BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
why do people think the confederate flag is racist

I am going to assume that the resolution is: There is no compelling reason to believe the confederate flag has anything to do with racism.However, the confederate flag is a symbol of states rights. That being said, with all the tention stirred up when Abraham Lincoln was elected president, (1) especially over his stances on slavery, if the states within the confederacy (and all the states in the confederacy actualy did) wished to maintain slavery dispite the efforts of the federal government, then it should be established already that because the people within America democratically elect their officials, everyone in the confederacy was in favor of slavery.This is a compelling reason to associate the confederacy with racism. And as the confederate flag is the symbol of the confederacy, it thus is appropriate to suggest that racism and the confederate flag are bound in an unspoken way. (Or not, I guess)Thank you for initiating this debate, and I now turn over.[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...;
The Trinity is an Unscriptural Doctrine

This is a argument that i found in one of the comments In the book of Genesis after Adam & eve ate from the tree of knowledge... God said "behold man has become like one of us" (I don't have my bible with me so I can't quote exactly or scripture, my apologies) but that statement I think is the first evidence of the trinity that I know of... Though it is not mentioned as trinity , because the are three and they are one they are called as trinity
The Trinity is an Unscriptural Doctrine

First off, 2 Corinthians 13:14 is a statement that mentions all three of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit, but it is a statement of comfort to Christians showing that Jesus gives grace or the undeserved kindness that means salvation, the Love of God the Father as the Scriptures say that God is Love (1 John 4:8) and finally the fellowship of the Holy Spirit. A Scripture that makes the statement of the validity of the Trinity Doctrine is more of the nature of Matthew 6:9. As we all know this is The Lord's Prayer, I will break it down into its parts- first Jesus addresses the Father in the heavens as to whom we pray and does not pray to either himself nor the Holy Spirit. This part of The Lord's Prayer shows that the three are distinctly three and not a fusion of the three.Next, Matthew 29:18 does say to baptize in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, however this only shows that they are all three in agreement, but even if one is in agreement with another, they can be one as in one nation but they are still different entities.The last one 1 John 5:7 is actually even spurious in part. Look into the Codex Alexandrinus and other manuscripts like it, and you will find that the verse 1 John 5:7 has text added to it in the English and Latin translations. The way to look into those texts is to get an SBL Greek New Testament and to make absolutely sure with Textual Criticism, Novum Testamentum Graece and the Westcott and Hort Greek Text. The original Greek of these texts show that the part of the Scripture that supposedly proves the Trinity is actually an addition to the Scriptures. This addition was made by the church in Latin manuscripts of the New Testament in order to put the people under their thumb. It shows that the Trinity doctrine is one that the church felt the need to make an addition to the Scriptures in order to support. In saying this, I know hat most Christians do not know Hebrew and Greek as I do, so I will provide corroborating evidence that can be understood by the lay people in this video where Bible scholars are saying the same except beyond all evidence they still support it even knowing this.
The Trinity is an Unscriptural Doctrine

I am going to show proof of the trinity in the bible 1) 2 Corinthians 13:14 :- May the grace of Lord Jesus Christ , and the love of God and the fellowship of the holy spirit be with all of you 2)Matthew 29:18:- Go you therefore , and teach all nations , baptizing them in the name of the Father , and of the Son , and of the holy Ghost . 3)"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." - 1 John 5:7 Though they are not mentioned as trinity , there are 3 people therefore we call the trinity
The Trinity is an Unscriptural Doctrine

Don't worry about the whole exact Scripture thing. I know where you are referring to. However, that Scripture actually disproves the Trinity. If the three are one entity, why would they feel the need to consult the others in speech? Also, 1 John 4:9 speaks of Jesus being the only begotten Son of God. The definition of begotten is past participle of beget which is to give rise to or bring about. This means that Jesus is not equally eternal as the Father is but that God the Father produced Jesus. This is obviously before he was sent to earth as a ransom to reconcile sinful mankind to God as that Scripture also brings out.
Resolved:The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was an act of Terrorism.

Sorry. I have been busy. For me to win I have to prove America's intent to scare the Japanese into surrendering. It is clear that America wanted Japan to surrender. By nuking the two cities, America spread fear into the Japanese population. The Potsdam declaration is further proof that the bombings was terrorism. WAS HIROSHIMA AND NAGASAKI A TACTICAL LOCATION? Both cities were picked for the relatively untouched Hiroshima and Nagasaki. They were chosen for population. Sorry for the forfeiture. If I could can I post my sources in the comments later? I cant now.
Resolved:The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was an act of Terrorism.

