BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Underage minors should be mandated to attend parenting classes to have a right to parent.

I forfeited round 3 in response to my opponent stating their forfeit was unintentional. However, considering the second forfeit, I'm just going to carry on with my rebuttal. "A persons [sic] right to parent should not be based on a class that cannot fully equip people to become good parent." We aren't talking about everyone. We're addressing the issue of minors becoming parents, people who've hardly lived long enough to know how to be adults let alone how to be parents. "It takes more than learning how to change diapers to become a parent." Precisely. There's a lot to being a parent that many people don't know about (and won't understand until they experience first hand), but parenting classes cover far more that just changing diapers. "Some minors are good parents are capable of being good parents immediantly [sic]." That's not a call you can make. Some minors may be professional divers. That doesn't mean they're ready to take a class down through the Great Barrier Reef. Being able to afford and take care of a house or a car is in no way synonymous to taking care of a baby. "These classes only teach basic skills. They don't offer in depth counseling, or substance abuse treatment etc.. so that means that parenting classes cannot insure the product of a responsible parent." These classes are purely hypothetical, we don't know what they could entail. And there really isn't anything to "insure the product of a responsible parent", because the definition of a good parent, a responsible parent is far too subjective. "The government has enough unnecessary mandates so. [sic] Why make more?" This sounds like the background issue is money. Sure, the government might have unnecessary mandates, but if it's costing too much, go back and try to make a change on the dead mandates that don't really apply anymore. "Passing this mandate would mean the family couldn't receive food stamps, or any other public aid until both parents have taken these classes." Nowhere in the resolution does it state that. You're making an assumption to try and boost your case, but really this stance is too wishy washy. This is an issue involving CPS. They wouldn't lose food stamps (which they might not be on), they'd lose their child. A much more severe, but if ask any parent what they would give up for their child, an hour class once a week (or whatever the terms of time may be) would be accepted easily. To be honest, the last paragraph confused me a bit. However, in the instance of whether or not both parents would have to take the class and several "what ifs" around the scenario. Individual cases would be handled on an individual basis. I don't have an answer for every one of those questions because the resolution doesn't specify the terms. Look at it this way: adult people have to have a license to have a dog. It really doesn't seem like asking too much for a minor to have to be allowed to raise a child...
Underage minors should be mandated to attend parenting classes to have a right to parent.

Resolved: Underage parents should be mandated to attend parenting classes to have a right to parent. Though the resolution doesn’t take a stance on whether or not we’re debating about this issue in the instance where an underage person is already pregnant and is attempting to be allowed to keep the child or if this is the instance of a teenage love story of “we love each other and we’re getting married and having a baby”, I’ll be addressing the first for the sake of brevity. To say that teen pregnancy was becoming a major issue would be a major understatement. Teenage pregnancy is becoming a sort of pandemic in the world today, (even “popular” enough to gain a TV series) and that has to bring up the question, why? The argument is often made that in ‘ye olden days’, girls were getting married and having children far younger than they do nowadays, so what’s the difference? The first is how family structures are made today. This day and age, many kids are lucky enough to not have to grow up being a parent to their siblings and most likely have no real understanding of what it actually means to be a parent. “Baby sitters” don’t often have to deal with colicky baby, and they don’t spend weeks waking up for bottle duty, they don’t learn extended discipline tactics, and dealing with the “I HATE YOU!!!” phase… They won’t react like parents, they will react like children because they are little more than children themselves. Parenting classes will teach them the things they would’ve otherwise learned had they had time to fully grow up themselves and think about what kind of home they wanted to bring their baby into. Anybody can navigate the internet for information or go and buy parenting books, and there are good sources out there, but mandating a parenting class would ensure that the parent doesn’t get conflicting information that could endanger the baby’s life and/or development. If you want children to be raised up into proper adults, they need to have proper, consistent adult influences. Now, does that imply that all adults are fit to be parents? Of course not, but this debate is only addressing the issue of underage parents, minors. One could complain that if they’re old enough to be parents, they’re old enough to make their own decisions, however they are still young enough for the law to decide things for them without their consent, but for their well being. Now, the government would be deciding things for the well being of a defenseless minor – the baby of an underage parent.
Underage minors should be mandated to attend parenting classes to have a right to parent.

