BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
George Bush: Good Candidate...Bad Timing

George Bush... Not a day goes by when someone does not refer to him as the worst president in American History. Seriously??? Some people need to learn their history. How about Ulysses S. Grant, whose administration was the author of the greatest government scandals in US History. Then theres John Adams, who stiffened our economy and passed laws that made it illegal to talk badly about government leaders. When John Quincy Adams left office our country was in a serious recession and EVERYBODY hated him. He refused to pass public works projects and seemed to do nothing else but sit in the oval office and doze off. President Hoover...President Taft... Now my point is, however, that Bush isn't the worst president ever. I just like bashing ignorance. No, what I'm really going to argue is this... George W. Bush's legacy, his performance, and his reputation are all the products of the unfortunate events that took place during his administration. The events that we had little if any control over. When Bush was first elected, foreign policy was hardly an issue that was on the publics mind. Certainely the world had its issues, but as for as the American mind was concerned, foreign experience was of lesser importance. America was in an very good place. Unemployment was the lowest its ever been. House ownership was the highest its ever been, and the economy was growing rapidly. Unlike the election today, our concerns were based solely on home. We needed a president who could maintain and even feed our success. The man for that job: George W. Bush Unfortunately...Bush never got his chance to shine on domestic affairs. 8 months after his inaugeration, Al Qaeda struck the twin towers and the pentagon, and the rest is history. This was definately the turning point in bush's reputation. Bush had to turn his eyes to foreign affairs, and that was his weak spot. Now, Im not saying that our situation isn't Bush's fault. I don't think its entirely his fault, but thats another debate. No, what Im saying is this... George W. Bush's administration performed poorly because Bush was given a unexpected task that he was unqualified to accomplish, and to call him the worst president ever, is unfair. Further more, that President Bush should not go down in history as the man who failed America, but the President who had an unlucky break.
fortnight is sh!t

Fornite This is one of the best games for free, its not only for poor people btw everyone can play it. PUBG has the worst graphics ever and it is so stupid. PUBG was made by Hackers right what makes you think that they wont Hack your account even If its in stores. Fortnite has made building what other PVP game that is popular has that Not Much Right. Thanks for the Battle your turn
Was Jesus crucified on the cross for the sins of mankind

Yes the bible has lots of errors http://www.discoveringislam.org... These are all just scientific errors in the bible, If there are so many scientific errors in the bible then in how many more aspects can the bible be wrong? That would account for more then 1%. http://infidels.org... Pro says: Jesus does claim divinity in the Gospels (John 8:56). My reply: No, it says "Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad."(John 8:56) http://biblehub.com... There is no were in the bible where Jesus directly says "I am god". why ??? I never denied that the gospel of barnabas has some errors, i said " in some key respects, it conforms to the Islamic teaching". Like the crucification of Jesus(PBUH) for the sins off mankind "Have I been so long time with you, and yet have you not known me, Philip?"( John 14.9.) Then many of his disciples, when they heard these things, said, "This is a difficult saying! Who can understand it?" (John 6.60.) It is clear that even his most highly touted disciples had trouble understanding him. If his disciples had so much difficulty grasping what Jesus was all about, how much more difficulty would the entire world have, especially after he was gone? If crucifixion of Jesus is all that is needed for salvation then why all the parables and metaphysical teachings he spoke of? "Why do you speak to the people in parables?"( Matt 13.10.)
Was Jesus crucified on the cross for the sins of mankind

