BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Should homework be banned

Most teacher (at least at my school) are very lenient about homework. One of my friends doesn't have Internet at home all of our assignments on the Internet so she just talk to the teacher about handing it in a little later when she can. You're honestly just making excuses for kids not to do homework. As teenagers we don't really have an important social life we only care about being popular and that's what it's all about. Not being able to go out on your family is another thing that they should understand and work around your homework schedule. We are also being shown how to meet deadlines. Like say you're a lawyer you have to read a case for you have to go defend that person, if you don't read the case you have no clue how to do or what you're defending. Why because you didn't do your 'homework' as a lawyer. Why didn't you do it? Because you 'have a life' or 'have a important social meeting'. We are just being taught life skills through homework. I will admit that some homework assignments are ridiculous in either the assignment itself or when it's supposed to be due. But if you section it out, in even proportions (or however you want to divide it), it can be done. But there's a difference between actually having a problem or just wanting more time to do nothing to construct you to the world. Doing homework will get you ready for life in many different ways (because of the subject). And as you get older your job could influence country's economy or on a bigger scale the whole world. Honestly it comes down to priorities if you want to be one of those people whose life revolves around what they did in high school, go right ahead but some people actually want to do things with there life. There so much bad going on in the world that need to be changed and because where the next-generation we need to open our eyes and learn all we can. Even if that means bringing it home with us. I believe that homework shouldn't be banned because of the fact that we need to understand and know about the world, whether it be math, history, all the new literature or current events are all important and take more than six hours a day for weeks on end to learn about. Teachers don't give us homework to do you mean they do it to help us in the long run, so if you can take a step back and look at the bigger picture and look at all of it not just what you want to see
Should homework be banned

Homework is something that a lot of kids can't do, some don't have the resources at home to do them, so when they doing do it they get a detentions of some sort just because they couldn't do it. Not every kid that doesn't do homework fails, it doesn't mean test have to be banned, it's just not fair on a lot of kids that aren't eligible to do it at home. Saying homework should be banned isn't saying test should be too it's just not fair on a child's life, if you study you study, every kid has the choice to do it or not but when it comes to homework no kid has a choice to do it or not. I know that in my class a lot of kids do not complete their homework due to them not being able to have access to any resources at their home. Homework isn't a necessity of education, we go to school for 6 hours a day and then have to come home for more, I don't believe it is fair, a lot of kids don't learn anything from homework as a lot try not to do it cause it's our own time. Homework doesn't show that assignment have to be handed in on times it just shows that we have to do extra homework outside of school and have to put our extra curricular activities to the side. I personally could not go out during the day with my Family because the homework tasks that was set for me was due that week and if it was handed in late I would have got a detention. Homework is something no kid enjoys and is placed into our personal lives. So we have 6 hours a day of learning then we have to come home to homework, I don't believe it is fair. Homework should be banned because it's something that is not really necessary, depending on what it is. Studying is different to homework unless you are asked to study as homework, every kid has the choice to study or not, some kids may not be able to, some kids might not have to and some kids just choose not to do it. Homework should be banned!
Should homework be banned

You're bringing in "baggage" (I guess that's how I'd word it) into this debate. No teenager should have to watch younger siblings and if they do, they should decides it not be forced to. Homework is very important even if it's not fun at all. Obviously nobody likes homework but it has to be done. Homework shows us that some assignments have to be in on time and if not you don't pass/get a zero/etc. It's true not all teenagers get on their phones as soon as they get home, majority of them do and experiences show that majority wins. Education is very important , homework is just apart of that. There are honestly more important matters in the world then banned homework honestly and we probably wouldn't know that if we didn't get homework. In my math class, all homework is study for tests. So saying homework should be banned is like saying tests shouldn't be allowed either because you have to study at home too.
Should homework be banned

Homework is something that should be left at school, we learn and pay for an education at school not at home. If we needed to have any homework of a sort we study, that must be left into everybodies responsibility not the teachers. Not everyone goes home to their devices, I knows alot of teenagers do but what is the point of doing homework when we have an outside life besides school. Some kids doing their homework might not have a computer at home to do it, by not being able to complete it the child is then punished for something they can't help. A lot of children are busy anyway, some kids have a hard life where they have to look after younger siblings or extra curricular activities out side of school. We have 6 hours a day do do work, why does it have to come home?
Barack Obama