Parenting classes does not have the abilities to fix problems and is not guaranteed to make everyone a good parent. A persons right to parent should not be based on a class that cannot fully equip people to become good parent. It takes more than learning how to change diapers to become a parent. Though some minors do not have the resources or the maturity to take care of children some do. Some have the maturity to already have a job, homes, car etc. Some minors are good parents are capable of being good parents immediantly. Lets not forget that some teens grew up taking care of younger relatives. However we know by majority that minors don't have what it takes to become proper parents.So should we send all minors to parenting classes to ensure that these minors become proper parents? No, one reason is the fact that a parenting class cannot ensure that one becomes a proper parent. These classes only teach basic skills. They don't offer in depth counseling, or substance abuse treatment etc.. so that means that parenting classes cannot insure the product of a responsible parent. Usually the parents receive help from family members or friends or doctors who can teach them the very same basic skills. So why should we require these classes in order for someone to have the right to parent? The government has enough unnecessary mandates so. Why make more? Also where would the kids go since the parents don't have a right to parent and will therefore not have the right to watch their own children. This mandate creates unnecessary problems. Unnecessary problems, stress, and grey areas. Passing this mandate would mean the family couldn't receive food stamps, or any other public aid until both parents have taken these classes. What happens if the dad doesn't want parental rights and don't want to be a part of the child's life or has spite towards the mother? How would a mother get to ever have her child? What If she cant pay for the classes? If the child's still lives with their parents during this time those on public assistance will harm those very children their trying to protect because the government will cut the funds off. Is it worth it? Absolutely not. Bills wouldn't get paid and the babies. Will suffer dearly.
Underage minors should be mandated to attend parenting classes to have a right to parent.

This is the full topic Underage minor parents should be required by law to attend parenting classes to have a right to receive government benefits or to have parental rights. I encourage all to oppose the resolution stated above as i do. I intend to prove the negitive effects of such a mandate are too great in quality of care and quantity than there are positive effects. Therefore this resolution must fail. Both goverment benefits and parental rights must prove to be more beneficial to reject until the minor can have parenting classes in order for this resolution to pass. This debates terminology is self explanatory therefore I shall not provide definitions unless it becomes nessesary or semantics becomes a issue. Failure to follow debate structure equals loss of conduct points. Forfeit equals loss of convincing argument points. This debate should be judged on a cost/benefit analysis. round 1..intro/ acceptance round 2..state cases/ no rebuttals in this round round 3 rebuttals round 4 summary and further rebuttals round 5 conclusions and further rebuttals/ no new information
Abortion is murder and should be made against the law

I'll start my argument with "with life comes death". No matter what we will die whether we are 12 or 80 years old. I do understand that killing an unborn child is not just bad but its unmoral. But look at this way, if your daughter got raped and she didn't want the baby because it doesn't feel like hers and its too much pain because she is 13 years old. Then what? still say no ? Look some people in this world are having sex consistently and breeding and some people live in an environment where its not for kids. So in the long run it would be better if abortion is an option because I wouldn't have a kid in a situation where I know I couldn't take care of him/her. Babies aren't innocent, they just haven't learned about the world. Now I don't agree with the random abortion to any babies which would be unmoral but cases such as underage pregnancy, rape, and incest should be the exception .
Abortion is murder and should be made against the law

Abortion is the murder of human life and should never be allowed under any circumstance. If a pregnant women was driving to an abortion clinic but died in a wreck, the person who hit her would be charged with the murder of the women and the baby. But if she got the abortion, it would not have been considered to be murder. The baby also should not be punished for the sin of the rapist, if a women were to get pregnant from being raped. If a father murdered someone, they would not kill the child. They would kill the Father. The baby did nothing wrong. Also most abortions happen at 6 weeks, and at 6 weeks the heart starts beating. The baby is alive and abortion will and does KILL the baby.
Resolved : The Electoral College should be Removed

My opponent's first new objection is that campaign strategy would be different under direct election. I have no problem with this: the new campaign strategy would target voters more efficiently and more thoroughly. Under the current presidential election procedure, a disproportionate amount of money [1] and visitations [2] is spent on "swing states," when that money should focus on changing votes everywhere. My opponent also tries to defend the electoral college by arguing that the power of the president comes from the states. This contradicts the Declaration of Independence, which originates political power from those it governs. States have no power to coerce their political minorities into counting towards the candidate they didn't choose. My opponent's last new appeal quotes Wikipedia which argues that the Electoral College forces candidates to appeal to minorities to squeak out a majority. This would happen under direct election as well, except at a national, rather than state-specific, scope, and to a larger degree, because the minority would count: not only if added it passed the fifty-percent margin, but all of the time. In the last roud, my opponent did not object to the following arguments: The Winner-Take-All provision misconstrues the votes of the minorities of every state. The Electoral College distorts the vote of individuals based on their location. The Electoral College harms third parties. It isn't enough that the Electoral College system functions. Dictatorships function. Military fascist regimes function. A functioning government that violates its citizens should be corrected. The Electoral College violates the democratic liberties of the citizenry. Therefore, it should be removed. The resolution is negated. ==Sources== [1] . http://www.politico.com... [2] . http://www.fairvote.org...
Resolved : The Electoral College should be Removed