No Semantics. R1 Con may post opening shoots but must agree to my terms. R5 no new arguments will be made. -"...bombing of" is talking about the atomic bombs terrorism[ ter-uh-riz-uh m ] noun 1.ï¿½the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
Day care cites should have more security

Since james1014 forfeited the round I'll introduce a rather concise version of my thinking on this subject, to be expanded on should my opponent return: It is not the responsibility of the government to protect its citizens from themselves in certain instances. Should a law be passed that requires some additional security for whatever these daycare sites may be, we would ultimately end up using a limited budget failing to stop the threat these sites pose or find ourselves hemorrhaging money to merely combat an internet threat *adequately.* It is too difficult to patrol every daycare website registered in the US and force extra protection on them and ensure this protection actually works. If you are raising a child, the onus is on you to protect that child from harm. If you leave your baby near the oven and the baby manages to knock something down and hurt itself, we do not campaign for baby-proof ovens. There will always be a risk in leaving your child with someone else and while it would be nice of the government to try and reduce that risk, this is not something that we should waste resources on.
Day care cites should have more security

Hello all, I'm here to argue Con for the issue "Day care cites [sic] should have more security." I would like to clarify right off the bat that while I do not believe it is a bad thing if a site chooses to have increased security, I will be arguing that these extra precautions should not be made absolutely necessary and that pursuing such an issue is simply a waste of time. Firstly, I would like to ask what kind of day care sites you are talking about, james1014, and what kind of security you think should be put into place or required of these sites? Internet regulations can get tricky and first we have to establish what kind of sites we're talking about, and what kind of security you think they should have that they are not already required to have.
Darren Wilson should not be charged with murderer.

But consider this :https://38.media.tumblr.com...That shows that the overwhelming majority of witnesses said that Brown had his hands up--he was surrendering, but Wilson shot anyway.Here's more information. Wilson shot Brown in the arm when Brown had his hands up and continued to shoot as Brown fell to the floor. But wait, there's more. Darren Wilson has a history of harassment. http://news.yahoo.com... http://thefreethoughtproject.com...The Ferguson police have been working with the KKK: http://toastoat.tumblr.com... It's likely that Wilson is involved with the KKK too: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk...Plus, it's rather telling that Wilson did not follow police protocol: http://land-of-propaganda.tumblr.com...
Darren Wilson should not be charged with murderer.

As far as gun powered is could be on mikes clothing. To be honest I wouldn't trust any of the violent protestors. There are witnesses who say there was a scuffle and that Brown didn't have his hands up. Anyone would shoot a 300 pound man who had pinned them in their car and tried to grab their gun. As far as the media covering up Black on White crime they certainly do just that. According to the DOJ Black on White murderers are 4 times more common than White on Black murderers and Black on White crime is 10 times more common than White on Black crime. You wouldn't have guessed this from watching MSNBC. When ever a White person is brutally killed by a Black person no one cares. When a White or Hispanic like George Zimmerman kills a Black even if it's out of self defense everyone suddenly wants to talk about it. Where was the coverage when Channon Christian and Chris Newsom were carjacked, tortured, raped, beaten and murdered by 5 Blacks? What about 14 year old Kelli O'laughlin a White Chicago girl who caught John Wilson Jr stealing from her families upper class home and was stabbed to death by him. Or how about Melinda Sue McCormick who was beaten to death by Anthony Prescley, Kiesha Pugh and Gregory Williams. If those weren't bad enough a 13 month old White/Hispanic baby named Antonio Santiago was shot in the head and killed by two Blacks when his mom couldn't give them any money. A nother story of a White child being killed by a Black and the media not covering it is the story of Kevin Shiflet from Alexandria Virginia who was stabbed to death by a Black man simply because he was White. Another story is that of Autumn Paquin who was killed by two Black teens in Cleveland after they tricked her into coming to their house. Some of the White victims of racism are old like Bob and Nancy Straight from Tulsa who were beaten to death by Tyrone Woodforke. Rebeka Powell, Katie Powell--Melchol and Julie Jackson who were killed by Cedric and James Poore in their Tulsa home. The last one I'll type about is when Jane Juergens was stabbed to death in Westerville Ohio by a Black teen as she was jogging. That story only made local news!. All these stories hardly get reported on by the mainstream media. We don't hear much or anything about brutal murderers of children simply because they were a White but we hear too much about people like Michael Brown who were killed out of self defense?. The media is dividing us and I'm worried that people will riot and kill a bunch of Whites like what happened after the Zimmerman verdict was announced. A 27 year old nurse was killed as revenge for Trayvon. His name was David Santicci and he would be alive if the media had left the Trayvon Martin story alone. There were other anti White attacks in Milwaukee as a man jogged and in Houston as a woman tried to drive her daughter to the hospital. There were at least 20 revenge for Trayvon attacks none of which were talked about. The media is responsible for this avalanche of anti-White crime. What happened was sad but it's over. We should all move on and focus on more important things.
Darren Wilson should not be charged with murderer.

