.)
Communism

One of the most misunderstood ideas that communism proposes is that under this system all people are equal. This is not true. Communism takes away personal liberties and freedoms. For one example, let's say you started a business. The business isn't yours; it is shared by everybody. Let's say you work hard to make that business grow. It doesn't matter, because you are all paid the same. Let's use the analogy you used. Say you go to school to get a PhD for 8 years. You finally start working, but make the same amount of money than a person who has no formal schooling and works at McDonald's. Does that sound fair? I don't think so. I think you should aptly be paid for what profession you are in, but in a Communist country, that doesn't matter. Another key fallacy with communism is the way it plays out in real life situations. Communism in itself is a bad idea, but the way it plays out is even worse. See, the main object of communism is that the proletariat (the working class) will rise up an eventually rule the republic. Sounds good, right? Well, no, because it never works that way. Take classic examples of Communist countries, like Russia, China, etc. While the proletariat are at that stage where they are under the government and market's control, the leaders have complete control over what wealth is distributed and what shares of business are given to people. The proletariat never rises up because Communism is flawed and the country prevents them from doing so, so many communist countries end up corrupt and non-functional. I probably shouldn't have included 5 rounds on this; both of us have pretty much made all our points.
Communism

(Okay, I guess then I'll start. Sorry if I don't post fast enough, because I won't be on 24/7. This is also my first debate, so tell me if I did anything wrong.) I think that all people should be equal. I think that Communism is good, because everyone gets equal amount of pay, no matter what job they have. (Correct me if I'm wrong.) If you say, "but then that isn't fair, because for example, doctors get the same amount as a fast food cashier" I think that if you like the job that you have, then why should it matter? Capitalism today feels like a race to see who can get the most money, and I think that's sad, don't you agree? I also think that with Capitalists judge each other from what job or how much money they have, while with Communism you really can't judge with how much money you make. I also feel that with Communism there will be less people in poverty. (I'll end it there. Your turn.)