BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Gay Marriages

Most people do believe in a creator but that does not mean that they believe in God. Yes it may be immoral but people do immoral things everyday. It may destroy the foundation, but I believe not that many people will turn gay, and there are families when they treat them to not be gay, so they wont come out to it, and yes i do believe that they will get away with something if they destroyed something of homosexuality. Most of the country doesn't not agree with it, but it should be something that they live with because it the people in there in country or in there state, it is like them turning them away like they dont want them to be there. Now put yourself in there position. What would you do, if you felt like the outsider of everyone because you couldn't come out about your sexuality because no one agrees with it.
Gay Marriages

I'm happy to debate you on this matter but I do ask that you keep things factual. First off your comment about "most" people not believeing in God, that is inaccurate. Many polls put the number around 85-90% of the population that believe in a Creator. Secondly, what most people see wrong about homosexuality is that it is immoral. I believe it destroys the foundation of what a family truely is. Also it is unnatural. The human body wasn't designed for intercourse with someone of the same sex. Lets just imagine if the whole world decided they were gay and nothing else. The whole human race would only continue to exist through test tube babies. How is this natural?? As far as gay rights go, I seem to recall a certain homosexual group able to get away with desecrating a Catholic Church. Would a heterosexual get away with the something to that extent to a homosexual organization without nationwide coverage?? A big point I would like to make is that the majority of the country (washingto post poll) think that same-sex marriage should be illegal. Last I check this is a democracy, put it up for vote. Even in the 2004 campaign when the gay and lesbian lobby tried to putting it on the ballot they were shot down in every state that ran it. Even in Oregon where most of their campaign was focused the measure was shot down. I do not think there should be a constitutional amendment, but left up to the states.
Gay Marriages

I am in favor of gay mariages, because it is who they must be. God might not have said it was right, but did he also say that being straight is right. Now i do not want to bring god into any of this because most peopele do not believe in him. Now, what are the people doing to us, what are they doing for you to dislike them? Nothing at all. Once someone told me how do you know you are gay if you never had sex with a guy, and i simply answered how do you know you are straight if you never had sex with a guy. and he simply just walked away not knowing what to say knowing that i was right. They are people just like you, and really you have more right that we do, We can not get married in a church, We can not show a simply kiss or we will get gay bashed. Wich in my opinion is unfair to us. Even though it says that we are alltreated the same, that is not true.
Gay Marriages

I'd would like to start by saying everything I have stated is easily availible. I have ONLY included FACTS in my argument. What information have you provided to dispute my claims?? Any polls or data that proves I am wrong?? And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. (romans chapter 1:27) You sure you went through every verse?? "For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due." —Romans 1:26-27 To your next question,"Yes it does, if two people love each other and they make them happy, why shouldn't they be aloud to be together, why shouldn't they be able to love who they love." Why do you have to be married to love who you love?? If marriage is just a law binding agreement, why do you need it to prove that you love someone?? And the goverment DOES NOT provide happiness. They give you the freedom but does not provide the hapiness. Where does it state in the Constitution that the goverment must provide YOU happiness? I'm not contradicting myself because having a right to be together and having a right to marry are two diffrent things. My next point is why can't you accept that the results in Sweden can be duplicated here?? Do you have proof?? Also, to awnser your question about HIV/AIDS being a homosexual disease, that came from a gay/lesbian group. You even admit that it is more common in homosexuals. How does that make me rude and cruel to state a FACT?? Lastly, you have failed to awnser any of my questions about what benefit the goverment has in providing gays the right to marry. You have also failed to address the issue of the countries that have legalized same-sex marriage and paid a high price for it. I have simply stated the facts while you have ONLY provided opinions. I would suggest that in your Closing Argument you provide at least one fact.
Gay Marriages

First off i would like to say, how do we know your information is right you have not stated where you have found your information out or not. Secondly, All of the bible verses that you have given me i went through all of them and read them over, and I keep reading them over and over and none of the state clearly that being straight is RIGHT, and being gay IS NOT right. We live in a democracy right, well it is what the people want, or what majority want, maybe they have not realized the growing population of homosexuals, maybe they just dont want to listen to the very few who have the courage to stand up for what they believe in. Yes it does, if two people love each other and they make them happy, why shouldn't they be aloud to be together, why shouldn't they be able to love who they love. Well, they government does provide happiness, because they have to do what the people want, and if they do then the people are happy, so technically when you really think about the government does provide happiness. The only reason why they dont approve of gay marriage is because, they dont have this NORMALNESS, of how you call it. Well would you rather have two people together who dont like each other, or two people who love each other. What it does to the family, is between the family, as long as it is in a loving home and is being taken care of well, they should be left alone, if it makes another baby out of an orphanage or and adoption agency then I see no problem with it at all! Those results are in Sweden to say I am not there, people are different all over the world. Basically what you said is contradicting itself you said you HAVE NO PROBLEM with gay people together, but you do not think they have the right to marriage, it is the same thing only they have sworn themselves to each other for the rest of there lives. Also, I was going over what you said how HIV/AIDS is a gay disease. what kind of rude and cruel person would say something like that. Straight people get that disease too. the disease is just more common to be found in homosexuals.
Legalization of Marijuana