"Of course the bible has lot more errors and it affects the doctrine." You presented no evidence to support this. Jesus does claim divinity in the Gospels (John 8:56). In response to the Gospel of Barnabas, i would first point out that experts analyze the date, the material of the manuscripts, and it's content to determine whether or not it's reliable. The Gospel of Barnabas has several errors which i think even you would agree with: The inscription in neo-Aramaic says: " "In the name of the Lord, this book is written by monks of the high monastery in Nineveh in the 1500th year of our Lord."" No one in Assyrian refers to a writing in the Bible as "book." The Gospel of Barnabas contradicts the Qur'an: 1. The Gospel of Barnabas says there are 9 heavens (3:105) while the Qur'an says there are only 7. Quoting Al-Baqarah, 2:29 "He it is Who created for you all that is on earth. Then He rose over (Istawa) towards the heaven and made them seven heavens and He is the All-Knower of everything" 2. The Gospel of Barnabas says that Mary gave birth to Jesus without pain while the Qur'an says that she did. Sura 19:23 "The birth process came to her by the trunk of a palm tree. She said, "(I am so ashamed;) I wish I were dead before this happened, and completely forgotten." 3. It says that the armies of Palestine made up 200,000 men but according to some scholars, Palestine 2,000 years ago didn't go over 200,000 people. 4. In chapter 217, it mentions 100 pounds of stone placed on Jesus. the 1st pound of the unit dates to the Ottoman empire in it's dealings with Italy and Spain. 5. There are also historical inaccuracies (1). That being said, the Gospel of Barnabas cannot be reliable. "Throughout the Old testament you will find that God himself says only I can forgive sins. God forgave sin throughout the old testament without Jesus, why would he suddenly need a human sacrifice. If God had wanted a human sacrifice to forgive sins, he would have done that for the people who came before Jesus too." God progressively reveals himself to the world, thus the Torah was put into effect until the time of the Messiah would come. Galatians 3:24 "The law, then, was our guardian until Christ, so that we could be justified by faith." Conclusion: There is evidence for Jesus death and Crucifixion. I rest my case. Sources: http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it... 1. http://en.wikipedia.org...
Was Jesus crucified on the cross for the sins of mankind

Saying that the bible just has 1% error and the doctrine is not effected, is an exaggeration. Of course the bible has lot more errors and it affects the doctrine. By the way in the bible Jesus never claims divinity. Cornelius Tacitus was a roman, like other romans he thought that Jesus was crucified. It was actually someone else in his place who was crucified. Few years ago an old gospel was found, which is about 1500 - 2000 years old, in some key respects, it conforms to the Islamic interpretation of Christian origins and contradicts the New Testament teachings of Christianity. "gospel of barnabas". Please do go through them. http://en.wikipedia.org... http://www.barnabas.net... http://www.answering-christianity.com... Jesus (peace be upon him) was a prophet, like the prophets who came before him,Noah , Moses, Elijah ( may peace be upon them all). It Does not befit the all merciful to take a son, There is non in the heavens and the earth, but comes to the all merciful as a servant. Throughout the Old testament you will find that God himself says only I can forgive sins. God forgave sin throughout the old testament without Jesus, why would he suddenly need a human sacrifice. If God had wanted a human sacrifice to forgive sins, he would have done that for the people who came before Jesus too. http://en.wikipedia.org... If you are really seeking for the truth, i will advice you to read "The science the bible the quran" by Maurice Bucaille. This book also shows how the present bible was formed, many great christian scholars also agree with him. Maurice Bucaille was also a christian. http://en.wikipedia.org... http://books.google.co.in... https://archive.org...
Was Jesus crucified on the cross for the sins of mankind

There's a difference between God punishing someone for their sins and bearing the sins of the people. Isaiah 53:4-6 "Surely He has borne our griefs And carried our sorrows; Yet we esteemed Him stricken, Smitten by God, and afflicted. 5 But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; The chastisement for our peace was upon Him, And by His stripes we are healed. 6 All we like sheep have gone astray; We have turned, every one, to his own way; And the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all." The Bible essentially does not have errors. Here are some errors which do not affect doctrine (1). The verses you gave do not support the fact there is a contradiction as the world itself can still believe in Jesus to be saved. A french scholar went into a cave and found an ossuary with the name "Jesus" on it (2). Cornelius Tacitus wrote about how "Christus" was put to death (Annals of Imperial Rome, XV 44). The evidence is clear, Jesus was crucified on the cross for the sins of mankind. Sources: 1. http://theresurgence.com... 2. http://www.freeminds.org...
Was Jesus crucified on the cross for the sins of mankind

I strongly believe that Jesus ( may peace be upon him) was not crucified for the sins of mankind. If you think about it rationally, it seems quite absurd, how can one man pay the price for the sins of humanity. There are millions of people around the world. Why would god punish someone else for the sins of other people. That would make god very unjust. How can a christian who has lived as a good human being and another christian who kills people and causes oppression on earth and dies that way be the same, how can they both be saved from hell, That is unjust and absurd. "[Jesus] is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world." (1 John 2:2 NIV) Of course the bible has a lot of discrepancies in it, as it has undergone numerous translations and interpretations. The crucifiction of Jesus is also among those discrepancies in it. I will present one example: , "[Jesus] is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world." (1 John 2:2 NIV) "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son." (John 3:16-18 NIV) In one statement the whole world is saved because of his crucifiction and in another statement only those who believe in him are saved. There many such errors in the bible. Do you know that there is even a word for it. "Apocrypha" http://en.wikipedia.org...
Gay

