BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Vdeo gaming a day is good for you

Addressing the claim that is damaged eyesight:(1) Do you have any sources, resources that you would like to use to support this claim?Here is an article on the topic:http://gamerant.com...Addressing the claim that games promote violence:The example you used of a chess gamer being killed over a chess move falls under the fallacy of appealing to extremes. http://www.logicallyfallacious.com.... Using an extreme and isolated incident to reflect a larger issue. I don't know about you but I don't see 7 o'clock editions of the news appealing to stop the chess violence. Same thing goes for video games as a whole, despite years of study there remains only a weak case to prove causation relationship between even violent video games and violence as a whole.
Vdeo gaming a day is good for you

Video games damage people's eyes and nerves. Video games are also designed to hook people in - so they play and play until their are nearly blind. Being blind is extremely detrimental to the brain - even if "Increased grey matter in the section for the brain that controls moto functions and navigational ability over the control group which was not allowed to play video games in the same time frame" happens. That increased moto functions and navigational ability is useless without your eyes.My opponent has not rebutted the fact that some people can take RTS too seriously. Would you lose 100 times at a game and feel it benefited you? Of course not.Thank you.
Vdeo gaming a day is good for you

In the following study, a Group was asked to play mario 64 for 20 minutes a day. http://www.kurzweilai.net...; The result: Increased grey matter in the section fo the brain that controlls moto functions and navigational ability over the control group which was not allowed to play video games in the same time frame.The following study was funded by the United States airforce and conducted by Katholieke Univestiy in Belgium. http://www.plosone.org...The result: Real Time Strategy games (RTS) are shown to improve neural placity related to stratgic thinking. These studies and many more including this one:http://www.huffingtonpost.com...Which shows even very small amount of gaming is capable of staving off metnal detteoriation associated with aging. And this study: http://news.nationalgeographic.com...; Showing improvement in eyesight.The abstract conclusion is that these games are akin to mental excercises, the mnd responds to stimulation in a way that is not dissimiliar from stimulating muscles. http://www.wikihow.com...; <- A neat article if aonly slightly anecdotal.
Vdeo gaming a day is good for you

Rather than focusing exclusively on Video gaming, I will broaden this a bit to include none athletic games in general, be them using Analog or Digital technologies. For the purposes of the Argument I am going to ignore "athletic" gaming leagues and instead reference the common understanding of what a none athletic game is exemplified: Connect 4, Chess,Checkers and other games played on a board or other physical media that requires physical manipulation of pieces in some fashion. - The cause for this expansion is to establish consistency in reference for generations which grew up with mostly analog technology in their entertainment. I propose that for any future need to define a term, Merriam Webster Dictionary ( found here: http://www.merriam-webster.com... ) Be the common resource.
Prostitution Should Be Legal

"In the year since lifting the ban on brothels in the Netherlands, eight Dutch victim support organizations reported an increase in the number of victims of trafficking, and twelve victim support organization reported that the number of victims from other countries has not diminished (Bureau NRM, 2002, p. 75). Forty-three of the 348 municipalities (12%) in the Netherlands choose to follow a no-brothel policy, but the Minister of Justice has indicated that the complete banning of prostitution within any municipality could conflict with the federally guaranteed "right to free choice of work" (Bureau NRM, 2002, p.19). . .. Contrary to claims that legalization and decriminalization would control the expansion of the sex industry, prostitution now accounts for 5% of the Netherlands economy (Daley, 2001, p. 4). Over the last decade, as pimping was legalized, and brothels decriminalized in the year 2000, the sex industry increased by 25% in the Netherlands (Daley, 2001, p.4). At any hour of the day, women of all ages and races, dressed in hardly anything, are put on display in the notorious windows of Dutch brothels and sex clubs and offered for sale. Most of them are women from other countries who were probably trafficked into the Netherlands (Daley, 2001, p. 4). . .. Results of the Swedish legislation thus far have been promising. The prohibition against men buying prostituted women has received strong social support. Several polls, conducted in 2000 and 2001, show that approximately 80% of the Swedish population support the law. Of those who want to repeal the law, the majority are men, with only 7% of women in support of repeal (Jacobson, 2002, p.24). Most importantly, women who are attempting to leave prostitution support the law (Ekberg, 2001). Swedish NGOs that work with women in prostitution also support the law and maintain that since passage of the law, increased numbers of women contact them for assistance. The very existence of the law, and the fact that people know it will be enforced, they say, serve as an aid to young women who are vulnerable to pimps and procurers (Ekberg, 2001). " . http://www.honourconsulting.com... "Legal sex businesses provide locations where sexual harass- ment, sexual exploitation, and violence against women are perpe- trated with impunity. State-sponsored prostitution endangers all women and children in that acts of sexual predation are normal- ized"acts ranging from the seemingly banal (breast massage) to the lethal (snuff prostitution that includes filming of actual mur- ders of real women and children). A report on the sexual exploita- tion of children noted that the presence of a thriving adult sex industry in a community had the effect of increasing child prosti- tution in that same community (Estes & Weiner, 2001). Nevada, the one U. S. state where prostitution is legal in 13 counties, had significantly higher rates of sex crimes than the rest of the United States in the 1990s (Albert, 2001). " . http://www.prostitutionresearch.com...
Prostitution Should Be Legal

