BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
IVF debate

Legal issues that arise with the ownership of the eggs really boils down to who actually has legal rights over the eggs. In all technicality, both the male and the female have rights over the embryos, as they are a mix of the two in zygote form. The donation off female gametes is a different story entirely. The main legal issues that come as a result of donation of embryos produced by IVF are, "whether embryo donation is viewed as gamete donation or adoption; the rearing rights and duties of donors and recipients in resulting offspring; liability; and compensation issues; and the legality of monetary compensation for donors. (Robertson, J. A., 1995.)" There have been issues in the past where the sperm and egg cell donor could not agree on what actions to take with the unused embryos. In addition, when couples do not make a decision or leave the clinic without telling them what further action to take with the remaining embryos, who is responsible for the fees that incur with the storage of the zygotes, along with does the clinic now possess legal rights over the embryos? As a whole the "main ethical issues concern the effect on offspring, consent and counseling of donors and recipients, avoidance of mixing embryos or gametes from different sources, and payment of donor expenses (Ibid)."
IVF debate

Ivf does produce a high rate of multiple births, over 20% (IFV-The Risks). The technology is still fairly new. Through improvements in the technology much of these problems could be avoided. While this is a problem it is a fairly documented problem. Any couple that has done their research on IVF will know that this could be a potential outcome of the procedure and should be responsible and plan accordingly. Many of the multiple births that happen through IFV are when the procedures are not followed correctly. IVF gives an opportunity to couples who otherwise could not have children. While it can be rather expensive that is due to the fact that the technology is still fairly new. Through more development of the technology it could become cheaper, more reliable and safer for all of those involved. Not only all of the above mentioned benefits but through the use of IFV a system could be created to perfect genetic screening that could lead to many if not all of the problems that occur genetically could be spotted before the embryo is developed fully.
IVF debate

Multiple births usually occur as a result of the procedure of placing more than one embryo within the uterus. Especially in couples that have a very low fertility rate, "more than three embryos are transferred mostly in couples with a poor chance of pregnancy ("ESHRE Task Force on Ethics and Law," 2003.)." The implantation of multiple embryos also "resulted in 27.3% twin deliveries and 3.4% of deliveries of triplets or more (Ibid.)." There is also a correlation between multiple births and premature deliveries. For triplets, they "represented 5.6% of all the IVF babies, but they accounted for 30% of the high prematurity (Ibid.)" There is also a correlation between a high mortality rate in cases of multiple births. Many of the couples who have low fertility rates have a high number of embryos implanted in hopes of a more successful procedure, research actually shows that there wasn"t a correlation between the two, "pregnancy rate does not increase for transfers of four, five or six embryos, multiplicity continues to increase (up to 45% for twins and 16% for triplets) (Ibid.)." While many parents view the possibility of a multiple birth as a successful procedure and a wanted outcome, the effects on the children are "more likely to be preterm, to be SGA (birthweight below the 10th centile of reference curves adapted for gestation and sex) and to die in the perinatal period (Ibid)." This also increases the chances of further growth and mental retardation down the line for the children. There are also financial consequences to multiple births, creating a stressful environment for the mother and family, this results in "maternal depression, less possibility for mothers to work outside the home, and an increased rate of divorce. (Ibid.)"
IVF debate

Many of the Problems that arise after embryos are created could be solved through decision making before any of the procedures are completed. Couples should have to sit down with a specialist and go through signing a contract before anything is paid for or done with. This would keep all the problems that happen with unused eggs to a minimum. Through deciding early and having a legally binding contract ll the expenses would e known upfront and then on top of that both the facility and the parents would know exactly what would happen before any of the procedure is done.
IVF debate

Excess embryos may be thrown away by the facility, but the couple can elect to have other things done to the embryos. The frozen excess embryos can be donated to other couples, but this can be problematic in the sense that most couples wait too long to make the final decision, which adds up in bills for both the facility and the couple. There are also a lot of legal ramifications to the process and many families never end up going through with it due to the process and the fees, or not being able to afford a lawyer. Another option is to donate the eggs to research, specifically to stem cell research, but that comes with ethical dilemma of the ethics behind stem cell research, specifically on embryonic cells, as the removal of embryonic stem cells kills the embryo. There is debate on whether or not the embryo is a living thing.
IVF debate