ok by barack obama i mean is obama doing a good job as president. no i dont think obama is doing a good job. under this president the debt has gone up 7 trillion dollars. when running for president obama said that all the debt bush added was unpatriotic and un american. in 2000 the debt was about 5.7 trillion dollars and in february 2008 the debt was 9.4 trillion dollars and today the debt is 17.3 trillion dollars. so obama lied there. obama said that if we passed the stimulus the unemployment would be lower than 8 percent but it never went below 8 percent until 1 month before the 2012 election and now there are reports out that those numbers were faked. under obama he expanded the patriot act and this mass spying on americans which is a violation of the 4th amendment. the benghazi attacks were covered up for political purposes by clinton and obama. the cash for clunkers program was a failure. the obama admin said it would help the environment and all it did was destroy classic cars and give people a reason to buy a new car from the auto companies he propped up with the bailouts. all the money obama gave to green energy companies. he gave 535 million dollars to solyndra and then they went bankrupt and that was a waste of taxpayer money. 25 million to evergreen solar and a whole bunch more on this link http://blog.heritage.org...
Barack Obama

I accept this argument with some trepidation, as at this time there is no resolution for me to argue in favor of beyond the name of the President of the USA. Clearly I must assume that there is more that the opposition wishes to argue than this; while a fine name for a topic, "Barack Obama" is hardly something that I can argue in favor of. An infinite number of possible resolutions fall under the heading of "Barack Obama." Indeed, it is entirely possible that I have just accepted the task of arguing in favor of the resolution that Barack Obama is the earthly embodiment of Lucifer. I ask all voters to bear this incredible lack of any original resolution in mind when voting.
Communism in America

If we look into how China's government is established its really not a Communist nation it's more Maonism then anything else. I do not recall and Communist nation in Europe passing a law on children. China does that cause its Maonism, a form of government created by Mao Zedong himself. Russia, Yugoslavia, Hungry, Poland etc. are and were true Communist nations. Socialism, Facisism, Nazism etc. are branches of types of government that came from Communism. Karl Marx the father of Communism once said that Communism is the true government for the people not the Borgusie. The Borgusie is what King Loui" IIIIIX was and they controlled the government after his death. Even today you see that the power holders have not changed, the Borgusie is still in power and the Prolitarians are still the presents to the Borgusie. Not a sinle person in America will see what I see cause they are not Communist
Communism in America

Communism collapsed in Russia and most of Europe in the early 90s. Now-a-days Europe is mainly socialist, not communist. China is the only communist country I can think of at the moment... and what they do is messed up (killing babies, forcing parents to only have a certain amount of children, etc). So are you saying then, that socialism is also communist? lol that is where you conflict with all the major professors and sociologists. They say socialism is NOT communism. Yet to me it seems like you are saying it is. Well, I agree with you, socialism is the Beginning to communism.
Communism in America

Yeah it's a really broad topic. that's the whole thing though, with the communism of the worlds standards, God is NOT in the picture, and you have no freedom of religion, or any type of freedom period, no freedom of expression. It's all planned and everything. I think a hybrid country of different mixes of ideologys/economys would be better, that way it would be a balance and no controlling majority. Like democracy and socialism, and then capitalism and communism mixed; all to balance each other out and to be like a kind of checks and balances of both. lol yeah a mixture. And with proportional representation and no interest groups controlling and deciding policies. A 10 percent tax on your income per month for health care would be much better too, as Benjamin Carson PhD neurosurgeon suggests. I'd say communism could work if the leader was pure of heart and mind, but pure communism to the worlds ideals like I said before is atheist, and I don't like that. The People should have the right to religion. People like me would be killed instantly in a communist country... or immediately silenced and imprisoned. Like one of the colonists said before, "Give me Liberty or give me death!" I'd rather live for freedom and die fighting for it, than compromise under a tyrannical dictator.
Communism in America

I do appogize for my actions earlier on, but China does claim to be Communist but they're actually to much Maonism(Qouted by my college profeser of Asain and European studies). I did a misprint on Karl Marx I admit that but the whole Christian ideology can be left along because in Communist nations religion is not permitted except in China. I'm also sure that with the right leader Communism could take a leading role in Ametica, it all depends on the leader and the will, might and the minds of the people.
Communism in America