Hello, There has been a lot of talk these days about gays and that its bad, however I don't know and I never have been told why its bad. I know that killing people is bad because your interrupting there life when its got nothing to do with you when its there time to leave this planet. But how can something that does not hurt, harm or in danger anyone be bad. I had two gay friends at school and I never knew because I never jugged the way they acted. They wore nice people and truly loved people and animals, so what's the bad thing they are doing. We all know that eating bad food is bad because it does harm to you and your body. But what harm can come from two people that love each other that make each other happy and that do not harm others. Now a lot of people will start quoting the bible and use it to back up there own beliefs. They read the bible and see scripts that makes them start to think "this must be something to do with something I know of". If god makes someone gay then why would he hate them. If some someone loves people, helps them, loves animals, helps the earth, prays and loves god, does no harm, then it would stand that they are a fully good person. But why it is when the word gay is but in, it suddenly becomes so bad that they must spend forever in hell. How can an all loving god hate someone for one thing about them that has nothing to do with anyone else. I am sorry for writing so much. But thank you!
Gay

I think that this has been a healthy conversion on two peoples views of homosexuals, I think that if anything homosexuals have to be very careful and really look at why some are sleeping with so many people. They will have to find out what they are truly after, sit down with themselves and think about that special someone for them and learn the differences between Lust (Pleasure) and Love (Happiness). In this conversion there are no losers, its just really good to get one more step closer to understanding. I grew up with Christian parents and went to chapel every Sunday and so did my brothers and sisters. We went and most people who go have learnt that if you don't you will go down to hell. Most Christian people have made it some ritual for every Sunday. They don't understand the true and real depth of what the people in the bible are talking about and don't even pray as much as they think others should. They think that praying is kneeing down and saying words without feeling them. I believed my parents until I was about 9 or 10 years old then I did not understand a lot of what was blindly taught to me. I was depressed and said "god if you exist why is my life so S*@T". But I then learnt that god is not a man that fly around with a white beard helping people. I had understood what god truly is. At the age of 13 I loved the idea of Buddha and what he taught. When I was 16 I bought a book called (how to become Buddhist in 5 weeks) and love it and ever since I have been learning Buddhism and what Jesus taught people and I love them both. I believe god exists through Out of body experiences and learning the real truth. Look and you shall find. Thank You! I am now 21 years old and a life coach.
Gay

There are health risks for both homosexuals and heterosexuals, but being homosexual exposes one to even higher risk of contracting HIV/AIDS, mainly because homosexuals are more prone to promiscuity than heterosexuals. I'm not saying that your friends are not faithful partners at all, I'm just saying what research has shown among the average homosexual. A study conducted by A.P. Bell and M.S. Weinberg found that 43% of homosexuals had 500 sexual partners and 28% had over 1,000 sexual partners. (Cited from The Family Research Council website http://www.frc.org...) I have not grown up being taught to hate gay people, so I don't. However, many people of the generations before me have been taught that homosexuality is weird, isn't natural, and that they should avoid them. That is just downright wrong, and we do agree on this. I think we have found that we do agree on most of our beliefs except, perhaps, the existence of God (which I wasn't sure if you do agree or not, I would appreciate a clarification.) This hasn't really been a heated debate, and I will actually be going on a long trip on Thursday to see my pregnant sister, so I will try to respond. If not, I will probably have to forfeit, sadly. I will try my best though! Thank you!
Gay

Hello, I don't think that there is so much health risks, my friends say that it depends on the health of both individuals. yes there is a lot of gay people who party all the time and sleep with a lot of people and don't take proper care of there body's but my friends are not like that. You have hit a good point about that some gay people don't stay together, however I would like to say that there is a lot of straight people who also don't stay together also. I think that most straight people believe that you must stay with each other out of there up bringing, My parents have been together for over 25 years and they don't remember why they got together. I think that gay people are just trying to find the right person to spend there life with rather than just making do. "I do not believe God hates anyone because they are gay nor sends people to hell because of it. That is not what the Bible teaches, it is what certain people make up because they dislike the gay community, which is very wrong of them! We should never judge somebody based on their sexual orientation or treat them bad because of it. Whether we agree with their actions or not doesn't matter, acceptance is the key." Above is what you have wrote and I think your heart is in the right place. If its of love then its of god if its not love then it isn't. What divides us is not of god what unites us is of god. There has be more than the possibility of disease and misunderstood bible quotes that makes people have such foul hate towards gay people. If there is any gay people out there reading this, I am sorry if I may have caused you any upset with my use of the word gay and not put in the word homosexual that's the last thing you need.
Gay