To recap my opponents arguments - The College is unfair to smaller states, and small minorities. The electoral college prevents an urban-centric victory. It requires candidates to spend time across the country campaigning, rather than focus on the main urban populations. For example, a recent study showed that current Presidential candidates focused their time in states with high populations. If the Electoral College was to be demolished, even more time of the President-candidate would be spent targeting only the urban population.[1] When the founders of the Constitution created the Electoral College, their thinking was thus - Our government is built on a system of checks and balances. The Legislative branch is elected by the People. The Judicial Branch is elected by the Congress. The President is elected by Legislature and the Common people - a compromise between the two, that allows the system of checks and balances in our government to stay the way it was intended. So even though the Electoral College gives some people a higher "power" for their vote, it is justified due to the small power the State has anyway. During that time period, many compromises were made - the 3/5 Agreement, the Virginia Plan, a bi-cameral legislature, etc. This is one of those compromises. It maintains the separation of powers that our founders fought for. "Far from decreasing the power of minority groups by depressing voter turnout, proponents argue that, by making the votes of a given state an all-or-nothing affair, minority groups can provide the critical edge that allows a candidate to win. This encourages candidates to court a wide variety of such minorities and advocacy groups."[1] Again - this forces candidates to appeal to the Nation, not just a single demographic of the people. Though it has flaws, the Electoral College *works*. It has served our country, and has no need for its demolishment. Thank you, and I hope you choose to vote Neg Sources http://en.wikipedia.org...
Resolved : The Electoral College should be Removed

My opponent argues that the electoral college system is superior to direct democracy because the delegates can make a more intelligent decision than the majority. Ignoring the elitism, "faithless electing," where electors vote other than their promise, has only happened 158 times in all American history, and has never had an effect on the election result [1]. Thus, the only distortion of democracy instated in the electoral college is the disproportionate voting described last round. My opponent argues that the Electoral College favors republicanism, where voters choose representatives. In my proposal, voters elect a governing President directly, so both proposals are republican; however, my system does not give voters in underpopulated states extra votes and does not implement a system that counts a dissenting population towards assent. Further, my proposal is more favoring than the Electoral College to the political minorities of every state, because these minorities are not counted towards the candidates they vote against. Thirdly, my opponent contests that the Electoral College is "fairer" to small states, when in fact, it is unfair to the people living in more populous states. Direct election would yield a one-man-one-vote system, which is fair to everyone in the United States, while the electoral college gives people in rural states four times as much electoral power as those in urban states. Discrimination by location is most certainly unfair. I would like to clarify that I did not contest the creation of third parties; rather, I stated that the Electoral College prevents third parties from becoming successful, and, in fact, causes them to serve against their purpose. There is no advantage to the Electoral College; it merely distorts election results by discrimination and abuse of the minority vote and squashes third parties. Thus, it should be removed. Thank you. ==Sources== [1] http://en.wikipedia.org...
Resolved : The Electoral College should be Removed

Thanks :) I hope I catch onto the style of debate.org, and good luck to you too The electoral college system of the United states does not need any change. ==My Arguments== 1. The population may not always have the best presidential candidate in mind. It is the job of the electoral college members to determine the best possible presidential candidate, and their absence would result in popular vote, a mass "mob", controlling our government. Even if the best suited President runs against popular opinion, the Electoral College is able to right this. ==My Responses== 1. My opponent contested that the Winner Take All system that is implemented in most states, the minority votes count towards the election of their opposition. However, this system is for the best interests of the American people. As Thomas Jefferson put it, in his reasoning for the Electoral College - "Republicanism is the best form of government and representative democracy is needed to prevent the tyranny of the majority, as Madison explained in Federalist No. 10. Jefferson maintained that, '[a] democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.'"[1] Additionally, the system of the Electoral college is more fair to smaller states than a popular vote would be. Just because farmers, for instance, make up a small percent of U.S. population, (but their authority is found in the Senate, where states all have 2 votes), does not mean that they have to be punished. The electoral college balances the U.S. population and equal state representation issue, and solves a problem that would present itself in the event of a popular vote 2. My opponent contested the establishment of third parties. My response- Are third parties *bad*? They present a new view point for the American public. They are merely exercising their right to speech and run for office. For these reasons, I support Neg. Source 1. http://en.wiki...
Resolved : The Electoral College should be Removed