My opponent's forfeit Now, at first glance I would just assume that there was a perfectly reasonable excuse for my opponent to forfeit the round, other than he had just surrendered to my arguments. But, doing the easy research by simply looking at my opponent's profile, I noticed he was online yesterday, and even looked and noticed he was on the day before that. Which leads me to say;My opponent was aware that he had a debate argument due. Now, if my opponent also forfeits the final round, it will only lead me to the conclusion that I had won the debate. This round may have been a fluke type of round, so I will not assume my opponent fully surrendered.I anxiously await to hear my opponents decision.
Legalization of Marijuana

First, when I mentioned we are wasting money on wars, I was saying we could use that money and make money back if we produced a sold Marijuana properly. We are using way to much money on the Marijuana war then needed. Also my sentence about how prescription drugs kill 100,000 people a year came from the book, "Marijuana Reconsidered" By: Doctor Lester Grinspoon. Second, I understand if it is used as a medical drug it will also be used for smoking. You mentioned there will be pot- heads out their. I understand that, but if you look on Fox News, today they talked about how if it was sold they would only sell it in four packs so people can't smoke it constantly and they would use a system to tell how recently the bought it. Third, we are wasting money by the police using the gas, time, and energy stopping people who are harmlessly smoking the drug. We are wasting money on the gas they use by stopping what many believe is a petty crime. If you would like me to go into further detail I will. Then, you talked about this sentence, "Besides, Marijuana affect would have you pass out before you could try to overdose". You took me as talking about prescription drugs. I was saying The affect Marijuana, if used improperly by abusers, they would pass about before they could try to overdose on MARIJUANA! When I was talking about prescription drugs, I was comparing about how something you can just go buy, is much more dangerous than Marijuana. I was never talking about using Marijuana and prescription drugs together. I was just comparing the two. You mentioned how Marijuana has been found in the system of people who have died, but not directly. That because you should not use Marijuana with any other drug. Just like with alcohol, you are not safely supposed to drink and use other drugs at the same time. I got this from the National Geographic " Drug Plant " article. If you actually would talk to someone who works with Marijuana and prescription drugs you would understand the differences. I would give you a source, but unfortunately all I can tell you is my cousin works with these things at Cambridge University!! Their is my argument, as I wait for your response! P.S. you talked about how we don't need Marijuana, but we don't need alcohol and tobacco either!
Legalization of Marijuana

I think Marijuana should be legalized in the United States because for one thing it is causing more wars and wasting more money instead of stopping wars and making money. Some people say Marijuana is to dangerous, but alcohol is more unsafe then the drug. You may also point out that I called it a drug, but tobacco is also a drug. Marijuana, even if it is not used medically, can be beneficial. Some people say it kills to many brain cells, but what their not thinking about is that when any brain cell dies, a new one is created. Which new brain cells are stronger than old ones, therefore making Marijuana healthy for the brain, if smoked safely. That does not mean I am saying you can smoke it anywhere you want. It still should stick with normal smoking laws. Another point is people try to complain that people can overdose on Marijuana, but you can do that with any drug or alcohol. Besides, Marijuana affect would have you pass out before you could even try to overdose. Prescription drugs kill about 100,000 people in the world each year. Off the top of your head, do you know how many deaths are caused by using Marijuana, either medicinally or recreationally? "There are no deaths from Cannabis use. Anywhere. You can't find one," said Dr. Lester Grinspoon, professor emeritus at Harvard Medical School. Believe it: In 10,000 years of known use of cannabis, there's never been a single death attributed to Marijuana. Marijuana is smoked by some people to ease Arthritis pain in the muscles. Thought, this does not mean they should trade their medication for Marijuana. Marijuana is just a a pain remover. Going back to the prescription drugs; Prescription drugs, while legal, are experimental, dangerous and often toxic. Prescription drugs continue to kill hundreds of thousands Americans each year; meanwhile, Marijuana has never been the direct contributor to a single death. Overall I think the should legalize Marijuanna because of it medical help and because it will end many wars America is having!!
Legalization of Marijuana

