BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Marijuana should be illegalized

http://thinkprogress.org...... . http://www.cnn.com...... . http://www.alternet.org...... 1. I believe all US citizens should be allowed Life, Liberty, and the PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS 2. the most common idea is that they prevent people from harming themselves and from causing harm to the culture. But laws against self harm always stand on shaky ground, as they are, on the idea that the government knows what's better for you than you do and no good ever comes from making governments the guardians of culture. 3. You don't have to look hard to find examples of lives needlessly destroyed by marijuana prohibition laws. The government arrests over 700,000 Americans for marijuana possession every year. These new convicts are driven from their jobs and families. Then pushed into a prison system that turns first time offenders into hardened criminals. 4. Marijuana prohibition has created an underground economy, where crimes unrelated to marijuana but connected to those who sell and use it, go unreported. End result: real crimes become harder to solve. 5. A recent Fraser Institute study found that legalizing and taxing marijuana could produce considerable revenue. 6. Marijuana is not a lethal drug and is safer than alcohol. It is a scientific fact that marijuana is not toxic to humans; marijuana overdoses are nearly impossible, and marijuana is not nearly as addictive as alcohol or tobacco. It is unfair and unjust to treat marijuana users more harshly under the law than the users of alcohol or tobacco. 7. Both the fiber (bast) and pulp (hurd) of the hemp plant can be used to make paper. Fiber paper was the first kind of paper, and the first batch was made out of hemp in ancient China. Fiber paper is thin, tough, brittle, and a bit rough. Pulp paper is not as strong as fiber paper, but it is easier to make, softer, thicker, and preferable for most everyday purposes. The paper we use most today is a`chemical pulp' paper made from trees. Hemp pulp paper can be made without chemicals from the hemp hurd. Most hemp paper made today uses the entire hemp stalk, bast and hurd. High-strength fiber paper can be made from the hemp baste,also without chemicals. 8. If someone is fine with self harm, let them harm them self it is there life, you should not control it. Clouded judgement doesn't mean your going to kill everyone around you it means you will suck at sports.
Marijuana should be illegalized

There are plenty reasons in the world to make marijuana illegal. The first reason is that it is bad for you. Plenty of people develop serious chronic diseases. The next reason is that if you are then a hazard to others. Being high is dangerous, if you need to get high from a plant, then you shouldn't spend money on it. Why not just "get high" on the moment and the excitement. I am high on the moment every time I go into action. Every time I went to play baseball, I was high on the moment and I never had to go and buy a plant! If you are high, then your judgement is clouded and so you are a danger to everyone around you.
No more dog abuse!

Why do people choose to stay in an abusive relationship? That is a hard question to answer. Nobody can ask a dog if s/he is happy living with their owner thus nothing needs to be done to stop dogs being abused. Also dogs can be purchased like any other animal too, therefore there is not much need to be concerned about how they are treated. I will now take a snippet from my source:"people who abuse end up abusing because they have an empathy deficit, either because of some sort of brain damage, or because they were so abused themselves as children that their innate empathic abilities never developed properly. Such abusers cannot or will not relate to other people as people, choosing instead to treat them as objects. In effect, they confuse people for things. They treat people as though they were there solely for their convenience and do not otherwise have an independent, important life. Abusers who treat people in this manner are very likely psychologically ill, and possibly medically ill as well. " [1]By doing "something" to stop dogs being abused you are just going to make people who see animals being abused get angry about nothing and kill someone who is psychologically or medically ill. Human life is more valuable than animal life.sources:[1] https://www.mentalhelp.net...
No more dog abuse!

There are people who do die trying to save their pet but that is because they think they won't die.How many people would sacrifice their life so their pet can live? No-oneHow many people would sacrifice their life to save a family member, a partner, or a friend? A lotTherefore human life is more important than animal life. You can drive into a loose dog, take its life (cruelist thing you can do) and you are unlikely to be punished by law, however I am not going to say that human life is more important because that is what the law says.
Abortion

I believe that abortion should not be restricted by law. It is the mother's choice whether or not she wants to keep the child she is pregnant with, and that choice should not be regulated by the government. People who are opposed to this say that it's inhumane to kill a child like that. I agree that everything that is alive has its own rights, but when women get an abortion, the child isn't even old enough for speech. They also aren't old enough for sophisticated thought. Therefore, they are not yet a part of society, and aren't yet really their own person. They are completely dependent on the mother, so it is the mother's decision on whether or not she wishes to keep and raise them.
Atheism Evolution vs Creation by God