I accept. My opponents arguments are formulated in a way where my rebuttals should be sufficient to support my case. I will argue the laws should take the Nordic approach -- specifically the Sweden model which has had significant sucess. It is the client, not the prostitute, who becomes the criminal under law. http://en.wikipedia.org...http://en.wikipedia.org...This model should be accepted because punishing the prostitute-type-reforms seem to be fairly unsucessful, and actually worsen current issues with prostitution. But since the Swedish model, in my opinion, seems to work, I will take their general mdel as my stance. Let's proceed.
Prostitution Should Be Legal

Resolution: I am arguing that prostitution be made legal in the United States. Con must argue that prostitution laws should either stay the same or become more strict. The burden of proof will be shared equally.Definition to avoid semantics: The practice of engaging in sexual activity with a customer for payment. Note that prostitutes may be male, female, or both; and their customers may be heterosexual, homosexual, or other.An introduction to my arguments: After round 1, I will elaborate on my following arguments:1) People should be able to do what they want with their own bodies.2) By making prostitution illegal, a dangerous black market is created (which is what is happening now).3) Prostitution is victimless and is therefore not a crime.4) Personal and economic decisions of the people are none of the government's business, therefore making prostitution illegal is an intrusion.5) By legalizing prostitution, prostitutes will become safer and the business will be more efficient, adding another sector to the market.Rules: Pretty generic. Maintain a respectful attitude. Round 1 is for acceptance and any clarifications, perhaps a few opening arguments. It doesn't matter.Rounds 2 and 3 will be for statement of positions and rebuttal.Round 4 will be for closing arguments only.Thanks and good luck!
School Dress Codes are sexist and Add to Rape Culture

My group and I believe that School Dress Codes are targeting the female population and are unfair. School"s are beginning to focus on how the students dress rather than their education. For example, pulling a female out of class until she can change and taking her away from the education. Many cases have been reported of females being pulled out of class for minor infractions like straps being visible, or more than 3 inches of the thigh showing. Instead of letting the student know they're breaking dress code and let them off with a warning or letting them wait in class, they are pulled out to wait for a change of clothes. I understand there must be a general set of guidelines to avoid making peers feel uncomfortable, but dictating someone's clothing style is disrupting freedom of expression. The reason for a school dress code is to keep males focused on their education. Since when is a males education superior to a females? Pulling a female out of class while the male stays to continue learning without "distraction" is sexist. Men aren't pigs, they can control themselves. Making a dress code so boys stay on task is stereotyping males as pigs. An example - At a Haven Middle School, female students can"t wear shorts, leggings, and/or yoga pants because they might be distracting for boys at their school. This is a common occurrence across America at this day and time, Middle Schools AND High Schools. This not only teaches boys that it is okay to be distracted, it teachers girls that it's their fault if boys stare. This kind of message lands itself squarely on a continuum that blames girls and women for assault by men. It also sends the message to boys that their behaviors are excusable, or understandable given what the girls are wearing. This adds to Rape Culture. Rape Culture is when a citizens is raped and assaulted, it is their fault. It is their fault because of the way they looked, acted, or dressed before the crime was committed. It is saying "boys will be boys", and females will have to adjust themselves to a males perspective. Instead of girls dressing for themselves and feeling good about themselves, they are dressing based off teachers and the male students of the school. School Dress Codes need to stop making young girls feel inferior and feel like targets. A general set of rules is always okay, but when it is so strict it impacts a female, the administration has gone too far.
The Problem of Evil Against the God of Christianity Is Valid.