The EndWell, my opponent has stated why he was unable to post any rebuttals to my arguments. I will let my audience take what they want from the explanation, and view it how they like. Whether they believe it or not, there must still be a vote, for there were indeed arguments and points made. Now, I do wonder why my opponent was able to post an explanation in round five, yet still forfeited round four, but who knows what happened. I would also like to throw in that I gave my opponent a second chance after his forfeit, and he had a chance to still argue after round four despite the forfeit, yet did not reply. And the punishment for no rebuttal was; "Now, if my opponent also forfeits the final round, it will only lead me to the conclusion that I had won the debate"My audience can also view that how I want, but I would also like to throw that in there. Whether you take my opponents explanation as a forfeit is up to you.Thanks to my opponent for a brief, yet entertaining debate. When you are ready and able, maybe we could debate this topic again, and get through all of the rounds. Also; thanks to the audience and voters for reading the debate!
Society's Take On the Catholic Priest Harrassment Scandal

My Apology for the Roman Catholic Church I am not defending the priests. I am defending the Church, which is my duty. The Catholic Church has gone through quite a bit of reformation in the last four decades in order to appeal to the change in times. What happened was that there were changes in selection in priests. This changed their role from being the leaders of the conregation to being showmen(and now Fr. Brown and the Churchettes, dududududaaaa!). Originally, the Catholic church was an extremely conservative organization, and this worked well for us, but then, to attract more people to the faith (this part is regretable, but understandable.)they changed to become more "happy clappy". This caused an unshown schism in the faith, one side, traditonal latin masses etc., found the other childish, trumpets and tamborines. The trumpets and tamborine crowd recruted a heck of a lot of "dynamic" priests to attract more people. So to do this quickly, they laxxed their standards, a bit. This allowed creeps, who I have never ever defended nor ever have said I defended, to slip in. Priests were trusted members of the community back then, so parents trusted their kids with them, that's why the creeps wanted in. Parents back then also had a bit of common sense, a defficiency in today's world it seems, and if there was someone in the town who was a creep, they told thier kids, who back then had some ammount of intelligence, another defiiciency, not to go around them. It's pretty easy to tell a creep from a normal person, it's not rocket science and creeps are, in my eyes, complete retards, and they would be reported to the authorities, in this case, the Church, who would kick them out and report him to the cops. Now today, we have a big problem, because instead of throwing them out, the new and "improved" church justs lets the problem stagnate. While we can blame the church, a viable means of shifting the blame, they did not know, there was no way of knowing the results of their small changes over time, a better way of doing things would be to blame the individuals themselves, no? But instead, the media decides to condemn the church and push the individuals off to the side. Why? Because everybody deserves a second, or third, or fourth, chance, but by all means, let's blame the church, this is the first time in history that this has happened. About Reverend Wright, he did not just say mean things, a mean thing would be to say "nappy headed ho" on radio. Wright said down right traitorous things, geez I don't know "Goddamn America" during a time of war? But everybody should get their second, or third, or fourth chance, so let's sweep him under the rug, even though he's been saying things like that for twenty or so years. Now I'm sorry that I am passionate some times and that I can't be a mindless automaton with no emotions, but if one can't be passionate at times, who will? Now can I take this rod out of my ?
Society's Take On the Catholic Priest Harrassment Scandal