The Electoral College System for the election of the United States President should be removed and replaced with a direct election process. Because of the "Winner Take All" system [1] resulting from the Electoral College, the minority votes of every state count towards the election of those they oppose. In California, for example, although only 53.45% of the state voted for Al Gore [2], the electoral votes representing 100% of the state went to the candidate. This misrepresentation of popular opinion is more offensive than legislation without representaton, for the representation opposes almost half of the populaton it is supposed to represent. Under a direct election, however, each vote in the United States would count towards the candidate the vote was intended for. The problem of distortion, where "each individual vote in Wyoming counts nearly four times as much in the Electoral College as each individual vote in Texas" [1] is averted. The Electoral College System also prevents the establishment of third parties. Parties like the Green Party and the Libertarian Party cannot put candidates into an election without stealing away their ideology's influence on the election result. The Liberty Party [3], for example, caused Henry Clay to lose the election in 1844 [4] and subsequently caused slavery to expand with the addition of Texas. Therefore, the Electoral College System misconstrues the electing intentions of voters in states, enforces the two-party system, and augments the voting power of people depending on their place of residency. All these problems are solved with the direct election system. Thank you, and good luck to my opponent. [1] . http://archive.fairvote.org... [2] . http://www.uselectionatlas.org... [3] . http://en.wikipedia.org... [4] The American Pagent
Now this is a story all about how My life got flipped turned upside down And I'd like to take a minu

Je Aap Nachaave Yaar Ta Nachna Painda Ai Je Aap Nachaave Yaar Ta Nachna Painda Ai Russ Jaawe Dildaar Taa Nachna Painda Ai Aaja Yaar.. De Deedar Aaja Yaar O.. De Deedar Makke Gayeaan Gall Mukkdi Naahi Bhawein Sau Sau Zumme Padh Aayiye Oo.. Bhawein Sau Sau Zumme Padh Aayiye Ganga Gayeaan Gall Mukkdi Naahi Bhawein Sau Sau Gotey Laayiye Oo.. Bhawein Sau Sau Gotey Laayiye Gayaa Geyaan Gall Mukkdi Naahi Bhawein Sau Sau Pandh Padhayiye Oo.. Bhawein Sau Sau Pandh Padhayiye Bulleh Shah Gall Taahion Mukkdi Oyee.. Bulleh Shah Gall Taahion Mukkdi Je Main Nu Dilon Gawayiye Aaja Yaar.. De Deedar Aaja Yaar O.. De Deedar Sir Te Topi Te Neeyat Khoti Laina Keeh Topi Sir Dhar Ke Oo.. Laina Keeh Topi Sir Dhar Ke Chilhe Keete Par Rabb Na Mileya Laina Keeh Chileya Vich Vadh Ke Oo Laina Keeh Chileya Vich Vadh Ke Tasbee Phadi Par Dil Na Phireya Lain Keeh Tasbee Hath Fadh Ke Oo.. Lain Keeh Tasbee Hath Fadh Ke Bulleya Jaag Bina Dudh Nahi Jammda Bhawein Laal Howey Karh Karh Ke Aaja Yaar.. De Deedar Aaja Yaar O.. De Deedar Allah Hu Allah Hu Allah Allah Hu Allah.. Allah Hu Allah Hu Allah Allah Hu Allah.. (LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL) Lakhwinder Wadali - De Deedar - 2014
Now this is a story all about how My life got flipped turned upside down And I'd like to take a minu

Now this is a story all about how My life got flipped turned upside down And I'd like to take a minute, just sit right there I'll tell you how I became the prince of a town called Bel-Air In West Philadelphia, born and raised On the playground is where I spent most of my days Chillin' out, maxin', relaxin' all cool And all shootin' some b-ball outside of the school When a couple of guys who were up to no good Started makin' trouble in my neighborhood I got in one little fight and my mom got scared And said "You're movin' with your auntie and uncle in Bel-Air" I begged and pleaded with her day after day But she packed my suitcase and sent me on my way She gave me a kiss and then she gave me my ticket I put my Walkman on and said "I might as well kick it" First class, yo, this is bad Drinkin' orange juice out of a champagne glass Is this what the people of Bel-Air livin' like? Hmmm, this might be all right But wait, I hear they're prissy, bourgeois, and all that Is this the type of place that they just sent this cool cat? I don't think so, I'll see when I get there I hope they're prepared for the Prince of Bel-Air Well, uh, the plane landed and when I came out There was a dude looked like a cop standin' there with my name out I ain't tryin' to get arrested yet, I just got here I sprang with the quickness like lightning, disappeared I whistled for a cab and when it came near The license plate said 'Fresh' and it had dice in the mirror If anything I could say that this cab was rare But I thought "Nah, forget it, yo holmes, to Bel-Air!" I pulled up to the house about 7 or 8 And I yelled to the cabbie "Yo holmes, smell ya later" Looked at my kingdom, I was finally there To sit on my throne as the Prince of Bel-Air