First of all, I will only continue to discuss this issue with you if we both are constructive and do not negatively criticize or judge each-others beliefs. No matter what belief, right or wrong, no one will listen or accept something if spoken in a harsh manner; so if you agree to speak constructively and non-judgmentally (as this is a touchy/controversial topic), I will continue discussing this issue with you. But if not, then go talk to someone else. But anyways, all that I"ve heard and read, and seen, China claims to be communist. That is their title and their claim. I never heard of this "Maonism" ideology, something I could look into when I have free time. Yeah I don"t recall a communist nation in Europe passing a law on children either, but I wouldn"t be surprised about it though" In fact, my boy friends uncle, [well my boyfriend"s family (his mom and her sisters and parents lived in Communist Romania)], when he was born [in communist (at the time) Romania], he was [by the doctor (the doctor was ordered to by communist law)] consistently banged and hit in the head, so he could be mentally impaired; the doctor was order to do this because the mother had "too much" children -.-. To this day my boyfriend"s uncle has mental problems: All because of communist Romania. Yeah, I agree with you, most or Europe was communist until the early 90s. But I could also tell you, that I have read and heard, and watched/listened to many accounts about the HORRIFIC blood-shed that was spilled, of those who would not Conform to the communist principles. As I have heard and learned in life, the only way to awaken love, is by love. If a country wants its people to follow them whole-heartedly and devotedly, force is not the true answer. Communist countries, the past ones, have used force, and have exerted their power by that of tyranny. And as I learned when I took a sociology class last fall in college, by my sociology professor, Karl Marx was not the father of Communism. He was the father of socialism. He never even mentioned communism. Those who read Marx"s works later came up with the idea of communism. Karl Marx only addressed the issues of the Borgusie and the Proletarians, and the repetitive cycle that would occur; capitalism to socialism; on and on, over and over. I see what you are saying. But there is a much deeper issue to this communist idea that many people do not see. Or choose to stay blind to and stubbornly ignore. Communism on paper is ideal and well-suited to the needs of those who are taken advantage of by the rich. But all in reality, it doesn"t work. At least not for those who will not conform to her tyranny. The real and "pure" and "true" "communism" will only ever work" in Heaven. Where no sin, sorrow, or pain is. Where only love, freedom, equality and self-sacrificing love is. In this world there is sin and selfishness, and Man becomes power-hungry whenever given a seat of authority.
why colleges

It's not the same things you learn in highschool. There are tons of topics you can study in college that many if not most highschools don't offer. Highschool gives you a pretty general education on all the main topics, but it leaves out things like particle physics, quantum mechanics, a whole bunch of language courses, most of the stuff you learn at medical school, pretty much everything you learn at law school, and if we also consider vocational schools then we have to include pretty much every trade outside of wood shop and basic car work. You say that college should be about what career you want, well that's what it's for. You can't be a doctor or a lawyer without going to college, and highschools just aren't equipped to educate kids on how to be anything like an engineer. You also say that we should be able to immediately get a job in the field we studied in instead of getting an unrelated job. Well I agree, but thats more a problem with the job market, that's not the fault of the college. Keep in mind that people who only get a BA still earn on average almost double what people with only a highschool education earn over their lifetime [1]. You also say that college is a waste of time and money. College is expensive, I agree with that, but what you're saying is too extreme. You're throwing the baby out with the bath water. We can work to make college more affordable, you don't need to get rid of it all together. Also, like I said before, you earn almost double when you get a BA (over your lifetime), so it's obviously not a waste of time to do. [1]. http://www.dba-oracle.com...
Racists. Those that identify themselves as a Race.

The proposition states that a "Racist" is one who identifies themself as a race.Well race in a scientific sense refers to the human race, and by the virtue everyone is racist, however I'm sure pro is refering to the collequial conception of race synonymous with ethnicity."a person who believes that a particular race is superior to another."http://www.thefreedictionary.com...;."A group of people identified as distinct from other groups because of supposed physical or genetic traits shared by the group."http://www.thefreedictionary.com...Well the notion that one identifies themself with a race does not entail that the individual believes the race they belong to is superior.For example my best friend is white, however he does not believe that white people are superior.
Racists. Those that identify themselves as a Race.

Pro says"Racists, identify themselves as a race first. This is the mantra of all racist's Black or White. Racist's see color. Only a non racist does not. You cannot be accused of racism if you are colorblind. All racists see people as colors."The motion states that racist are those who identify themselves as a race and pro has not substantiated this and has diverged from it.Now he says racists see color and non racist does not and this is only by virtue of being colorblind. 1- Colorblind people are still a race. 2. Even though all racist see color, it does not entail that all people who see color are racist.The next paragraph is non-topical.Also please give me conduct, as pro was quite rude,
Racists. Those that identify themselves as a Race.