>>> what I meant was that society, through ignorance or hypocracy, overblows a pure minority of a group and represents the entire group as the few! +++ No! If any prominent group molested anybody, there would and will be a social explosion among American people. News travels fast. The Catholic priest molesters should be held accountable for their actions. These priests did not pay enough. They should have been publicly humiliated, arrested and fired. Only some of them have managed to be fired by this point. Society's reaction was not too much, if anything those molesters, that you admitted were abominable deserved more! >>> While Catholics aren't abhored, I apologize I got more than a little passionate and I tend to exagerate when that happens, +++ Well, please, for the sake of debate, tell the truth. And be reasonable. >>> may I ask the question of the take on the Morman poligamist sects? How did people react? Oh wait, now we seem to think that all Mormans are poligamists! Or what about Islam? Now all Muslim people will kill you as soon as look at you! It's outrageous what the media will do! ( Jesus, how many exclamation points can I use? ) But who gets it most? The Catholic Priests, the conservative Catholic priests. +++ Most Americans believe that modern Mormons are not polygamists and if anybody thinks they are, it is not the fault of the recent case. Catholic priests do not get the most scrutiny. Most priests are well-respected. Look at the pope. Islamists have it the worst. And there are sone casual jokes about priests, which is bound to happen. But you are really over-exaggerating! >>> It isn't a conspiracy theory, a theory about corrupted higher powers, but a hypocracy theory, one of corruption of the lowest scum on earth, the media. I am not defending molestors! I am saying "SMALL POTATOES! "! It is an overblown scandal, a scandal that the church should have fixed years ago, that the media and liberals eschew with such a ferocity that it got old long ago. Instead of going for issues of extreme importance, they skip merily to the weakest issue in school and mirthily pound the dickens out of it. It is sad how low our news networks have become. +++ . .. Look, the molesters comitted vile, hypocritical acts. They potentially harmed these people psychologically permanently. They deserve the American societal scrutiny they got and they deserve more. You saw what I showed you earlier about what the American Psychiatric Association says about molestion. It is morally wrong and will damage those children forever. They deserve to be severely punished for what they did to these children. Do not defend these priests and plea for a lighter sentence. They deserve the scruitiny and more. Thank yuo for reading the debate.
Society's Take On the Catholic Priest Harrassment Scandal

Of course molestation is abominable, I never denied that (next time try not to read between the lines, you don't do it very well!), what I meant was that society, through ignorance or hypocracy, overblows a pure minority of a group and represents the entire group as the few! While Catholics aren't abhored, I apologize I got more than a little passionate and I tend to exagerate when that happens, may I ask the question of the take on the Morman poligamist sects? How did people react? Oh wait, now we seem to think that all Mormans are poligamists! Or what about Islam? Now all Muslim people will kill you as soon as look at you!It's outrageous what the media will do! ( Jesus, how many exclamation points can I use?) But who gets it most? The Catholic Priests, the conservative Catholic priests. It isn't a conspiracy theory, a theory about corrupted higher powers, but a hypocracy theory, one of corruption of the lowest scum on earth, the media. I am not defending molestors! I am saying "SMALL POTATOES!"! It is an overblown scandal, a scandal that the church should have fixed years ago, that the media and liberals eschew with such a ferocity that it got old long ago. Instead of going for issues of extreme importance, they skip merily to the weakest issue in school and mirthily pound the dickens out of it. It is sad how low our news networks have become. Oh, yes, and don't try to accuse me of defending the vile pieces of blank that somehow crawled from their cruddy little hole in the ground into the church, it makes you look like you don't have an arguement that's better than a personal insult. Thanks for taking the topic, I'll enjoy debating with you.
Society's Take On the Catholic Priest Harrassment Scandal

>>> "First, they decide to turn their heads away from other religeous figures, I don't know, Reverend Wright, who do equall damage to society, and decide to put the spotlight on Catholic priests, who conveniently are rather conservative, the direct opposite of American society today. +++ Wright obviously did not do equal damage as these priests. Wrights said some mean things, but these priests molested innocent little boys! Those to acts are incomparable. Obviously, America did not turn their heads on Rev. Wright. We all know who he is and that is due to the fact that every news organization spent all of their news coverage on the man. The clips ran 24/7. But the Cahtolic priests molested little boys. Molestation is bad. To prove this I use the American Psychiatric Association: The American Psychiatric Association states that "children cannot consent to sexual activity with adults",[17][18] and condemns any such action: "An adult who engages in sexual activity with a child is performing a criminal and immoral act which never can be considered normal or socially acceptable behavior. " The attention on these molesters was well deserved. They each deserved much stricter a punishment. >>> Second, they paint ALL Catholic priests as demented little buggers and shun them. +++ Well, this is evidently untrue. When the pope can to town the entire nation was excited. All the shows were talking about it, they gave him a parade, he spoke publicly at many places, the president even came to meet him. America was obviously excited to see the pope. America dispises, rightfully, the molesters not all Catholics. >>> Third, this will most likely lead to general abhorment of all Catholics, because obviously their religious leaders, including His Holiness, are demented little buggers, so they must be demented little buggers. +++ Well, my second rebuttal proved this incorrect. America was excited about the pope. And nobody will abhorn Catholics. And your conspiracy theory. That is just stupid. Shame on you. The fact is: MOLESTERS ARE BAD! !! They cause psyhcological damage and force children to make decisions they are unprepared to make or unwilling to. I showed earlier the APA's take on it. The American Psychiatric Association states that "children cannot consent to sexual activity with adults",[17][18] and condemns any such action: "An adult who engages in sexual activity with a child is performing a criminal and immoral act which never can be considered normal or socially acceptable behavior. "