While in some cases couples do opt for a child that is not biologically theirs in most cases it is usually at least half their child. Usually their is a problem in either the women or males reproductive system that does not allow the couple to reproduce with only the couple involved. However, the adoption process is often long and just as expensive if not more expensive than IVF. The average adoption cost can be anywhere from 8,000 to 40,000 dollars (Child Welfare Information Gateway). As you can see adoption can sometimes be just as expensive. Genetic screening is done to weed out any potentially harmed eggs.(PGD and IVF - Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis & In Vitro Fertilization, Pros and Cons About PGD and PGS) genetic daises such a CF that only has a one in fourth chance of appearing in in children where the CF gene is present. Through genetic screening couples could still produce children and have them unaffected and carry on their genes without the risk of CF developing in their children.
IVF debate

IVF technology is advancing enough to allow for the implantation of embryos into another woman"s womb. Also because of this, there is a possibility of having couples raise a baby that is not biological theirs. There is also an issue of population growth. Adoption is a very viable option and also is more ethically sound. It reduces both population growth and it also reduces the amount of kids on the street. With adoption too, there is less of a risk to the surrogate mother, who can face risks like, "including ovarian hyper stimulation syndrome, bleeding, infection, cysts, anesthesia-related complications, and possibly an increased risk of thromboembolism, stroke, myocardial infarction. (Neumann, P. J., 1997.)" For couples who want to have biological children, that is understandable, but couples who are ready to have a child that isn"t biologically theirs, it is better for everyone involved to adopt instead.
IVF debate

Agreed the average cost of one round of IVF is 12,000. However, this should not be a reason for IFV to not be allowed. The problem is that in a couple who pays around 16,800 dollars a year for insurance (2014 Employer Health Benefits Survey) who typically does not use their insurance IVF under circumstances dictated by the insurance company would allow couples to do IFV on a budget instead of putting themselves into a situation that compromises their health. It is actually against medical procedure for doctors to put more than 4-6 embryos in the womb at a time, due to the health complications that can follow. While a couple that has problems conceiving naturally have low IFV fertility rate the rate of natural pregnancy is significantly lower. IT gives the couple a choice. As technology for IFV advances over the years many of the problems could easily be solved.
IVF debate

Couples who have a low conceiving rate also have a low success rate, even with IVF. There are also ethical considerations to be made for couples that have a low success rate, are experiencing financial hardship, but also really want to have the baby. This can result in them opting for riskier procedures in order to make the possibility of having a baby entirely possible. They may opt for having more embryos implanted in order to have a higher success rate, but there is actually no correlation between the two and "pregnancy rate does not increase for transfers of four, five or six embryos, multiplicity continues to increase (up to 45% for twins and 16% for triplets) (Ibid.)." There is also a correlation between multiple pregnancies and risks for both the mother and the child.
IVF debate

Some of the basic benefits of IFV is the fact that anyone can have a baby. It means that regardless of sexual orientation or any other extenuating circumstances couples still have a chance to have children. The infertility problems that occur naturally in some people can be overcome. Due to the nature of IVF it increases the chance of conception(Why Choose IVF?). Also this allows conception to happen at a time that is convenient for the couple involved. Due to the genetic screening that happens before embryos are placed in the womb it allows scientists to find problems with the embryos before they are conceived. (Fertility Treatment: In Vitro Fertilisation (IVF)) As eggs can be frozen it gives a chance for older women to have children after menopause. Some couples due to either the male or female are unable to reproduce naturally. Even if fertility issues are not a problem IVF has other benefits that make pregnancies that are typically high risk (older age) not as significant as a problem. If there is a problem with one parent then there is still a chance for that couple to have a child with the donation of either a sperm or egg.
Should they make little plastic army girls like they make army guys.