I argue that the problem of evil validly refutes the notion of the God of Christianity. I argue the existence of evil in the world is logically incompatible with the existence of a benevolent God, and that it is more reasonable to conclude that the God of Christianity does not exist than that he does exist but does nothing to stop evil. This is my brief syllogism: Assumption (1): God exists. Assumption (1a): God is all-knowing. Assumption (1b): God is all-powerful. Assumption (1c): God is perfectly loving. Assumption (1d): Any being that did not possess all three of the above properties would not be the Christian God. Premise (2): Evil exists. Premise (3): An all-knowing being would be aware of the existence of evil. Premise (4): An all-powerful being would be able to eliminate evil. Premise (5): A perfectly loving being would desire to eliminate evil. Conclusion (6): Evil does not exist. (from (1),(3),(4),(5)) Contradiction: But evil does exist. (from (2)) Conclusion (7): There is no being that is all-knowing, all-powerful, and perfectly loving. (from (2),(3),(4),(5)) Conclusion (8): The Christian God does not exist. (from (7),(1d)) I believe that the only way to refute the problem of evil without surrendering the assumption that such a god exists is to deny one of its premises. I will allow my opponent to make his initial defenses and theodicies, as well as expand on his proof as set forth in the debate. I look forward to his response. I hope we have a great debate!
Basketball or football

First off you need SCHOOL because you can't even spell. the word and school does a lot of things like giving people the opportunity to play sports make good grades and also have a good career starting from college to retirement to make money for yourself. By the way how did you even post this A computer, A tablet, A phone? How do you think those were made from 5 year old or 15 year old no a educated man who went through school and college and got a job and you telling me they should be nuked! Well lets see your idea No school mainly and that would mean no phones no tech-knowledgeably and no lifes all i haft to say is good plan.
Basketball or football

Since I said that shcool is not cool, shcool is not cool. Kids should not have to be brutally forced to go to shcool, because it is not cool. Shcool just teaches us about hitler and those darn nazi's. Alos we learn how to spell. And it gets boring because I know how to spell every word in the alphapet. Shcool should be nuked. In other words screw shcool because shcool is not cool.
Rationalist groups focus just on religion which is wrong. I agree to this & they should focus on all

Honorable Judges and my most worthy opponent, for debate round no. 4, I mistakenly pasted the wrong address of the link. For round 4, pls ignore the wrong link which was posted earlier in that round and go to this link -----à http://debateorg-round4.blogspot.com... For this round, i.e. round no. 5, pls go to this link ----à http://debateorg-round5.blogspot.in...Thanx.
Rationalist groups focus just on religion which is wrong. I agree to this & they should focus on all

Rationalist groups all over the world are just or mainly just against religion. However, there are several other topics were rationalism is not used and Rationalist Groups do not protest against them or seldom protest against them and not at that level which it should be as per its requirement. Indian Rationalist Groups like Sanal, a Dravidian, have also just copied the west and just target religion instead of other issues, just to gain appraisal and feel proud arrogantly by boasting that they are the only people who are smarter than everyone. I agree to it but if you do not then let's start a debate. If you want to start conversation, then start debating else do not comment because I will block your profile after replying.
Bribery is sometimes acceptable

Giving bribe is an act that takes place when a person is trying to acquire something he doesn't morally or legally deserve.Why should it be acceptable? BRIBERY NEGATES THE RULE OF LAW:The rule of law is the supremacy of law over everybody in a political system.Bribery can easily negate it in so many ways.An example of a wealthy man who might have acted against the law and is being charged to court,such man can easily bribe the judge and hence pervert justice.If such is acceptable or allowed in any state,it could lead to anarchy,a lawless state.Everybody or anybody who is rich and well to do can easily buy himself or herself out of jail.Bribery can restrict the fundamental human right of a citizen.It can limit right to fair hearing in court especially when one e.g the defender is unable to to bribe the judge because he could not afford the ammount of money the judge might have requested,the other would have the upper hand,he will bribe the judge and win the case.Everyone will agree with me that bribery has no positive impact,because it's immoral and does no good to the society.
Bribery is sometimes acceptable

Giving and collecting bribes can be so bad on a country's economy,it is not only bad but also immoral.Overall, corruption reduces efficiency and increases inequality. Estimates show that the cost of corruption equals more than 5% of global GDP (US$ 2.6 trillion, World Economic Forum) with over US$ 1 trillion paid in bribes each year (World Bank). Engaging in corrupt practices also creates a very unfavourable business environment by encouraging unfair advantage and anti-competitive practices. As well as allowing organised crime to flourish, corruption is one of the primary obstacles to the economic development of a country; it undermines the rule of law, weakens trust in public institutions and challenges democratic principles. Lets not forget that bribery leads to corruption.A country or organisation that practices such is headed for destruction.
Bribery is sometimes acceptable

During this debate I will be arguing for bribery sometimes being acceptable. My opponent will then be arguing that bribery is never acceptable in any case. Definitions: Bribery: The definition of bribery is offering something desirable or something of value in exchange for getting something in return. http://www.yourdictionary.com... Acceptable: The definition of acceptable is something that is good enough to satisfy a need. http://www.yourdictionary.com... First round is for acceptance. Good luck.
Bribery is sometimes acceptable