Hello! There has been much talk about homosexuality being bad because there is evidence that suggests being gay is harmful to their own health and the health of their sexual partner. Therefore, it does danger to other people by spreading sexual diseases among others. It is good that homosexuals love each other, but sadly statistics show that homosexual couples only last around 2 years, and within there relationship they had multiple sexual partners. I do not believe God hates anyone because they are gay nor sends people to hell because of it. That is not what the Bible teaches, it is what certain people make up because they dislike the gay community, which is very wrong of them! We should never judge somebody based on their sexual orientation or treat them bad because of it. Whether we agree with their actions or not doesn't matter, acceptance is the key. While I do not believe that it is right to be gay, I do not dislike them or judge them for it. I think homosexuality is wrong mainly because if we accept homosexuality, we would be obliged to accept polygamy and other forms of marriage. The arguments formed for homosexuality can also be applied to the other forms of marriage. So the question would be, where do we draw the line? And at what point do we say these actions are wrong? I have other reasons, but I would like to hear what you have to say in response. Thank You! :)
The law should be codified to one, easy to understand law: "Do not do bad things".

I am against this proposition. - Law may be complex for the average lay person, but given the nuanced moral dispositions of every individual, it would be difficult to abide by. What one person considers a bad act, another would not. - It leaves the too much open to interpretation for the judges; creating a risk of unjust precedents being established (in common law jurisdictions)
That the sale of fur should be banned

I came up with a good analogy for the economy: slavery. Slavery was an essential part of the economy, but it was horrific and inhumane, like the fur trade, and was banned even though the economy suffered a bit.On the subject of environment, fur isn't so great either. The waste from the animals goes straight into the rivers, and kills off river life. One million pounds of feces are produced by US mink farms alone, which pollutes water with phosphorus. So you'd prefer having a dead animal dangling around your neck? The farmers DON'T dispatch animals in a painless and humane manner. They are killed in any way that preserves their pelts. One of the most common ways are electrocution (which is VERY painful for the animals) and skinning them alive. Their throats are slit while they are still concious, and it all makes for a horrific story. There are no penalties for bad killing methods, and people take advantage of that.
That the sale of fur should be banned

I oppose. You mentioned that faux fur is almost as warm as real fur. Faux fur is derived from non-renewable sources that are petroleum based. Scientists have predicted a dire situation fifty years from now. If we extract more of this finite source, future generations will be at risk. Real fur is also much warmer than faux fur as natural fur has a layer of insulation that has sufficed previous generations. Fake fur cannot provide that comfort. I also disagree with your argument, that animals are treated under sever animal cruelty. You mentioned that animals are electrocuted and skinned alive. However; this is unwarranted as it is extremely unnecessary and a sadistic act to do. It is easier for the farmers to kill the animal with the least amount of pain, so as to save trouble for themselves. This act also lowers the fur-farmers profit as the animals pelt would have visible blemishes. Therefore; it is in the best interest of the farmer to dispatch animals in a painless and humane method.
That the sale of fur should be banned

I accept.Your main argument so far seems to be that banning fur would negatively affect the economy.Now, all those jobs are worth a lot, I know. But don't you think that lives of animals are just as important? Also, in this era of technology, faux fur is almost IDENTICAL to actual fur. And there are PLENTY of products on the market warmer than fur. In fact, I bet there is a lot of money to be made in alternative fabrics. The UK, Austria, and Croatia have all banned fur farming, and their economies aren't doing that bad. There is no ethicality about this industry. Animals are killed in whatever way preserves their fur the best. They are frequently skinned alive, electrocuted, etc. They feel excrutiating pain, don't kid yourself.The real thing is that these corporate companies are only concerned with making money. They COULD treat the animals more ethically, maybe kill them before skinning them, give them more than a few steps of space, but they don't. This won't change.
That the sale of fur should be banned

The sale of fur has many benefits that are helpful to the economy. If we shut down the fur-trade, a whole trading sector will collapse and may be the cause of a later Global Financial Crisis. 15 billion dollars are spent each year in the fur trade industry and if we ban the sale of fur, millions of jobs will also be lost. Many people depend on the fur trade, including the farmers, designers and the international auctioneers. It is very clear, that the sale of fur should no be banned.