Hi all,This is an interesting topic that might not have direct repercussions, but on a wider scale is important. The rise of the ideology that gender is a social construct and that men and women/boys and girls are exactly the same is harmful to society. Though this debate may have not been started on those ground, it most certainly applies to themMy opponent has taken the pro position, so I shall let him post his arguments first. I urge the voters not to take into account any evidence that is provided without a source.
Men with small packages will have a hard time pleasing a woman in the bedroom

It is well known that men who have small packages are often marginalized and made to feel terrible, especially when it comes time for them to "perform". Even though it is unfair, I support the notion that men with small packages have their work cut out for them and will have a hard time pleasing their partner. By "small" I mean around the vicinity of 4 to 5 inches. By "women" I mostly mean Western women such as those living in the United States. By "hard time pleasing" I mean taking them to that place where they can reach out and embrace the essence of life. The con side will argue that men with small packages are still capable of being complete studs despite this seeming disadvantage. Note that the use of any other body part or tool is not allowed to make up for said deficiencies in the size department.
religion is false

I can already tell you are one of those atheists who like to throw out insults because they have no real information or thoughts, aside of the ones which have been fed to them in public school growing up. So try to keep that on the down-low. Anyway, your topic is quite rash to come to the conclusion that religion is false. Technically you are religious. Have you been to the moon? Have you watched evolution happen? Did you live through the big bang? No, so you take faith that it happened, you have no solid evidence aside from word of others and what they say is true. So if religion is false, maybe you should come up with your own belief system which relies solely on personal experience, then you can make the claim that religion is false. Also, I'd like to hear your reasoning on why religion is false, without insulting God or the Bible, which an unintelligent may do. I have run into smart atheists, but most of them are just ignorant people who are angry with life and filled with guilt. So we'll see who you are.
Marijuana Legalization

Marijuana affects the brain and it is proved. If my pro doesn't believe this you can go to www.drugabuse.gov Now for the closing arguement. Marijuana has a wide range of effects specially on cardiopulmonary and mental health. Many like you have called for marijuana legalizationto treat conditions like pain and nausea caused by HIV/AIDS, cancer and other conditions, but clinical evidence has not shown therapeutic benifits of marijuana plant outweigh its health risks. As marijuana plant contains hundreds of chemical compounds that may have different effects and because marijuana plant is typically ingested via smoking, its use as a medicine is difficult to evaluate. Contrary to FDA marijuana is addictive. Estimated results shows that about 9% of users are addictive and which jas increased among young users of 17years toabout 19% and who use marijuana daily to 20-25%. Research shows that marijuana causes problems in daily life and make existing problems worse. Heavy marijuana users report lower life satisfaction, poorer physical and mental health, more relationships problems and decrease in academic and carrier success. Thank you. Nice debating with you.
Marijuana Legalization

My opponent has waited until the third round until providing any proof and could not even complete his argument before the concluding round. He has argued that the negative effects on the brain are reason enough to continue the failed war on the plant. Very little is know about how marijuana effects the brain. We know that the brain reacts with the cannabinoid receptors to produce the high effect. Past that not much more is known on how these receptors effect brain function. The research that has been conducted thus far on the effects of marijuana on the brain have all been inconclusive due to the limited scope of the study. In more recent research using brain scans to gauge the change in brain activity have shown that their is no effect on the development of adolescence who used marijuana. If Marijuana was legalized research could proceed unimpeded by prohibition and if any negative effects exist they can be genetically modified out of the strain. If the prohibition continues marijuana use will continue to rise due to the fact that people are becoming more educated and less afraid of using. Now for my closing argument Marijuana is the number one cash crop in America. It has over 400 medical applications, and over 1000 textile applications. There are no recorded deaths from marijuana. Statistics show clearly that the increased use of marijuana among the population has no negative ramifications. The prohibition on marijuana creates a huge black market in which drug cartels can profit and spread violence. It also aids to fund private prisons and contributes to America's growing police state. It is a window for law enforcement to violate your 4th amendment rights. You cannot legislate morality as it has been shown with both the prohibition of marijuana and alcohol. The prohibition of marijuana has slowed the study of a useful agricultural and medicinal plant. It is fiscally and socially irresponsible to continue the failed prohibition of marijuana. http://www.huffingtonpost.com...
Marijuana Legalization

Marijuana deals and buys drugs for the patients illegally and sells them at much higher costs. The abused drugs means that they use dried leaves, hemp plants etc. which contains phycoactive or mind-altering chemical namely delta-9, tetrahydrocannabinol(THC) as well as other related compounds which causes diminished mind common among the youth. When marijuana is smoked, THC rapidly passes through the lungs into the bloodstreams which carries the chemical to the nrain and other parts of body. It is absorbed more slowly than ingested food or drink. However it is ingested, THC acts on specific molecular targets like nrain cells called canabinoid receptors. I will say rest of the arguement in the next round.
Marijuana Legalization