I affirm, due to personal experience, observational, and scientific studies that all of creation demands that there be a living God that created ALL things. I know of no logical argument for the non-existence of a god, and have never seen any proof of evidence supporting the big band and evolution theories that attempt to give an alternative explanation of how everything we see came to be. Street rules for this debate. I only require a rebuttal for every argument and no insulting. Sarcasm is allowed. And no new argument on round 5 because I will not be able to give a rebuttal.
Universal Health Care

I think you hit the nail on the head when you asked why overpaid CEOs do not offer their employees benefits. This is a great question as it is not the government's responsibility to provide health benefits, But the employers. The employer should be doing this, But this does not absolve the employee from personal responsibility for attaining healthcare. By the time someone is 28, They should be able to care for them sufficiently to find a job with benefits. My mother has worked at Walmart for over 30 years, And my younger brother for probably 20. Both have healthcare benefits. Not everyone there gets benefits as most are part time and/or temporary, But if you are full time, You can receive benefits. Most people work within driving distance of a Walmart. Costco, Lowe's, REI (best outdoor store), Target, Trader Joe's, Staples and Whole Foods all offer health insurance, Including to part time workers (but by 28 you do not have an excuse to not be working full time). For fast food, In-N-Out (best burger chain ever), And Starbucks, Offer benefits. I believe you would be hard pressed to find anywhere in the USA that did not have a Walmart or Starbucks within a reasonable commuting distance, Then you throw in all the other shops, And one is left without excuse. If the burger joint, Or retail store you are working at does not offer benefits, Take responsibility for yourself and find one that does. Better yet, Move outside of fast food and get a career. Move if you need to. Citizens should not be forced to cover the cost of health care due to others their lack of accountability on finding health care. Regardless of this, Fast food and retail is not a career. Yes my mother has worked at Walmart for a long time, And I guess for her it has become a career, But she does it in order for the family to have benefits, While my father works (actually retired) at a higher paying job. If you have a two income family, At least one person can get benefits for the both of you at a minimum at somewhere like Walmart. The question to me is not only about taking funds by force and redistributing it, But also how the cost will be covered. In 2015 our government spent 3. 8 trillion dollars. Universal healthcare is estimated to cost 32 trillion dollars over the course of ten year. This would not double our taxes, But pretty close. Our country already spends more money than it brings in with taxes, Can we really afford to double our spending?
Universal Health Care

People who are working low-wage jobs did not choose to do such. Some people who work low-wage jobs have college degrees and a family, But can not put that degree to use due to the lack of jobs available in a certain area. Yes, Fast-food low wage jobs were seen as student jobs, But students now are not working these jobs anymore. This in turn, Makes adults have to fill these empty jobs and can not find another place to work because of a certain background, Etc. However, These fast food CEO"s make more money than you and I will ever see in life, Why don"t they provide benfits? The lack of available benefits for a wide range of jobs cause this healthcare breakdown. If it was required to provide benefits to your workers, Then we would not have this "universal health care. " I highly dissagree that someone must "earn" healthcare like you are implying. Everyone should have access to affordable health care. Period.
Universal Health Care

Whether taxes are how the "economy works" does not make it any less of a theft to take someone else's possessions, And redistribute it to someone else. Taxes are a forced "obligation" without the consent of the property owner. I believe you are correct that people should have access to healthcare, But this should not entail the theft of property by force. Most career jobs offer benefits, And currently people can be on their parent's insurance until 27 years old, So we cannot really argue that they do not have insurance because they are too young to have a job with benefits. When I was younger, Everyone thought of fast food and retail jobs as a student job, Not as a career. Now I see some people working in the same fast food company for decades. How is this now a career, And why have they not applied for a job with benefits? A lifelong lack of responsibility and poor planning should not justify taking from another to provide a service that someone does not earn.
Universal Health Care

Taxes is how the economy works, We may not like taxes, But it is an obligation to pay our taxes and respond accordingly. If there was a income-based health care tax, We would be able to use universal health care, Which was the ultimate goal of the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare). I can argue through this logic that if we can enact a health care tax so people without coverage, Can afford coverage without emptying their pockets. Every American deserves not to have health care bills that are astronomically high.
Universal Health Care