I don't really trust that. The autopsy here shows that Brown had his arms up in surrender:http://www.dailykos.com... agrees with another autopsy conducted in August. I'm not sure how much you can trust the Ferguson police after lies have been uncovered:http://www.huffingtonpost.com... http://www.dailykos.com...And the whole "it's covering up black-on-white racism!" thing is nothing more than a speculation with no evidence. Although the events in the Gaza occurred simultaneously, I doubt that the Mike Brown case was a news story due tothat. I just think it was more covered in the news because the news is US-centric.
Darren Wilson should not be charged with murderer.

Autopsies show Browns blood on Wilson's gun, car and uniform and that he was shot at close range. "Michael Browns blood found in officers car, on gun" is a cnn article from October 18 and "Brown shot at close range" is a nother cnn article from October 22. When Brown was shot in the hand it was from close range. Brown wasn't holding the gun when he was shot. Wilson shot him while he was pinned in the car. Opposing views recently had an article about several witnesses who say Brown didn't have his hands up. The title is something like "witnesses tell differ ten story of Mike Brown case". I am hesitant to believe any of the violets rioters. While most protestors are peaceful some are using this event as an excuse to cause violence. Recently a White marine was beaten to death by a group of Black men as "revenge for Michael Brown". This event is being used by the media to distract America of the epidemic of Black on White racism by pushing the myth of White on Black racism. This event was also focused on during the Gaza war when 1500 civilians were killed. This event was used to distract Americans from what their tax money was doing to the people in Gaza. Ferguson national response has targeted 83 cities for riots after the verdict is announced. Some of these cities include Austin, Boston, Cleveland, Columbus, Denver, Detroit , Minneapolis, D.C, Tampa and Chicago. Hopefully this won't be like the L.A riots in 1992 where 50 people were killed and 2000 people were injured. Hopefully these 83 cities won't be turned into war zones by violent protestors and hopefully we won't see a wave of anti-White revenge attacks like we did after the George Zimmerman verdict. When Brown turned Wilson had a right to shoot. After being beaten by the 300 pound 6 foot 4 18 year old Wilson had every reason to believe that Brown was going to charge him and cause more damage. It is likely that Wilson won't be charged and the media will have a race bating field day. It is also likely that White people will be targeted for hate crimes in the name of Michael Brown even though his parents asked people not to get violent. I am worried that the protests will become even more violent if Wilson gets off and that these 83 cities most of which are safe will be turned into war zones. Since my city is on the list Ferguson national response put out I am paranoid. Many other people are and are stocking up on weapons. It's said this mans death is used to promote a agenda, justify racism, justify violence and divide and conquer America.
Darren Wilson should not be charged with murderer.

Michael Brown’s autopsy showed no sign of struggle.The picture of the CT scan that’s being passed around to show that Wilson had an orbital blowout fracture is actually from 2008 from the University of Iowa, and a right-wing pundit photoshopped out the date and hospital info. Also, the autopsy shows that he was shot on the inside of his arm, meaning his hands were up, and the top of his head, meaning that, since Brown was 6’4”, either he was on his knees or the officer was 8’ tall. The officer was not 8’ tall.Officer Wilson’s story is that the first shot that went off was an accidental discharge while they were fighting over the gun. However. there was no gunpowder residue on Mike Brown, meaning that he was absolutely not holding the gun when it went off and furthermore that he was not even that close. He was fired on from a distance. As for how it happened, two people who witnessed the shooting of Michael Brown told the SAME story. They both said the officer pulled his gun from his car, Michael Brown put up his hands, and the officer shot him several times. One of the witnesses said the officer shot Michael once in the head and then got out of the car, walked over to his body, and shot him four more times. Here's some sources: http://southern-feminism.tumblr.com...; ; ;You may cite surveillance footage of a robbery, but it wasn't "recent": the footage is timestamped June, not the day Brown was killed. http://kiaske.tumblr.com.... The store owner doesn't even believe it was Brown! http://countercurrentnews.com...;So much evidence is against the idea of Darren Wilson's innocence.
Darren Wilson should not be charged with murderer.