Marijuana is the most abused illegal in the U.S and around the world." Marijuana by definition cannot be abused. It is a medicinal herb, and a textile crop. It is America's number one cash crop. Abusing marijuana is the equivalent of abusing corn. " Those who support its legalization for medical or for general use, fail to recognize that the greatest costs of marijuana are not related to its prohibition; they are costs from marijuana itself. " Costs such as lowering the crime? Costs such as creating jobs? Costs such as earning revenue to pay the deficit? Costs such as protecting our rights? Please elaborate. The only subject still up for debate is what impact legalization of marijuana would have on traffic accidents resulting in fatalities. Seeing as how Marijuana is already the most widely enjoyed drug, the true argument lies with how an increase of use would effect the number of traffic accidents. Lets go to the charts for this one for some actual proof. click below for actual proof. http://canorml.org... When marijuana use Soared in the sixties and seventies Highway safety was improving and still continued to improve at a quicker rate afterwards mainly attributed to new safety standards and features in automobiles. It proves that highway safety is unaffected by the increased use of marijuana. The testing for marijuana intoxication is very inaccurate. It can stay lingering in your system longer then any other illegal substance. This is due to that fact that your liver does not prioritize THC as a substance that needs to be cleaned out of the blood stream. Thus remnant traces of THC stay in your blood for up to 7 days after just a one time use and longer for regular users. Their is no way to prove if marijuana is directly attributed to any single car accident. "Legalized gambling has not reduced illegal gambling; rather marijuana has increased it. " Gambling can be done anywhere there is a group of people with cash. Selling marijuana is a different dynamic the cartels will have costly obstacles in their way in order to smuggle drugs into America as they do now. They take that risk and spend that money because there is a good return with a market that is unregulated where you can control the price. Marijuana is relatively cheap to grow in high yields in just about any environment as long as it gets adequate sunlight. The growers in America wont have these obstacles. At the moment legal marijuana in Colorado is just beneath street value. This is a matter of supply and demand. Once more growers are established and the supply can meet the demand the price will drop. Legalized gambling is not a proper comparison. My Opponent has failed to provide any proof, evidence, or elaboration for his arguments. I have expanded on and provided proof for every point I have argued.(although it seems as if he didn't even read my opening argument) The fact of the matter is their are no facts or actual statistics that suggest the legalization of marijuana would be harmful in anyway. Thus the reason my opponent has not provided any.
Marijuana Legalization

Marijuana is the most abused illegal in the U.S and around the world. Those who support its legalization for medical or for general use, fail to recognize that the greatest costs of marijuana are not related to its prohibition; they are costs from marijuana itself. Legalized gambling has not reduced illegal gambling; rather marijuana has increased it. The illegal drug suppliers deals drugs with marijuana. If Marijuana was legalized, then the only way of eliminating its illegal trade of coacine which could have been the modest way in comparison, would be to sell marijuana untaxed and legally to a willing buyer.
Abortion Debate

Let's clear a few things, a fetus is a 'living human being' because it originally was created from human parents and we know it's alive because it is growing. If it was not alive, then an abortion is not neccasary. Also there are countless biologists that conclude that a fetus is the beginning of human life. For example, Keith L. Moore says in his book of embryology, quoted 'This fertilized ovum, known as a zygote, is a large diploid cell that is the beginning, or primordium, of a human being.'Yes your correct on a fetus not having a consiousness or the ability of pain but does it make any less humane to kill them ? And by the way, if you can terminate a fetus for not having consiousness, can you terminate a person in a coma ? People in comas have no sense of there surroundings.You say that animals are more beneficial than unborn human beings but animals will never benefit society by not having jobs or a family, mean while a fetus can have a job/family.Yes it is true that making abortion illegal won't stop abortion but so is murder. Murder is illegal but some people still commit murder. And abortion and rape only effects about 0.05% people, that is a very small group of people. But even if a rape victim does an legal abortion she will suffer from depression and possibely commit suicide. India and China still have a culture of female infanticide and kill their unborn female children. Just to name a few.http://www.domesticviolenceservices.com...Abortion is wrong because scientificaly a fetus is a human being and should recieve basic human rights and be protected. Abortion just discriminates the unborn and shows that human life is disposable just for a few hundred dollars. And it isn't your body, it just lives in it.http://www.thefreedictionary.com...