Thank you for your response, it is much appreciated, however naive and misguided it may be. I will address your disillusions in order. I will use no source, as they are all biased, and I am not taking sides. This argument is fact, in my pea brain. Racists, identify themselves as a race first. This is the mantra of all racist's Black or White. Racist's see color. Only a non racist does not. You cannot be accused of racism if you are colorblind. All racists see people as colors. Liberal guilt uses the powers of the poll to protect their own wealth based on their ability to manipulate the facts about who is and isn't racist. Vermont was the first non racist state and it was governed by conservative whites that did not believe in owning slaves. Now the liberal democrats have slithered their way into our statehouse and have made us slaves to their law. That is the truth as I know it. So be it.
Forensics should be part of the required high school English curriculum

Now, second, I will address your second argument first. First off, as far as people with a mental disability, I am one of those people. I have autism and adhd, I am in 2 accelerated classes. For the severely mentally disabled as well as the blind, deaf, or mute, they can get excused from the course through their IEP. Finally, as far as bias is concerned. My social studies teacher admits that every teacher plays favorites even if they try not to, even in non-ideological classes.
Plato's Republic is a rhetorical attempt to curb political extremism

Hi...as the resolution prescribes, this is a debate over a specific interpretation of The Republic. ==Definitions== The Republic is indeed The Republic by Plato... 1) Rhetorical: Expressed in terms intended to persuade 2) Curb: Restrain or keep in check 3) Political Extremism: actions or ideologies of individuals or groups outside the perceived political center of a society; or otherwise claimed to violate common moral standards ==Rules== 1) Argumentation will start Rd. 2. Rd 1 will be for acceptance and clarification. 2) No semantics or resolutional negation. For example, arguments such as: "Derp...The Republic is a philosophical not rhetorical attempt o curb political extremism. Resolution negated" is not valid and will be an auto-loss for the round. *This i serious debate and please take it as such. : ) Thank you. If there are questions, ask me
Do Ghosts Exist

As with any fundamental pertinent to debate, a value of definitions will be identified in accordance of the criterion within each argument. Obviously, the prime keyword in the resolution (ghosts) will be defined and there will be no ambiguity within the definitions (I. e. if a word comprises of numerous definitions, only the one pertaining to the resolution will be entertained). Ghosts - "the soul of a dead person, a disembodied spirit imagined, usually as a vague, shadowy or evanescent form, as wandering among or haunting living persons. " (. http://dictionary.reference.com...) Exist - "to have actual being; be" (. http://dictionary.reference.com...) Since I am CON, my opponent will sadly have the burden of proof, however, they can obtain the information from any field of knowledge as they see fit - scientific, metaphysical or otherwise. Good Luck.
Do Ghosts Exist

Well, round 3 was awkward and rather lax but I take full responsibility for that as my forfeiture evidently prompted my opponent to forfeit as well. While I do believe you saw something that night in April 2012 but you stated that it was at 2:12 AM, pretty late at night for some (not for me though :P), you also stated you "vowed" to stay up that late, thereby implying that you made a commitment to doing so. In short, what you saw was a potentially a hallucination caused by sleep deprivation. http://sleepdisorders.about.com... Also, may I ask what lighting the surrounding was when you witnessed this, as I myself am a sufferer of Hypnagogic and Hypnapompic hallucinations (Hallucinations that only occur within the hours dedicated to one's sleep). There is another idiopathic phenomenon known a Peduncular Hallucinosis (Hallucinations that only occur at night). https://en.wikipedia.org... https://en.wikipedia.org... https://en.wikipedia.org...
Do Ghosts Exist

I will admit that is a worthy source for you. I believe ghosts do exist however. .. and I'll explain as best I can why from an experience I had. On April 15th 2012 at 11:40 pm I was keeping a 100th annivesary of Titanic's sinking vigil in my room. I vowed to stay up until 2:20 am. Then at 2:12 am, clear as day, I saw the Titanic band, all 8 of them with their instruments standing playing that haunting hymn Nearer My God To Thee. They smiled at me, I saw it clearly. I rest my case for the moment
Do Ghosts Exist

My initial defense will be that there is no biblical proof that ghosts exist as disembodied spirits. http://www.gotquestions.org... Its not the strongest defense given that any field of knowledge can be cited. Albeit, referencing scientific facts this early in the debate isn't really fair on my opponent nor the resolution as most "ghostly encounters" are described as defying scientific fact. Ergo, I will wait for my opponent to present his burden of proof.
Voting age limit should be reduced to 15-16

If we were to lower the voting age to 15-16 then governments (of some countries) would force kids to vote like they do for adults and it'd be pointless because majority of all the children voting wouldn't know the importance of voting. My opponent then states that children are very active on social media and would know about the current events from there which is useless. Children on social media don't even pay attention to the news, especially if it was concerning politics. Pro keeps stating that Children are harder to buy because they have this "Sense of justice", children are already becoming corrupted because of social media. Any kid would be willing to sign a piece of paper for $10 or less, why? because to them, it's something meaningless. This is why we shouldn't lower the voting age, you wouldn't want ignorant children choosing the future for your country.