First of all what happened on August 9 2014 was a tragedy. A young man lost his life before he had a chance to turn it around. I believe that Darren Wilson is innocent. Evidence shows that Wilson shot Brown at close range in the hand as Brown reached for his gun. Because if this injury Brown could not have had his hands up in surrender position meaning he was charging Wilson. Remember Dorion Jonson lied about Brown being shot in the back when 3 autopsies show he was shot in the front. Dorion is likely trying to protect his dead friend. He shouldn't be trusted. Brown had recently robbed a store. He and Jonson were jaywalking when Wilson pulled them over. Witnesses and forensic evidence show that a fight happened and Wilson was pinned inside the car. According to all the major news networks Browns blood was found on Wilson's gun, car and uniform and he had a shot in the hand from close range meaning he was reaching for Wilson's gun. Why would he reach for Wilson's gun? To shoot him. After this the men ran away but Brown turned back towards Wilson and taunted him and than charged. Several witnesses say he didn't have his hands in the air. It would be physically impossible for him to have been in surrender position because if his shot in the hand. Thank you for debating me.
Banning the Pill

People make mistakes when having sex. Irresponsibility should always have a consequence, but with the pill there cut can limit there chances of dealing with that. It also: "-Lowers the rate of unwanted pregnancies. -Stops an unwanted pregnancy before abortion is needed or considered. -Does not cause birth defects if the woman is already pregnant. -The morning after pill simply provides another method that can be used as an emergency." http://homepages.rpi.edu... These reasons prove that the pill shouldn't be banned. Regardless of age, if a woman cannot take care of a child there is an option for her to use which can benefit her.
Banning the Pill

I should 1st make myself clear, the ban should be for all. Those that are over 17 have easy access to the pill and could provide it for those that are younger. In order for the pill to be effective the person taking it would need to have a certain BMI for it to be effective [1] therefore those that are below 16 need a prescription but there are those younger than 16 that would not know this and if they are aware of the existence of the morning after pills but nothing more then this could create a misconception of it being a second option which shouldn't be. Therefore to prevent this misconception the morning pill should be banned for good. 1 http://www.plannedparenthood.org...
Banning the Pill

Whether it is a contraceptive or not is not in dispute. I am more concerned with the irresponsibility that will be created if those that are over 17 years old have easy access to the pill especially when that are under 16 years old could easily ask someone who is 17 years old to get them the pill or even worse their partner who could be of age and get it for them. Therefore, the morning pill should banned.
Banning the Pill

The morning after pill should not be banned. P1. It is true that the morning-after pill may act as a contraceptive; if it is taken before ovulation, it may act to prevent conception. http://www.prolifephysicians.org... P2. It can act for emgergencies for mistakes that a person may have done the night before P3. Everyone should be responsible for their actions Conclusion. The morning after pill should be available for eveveryone because its their life and their actions that impact their life, nobodys elses.
Banning the Pill

P1: Seventeen year olds do not need a prescription to have access to the morning after pill. P2: Anyone under seventeen does need to have a prescription to know whether they should be allowed to take the pill [1]. P3: Those under seventeen could get the pill from people over seventeen. P4: Having the pill will create a mistaken belief that the pill is a second option to solve their responsibilities of not having sex. Therefore: The morning pill should be banned. [1] http://www.plannedparenthood.org...
functional pattern training for the fascial system is superior at conditioning the body.

Functional patterns training is based off the idea of fascial systems and fascial webbing that is strung throughout the body. there are a series of different fascial lines that make up the integration of specific 'lines' (lineage of muscles that work together) in the body. the example I am going to use is the functional line. the functional line consists of the contralateral latissimus dorsi, to the contralateral gluteus Maximus. according to Thomas Myers, a manual therapist for over 30 years, describes this line as a necessary component to not only our evolutionary development but in our everyday life. this particular line is pertinent to one of our most basic functions, gait (walking, jogging, running). with this particular line being disconnected or trained in a more isolated fashion brings rise to a disconnect in the connectivity of which this line works from. as you lower extremity goes into hyper extension during gate, there is a shortening of the glute as well as the contralateral lat. this shortening acts as a loading mechanism for the anterior oblique sling which helps to pull the body back through into flexion (or more appropriately, pronation) as the functional line reaches maximal contraction. so even with this basic idea of extension and contraction of the functional there is a reciprocal flexion and eccentric load happening on the opposing side of the body (anterior oblique system). Myers, W. T. (2014). Anatomy Trains: Myofascial Meridians for Manual & Movement therapist. N/a. Elsevier.
functional pattern training for the fascial system is superior at conditioning the body.

functional pattern training is a superior form of exercise for the body than traditional forms of exercise, i.e. body building, powerlifting, weightlifting ect. defining terms: by superior I am referring to how the training modality follows the guidelines of the way the body moves and how the body evolved into its biomechanics now. by exercise I am referring to putting intentional stress on the body in order to receive a positive gain in functional strength and more sustainable way of living. this modality of training follows the baseline at which the body works as an integrated system.