Taking something without consent is theft. Taking it by threat of force is robbery. Taking money from citizens with the threat of prison or confiscation of property fits the definition of theft and robbery. One could argue that some services benefit everyone, And therefore should be a shared expense, Like national defense, Security, And possibly infrastructure, But that really is all that could be argued for. When you tax someone, You are taking, What someone worked hard for by threat of force, And in the case of redistribution of wealth, Giving it to others who may have not worked as hard, Or as smart, At the expense of the person that did. By this logic, I could argue that it is alright to rob you at gunpoint as long as I am giving some the money to those that may have worked less than you did to earn the money. I would of coarse keep a descent portion of the funds for myself because I need to cover my overhead you know, Guns and prison are not free, And I need to make a living collecting your money anyway, So I do deserve a cut for this days labor. Theft through taxation and redistribution to those I think deserve it is no different than If I stole from you and gave it to my overweight, Unemployed nephew that lives at his parent's house, Someone expects them to financially support him, Including providing housing, Medical care, And food while he plays video games all night. Theft is theft, And perceiving that you may be helping others does not change that fact.
Planet Earth

Time is against us. Ever since our species evolved and learned of this world, what it can do and what happens around it. We've learned that time doesn't favour us here. So why is it that the leading politicians of the world base there politics on staying here. In one billion years the sun will have expanded so much that earth will have lost its atmosphere. That along with comets, super volcano's and the like, why is all our fish in the one net? I heard last year off a grant to which the U.S government will grant a University 10million dollars if they can come up with a plan to send a space ship in 100 years to the closest habitable planet with humans. One plan in 100 years time. It's hardly enough to ensure our survival. The universe created us it is apart of us. Did we stay in Kenya? Did we not travel around the world and currently live on all its land masses, to one extent or another? So why then stop at the moon? True we currently don't have the technology to really leave here on mass. And the most problematic problem for the team that wins the grant will be to some how ensure the space ship isn't breached. Flying through space at 10,000's miles an hour and a small rock could destroy you never mind any big ones. I don't believe in present politics I believe in the future. This planet won't be destroyed by us, it has been through far worst than us. And when its end comes it won't be by us so why bet on it? Politicians in my country our fighting over a small piece of land to which truly only means something to them. They don't see that in 200 million years from now that the earths land mass will be in the South Pacific. Pangaea 2 if you will. This is why we need our people's in togetherness, to truly survive we need to be one for we will become one. One way or another. I call for the uniting of all governments, however that each country still has its own local policies within it. World matters will be dealt with by this elected parliament to which a 2 3rd vote passes. All world matters will be voted on every 5 years in which a new set of representatives are appointed. The UN doesn't do enough for our future or even the planet and should be dissolved. Settling down isn't what we evolved to do, we evolved to explore and we can only achieve this together with one voice. Not a single U.S. lead team. Why wait for tomorrow when it can happen today? Remember its happening right now somewhere else. MY overwhelming question to you is, would you vote for this future if it where to be put to the ballet box?
Blogger / Blogspot is a far better blogging platform for most people than Wordpress

If you're considering starting a blog, you have no doubt considered whether or not to use Google's Blogger. If you did any kind of research on the matter, you quickly uncovered a hotbed of hatred towards the service: People hate Blogger because it is a haven for automated blogs that are nothing more than fronts for spammy advertising (called splogs, for spam + blogs). People hate Blogger because its commenting system is bizarre and unwieldy. People hate Blogger because it doesn't give you pages or tags (they have to completely buck convention and use the word labels while the entire rest of the damn world uses the word tags. That's almost Microsoftian! People hate Blogger because it's easy for others to get your blog banned because they disagree with your beliefs or they simply don't like your blog. People hate Blogger because it's owned by someone else and they don't have as much control over things as they'd like. A professional or business person would simply never use Blogger, because it conveys an amateur sensibility. My first blogs were on Blogger, back before Google owned it. It was really the only service of its kind at the time. Since then, WordPress has shot past Blogger in prestige and credibility. I myself have come down pretty hard on Blogger in the past. No doubt that's partly motivated by my WordPress-dependent livelihood, but I've spent tons of time on both platforms. Being a more advanced blogger, I prefer WordPress. But is that reason enough to hate on Blogger? No. In fact, the newest beta version of Blogger is better than ever. But does Blogger really have any other advantages over other blogging platforms? http://remarkablogger.com...
Blogger / Blogspot is a far better blogging platform for most people than Wordpress

RESOLVED: Wordpress is a better bloging hotspot for people. Although blogger may have many more gadgets and what not; wordpress has an older system with many more updates that can be toggled in settings. This one of many features makes way for people to express there company,diary,etc. to be more sucessful. Recent studies show that over 260million people visit wordpress blogs daily. Studies have also shown that on 50million are entertained by blogspot.com. wordpress also has a more stable and safer blog server than any other blogger in history. This is why I would chose wordpress over blogspot anyday. if i am going to blog for free, why not blog on the best?
Blogger / Blogspot is a far better blogging platform for most people than Wordpress

For a long time Wordpress has been an innovator and leader of blogging platforms. However, in the past few months, Blogger, owned by Google, has been catching up to the point where there is little incentive for people to go to the trouble of installing their own CMS for an activity that seldom covers expenses. It seems that most people who switch to Wordpress from Blogger are not aware that they can use a custom domain name with Blogger. It is clear to me that for most people, Blogger represents the better platform, whether we consider Wordpress.com or Wordpress.org (self-hosted). (1) http://en.wikipedia.org...(service) (2) http://en.wikipedia.org...
Should sport become compulsory

My opponent yet again is creating an illusion of argument justification. Simply there has been no logical instance found in my opponents examples. My opponent was painting the picture that someone in Coma (Not alive or Active) is to be considered as "Part of the term Everybody" My opponent is suggesting that an infant who is yet to: teethe, walk, read or write, has the coordination skills to be playing sport otherwise will be imposed eviction by the federal police.
Should sport become compulsory

Compulsory - Yes this term does mean to enforce, however, the term "compulsory" in this argument is in relation to sport and no other, regime, war, guns, delinquency or babies as you have acquired for examples within the structure in order to attempt to win your argument. In-fact it would have been better if you didn't associate historical regime with sport, sport is already on a decline due to "Increased work and study commitments". You have also associated this topic engaging destructive and primitive behavior in very large populations. The worlds largest participating sporting event has no more than 210,000 participants as of this date, and is held for no longer than one week, proceedings generally go to a charitable cause, the average number of participants in any given sporting event by all means is under one hundred and is not limited to solace participation. You as my opponent have created an ultimatum by re-defining the term in this argument. Is anything compulsory for a baby? Certainly though if sport was under totalitarian policy for infants, in proportion, they would have a very consistent record being that crawling is a form of walking. Baby steps for all the babies out there :). land tax - a totalitarian policy. If one were in coma, mentally incapable or simply out of action, would the feds really proceed with conviction? There has been NO "instance" found in your premise. Relationships can't be made compulsory, but sport is something which really can make a difference in one's life, when one is physically active, the effect helps improve one's self awareness, and that is a crucial element which allows the ability of self mentoring. So many factors reason the recent decline of sport, one should not lose their best self, if their sport kin moves town or breaks his/her leg. Ideally, collaboration globally within governments can achieve extravagant results for society. Government corruptible behavior as stated in your argument is minimal, If one government is corrupt, that doesn't tally all. Such radical enforcement would reduce the burden of modern health systems, that's the single most benefit. On an ending note for this round, I would like to share with you something which I personally have experienced after exceeding the age of 30 years, and I think it begins to most people who enter maturity, financial burdens require a more heuristic approach, the focus for family survival radically shifts and so does the paradigm for a precautionary approach and life risk assessment. If sport were compulsory, society (Quality of Life) would better.
Should sport become compulsory

Some of the biggest challenges within cross culture societies is establishment of social relation based on common interests. Other major challenges include maintaining and leading a healthy and active lifestyle. Sport - It is the least disputed lifestyle for humans and always has been, because there is one for everybody. So why do people stop playing sport ? Physical education (PE) is compulsory while at school, the consistent repetition of physical activity during youth doesn't always follow through / re apply during ones work career. Additional study commitments accumulate, starting a family further lowers the paradigm sport. Ones active lifestyle all together reduces and begins to become a paradigm of low priority. And when sport is low priority, several other relatied active elements become a lower prioroty too, the longer one doesn't keep active, the harder it can be to return to the field of play, not to mention the loss of self-worth and disappointment that attaches to people who fall short of their ideal self. Often people stop playing sport due to work and study commitments. Injury, self neglect or failing to prepare / warmup before play, Other reasons may be re-location or with partner etc.. The benefits of sport equal to more stable and generally healthier society: Greater confidence and self-awareness Improved health, fitness and overall well-being Greater social contact and interaction Less isolation and loneliness Increased ability to deal with stress Greater sense of relaxation and well-being Reduced symptoms of anxiety and depression Improved self-esteem and self-image Ref# http://www.onlinesportscommunity.com... [Benefits of sport]