A candidtate who was running for a post of a governor,bribes the electorial chairman in the state incharge of the electorial commission.The chairman announced the candidate as the winner of the election because he had taken a bribe from the candidate.This act negates the principle of democracy.According to Abraham Lincoln,democracy is defined as government of the people,by the people and for the people.If a candidate is allowed to bribe and win through this means,then it means "democracy in that state is on a journey to extinction".Bribery only benefits two people,the giver and the taker at the expense of the whole country,its a selfish act that should not be allowed.I stand to say,that bribery is a bad act and cannot be acceptable under any circumstance.
Bribery is sometimes acceptable

I have been ill over the last few days so sorry for forfeiting round 2. Norms and values differ between countries. In many non-western societies gift taking and giving in the public realm is a matter of traditions and customs. Moreover, gift giving is a part of negotiations and relationship building in some parts of the world. It is hypocritical for the west to target developing countries for this as many so-called democracies are hopelessly compromised by business interests through political funding and lobbying. The United States Foreign Corrupt Practices Act bans large bribes but allows for the payment of small "customary" sums in order to ease transactions. The Economist, "When a bribe is merely facilitating business" June 11th 2011, . http://www.economist.com... Bribery is sometime necessary for survival. "Survival" corruption, practised by public servants, is usually the result of small salaries, perhaps in highly inflationary economies, which do not allow them to make a living. Such as with the junior police officers mentioned in the previous point. Without bribery, public administration would collapse altogether as no one would have any incentive to get anything done. Thus the level of corruption is determined by the poor economic situation of the country as well as by the policy of the government. Conclusion As bribery is sometime necessary for survival, bribery is sometime acceptable.
Gay marriage should be legalized in the United States of America.

It seems as if you've gotten pretty busy libertarian. No matter. You've taken on a lot of debates at once so it's understandable. I. The Fourteenth Amendment (Equal Protection Clause) I stand by my point of the definition of marriage not being changed. III. Natural Behavior Justification I can't refute this because I never said it. I don't know what you're talking about. IV. Leviticus 20:13 I stand by my point of Jesus fulfilling the law of the Old Testament. If homosexuality wasn't reiterated in the New Testament it would be accepted by all Christians. But it is so it is a sin. V. Romans 1:24 - 27 This clearly states a man with a man and a woman with a woman. Simple as that. VI. You Being A Jerk I don't think you're a jerk and I'm not judging you. If you don't want me to try to convert you to my viewpoint then you shouldn't have challenged me to this debate. I'm not calling you a jerk because you're trying t convert me. That's what a debate is. Your statement is hypocritical. VIII. Scientific Consensus I've read this over 10 times and it still doesn't make sense. 1. I never did this. If you're accusing me of something I didn't do just to win a debate that is wrong. I don't do that to you. 2.You said nothing about genetics. How could I copy and paste something you didn't even say? 3.I said nothing about the Bible before you did. This entire statement is completely ludicrous. I don't get it. Gays have equal loving relationship. Not all do. You need proof. Two humans who love each other should be able to get married! What about a human and his dog? Look at me and my dog. We both love each other so why would it be wrong for us to get married. Obviously not everything that involves love should be moral. This is a dumb stereotype, that is simply untrue! Then please prove it. I'm asking for 1 or 2 reliable links. It's not that difficult. Isn't promiscuity a reason to let people get married so they will only have one partner? That's like saying "Shouldn't we combine all the races together so we only have one race?" It won't work. I think I've refuted everything else in Round 2. I'm sorry you weren't able to respond libertarian. Maybe next time. Good luck.
Gay marriage should be legalized in the United States of America.

Gay marriage is great. 1. Gays do not have a choice to be gay and it is perfectly natural. Homosexuality is found in animals and in societies that are completely isolated. http://apahelpcenter.org... http://www.gaywired.com... 2. Gays can take care of kids just as well, if not better, than heterosexuals. http://apahelpcenter.org... 3. More couples means more families, which is great for society. 4. The definition of marriage can change. It'll deal. There is such a thing as Old English. One word can deal with the change. 5. The government should not try to stop love. It is immoral. 6. Gays will be able to visit their sick partners in the hospital. 7. Gays will be able to automatically inherit money from their spouses. 8. There will be less orphans. Gays are statistically more likely to adopt special needs children.
Should everything be taxed

Here we go again with the racist crap! Go on this site! http://www.datehookup.com... You did that on my previous debate, how do I not know you are racist to asains or whites?! http://www.asiandating.com... I extend my arguments, he has not dis proved a thing I had said and his link on wikipedia is invalid because I do not see tax as a cause for the war anywhere!
Should everything be taxed

This is why I think everything should be taxed. Case 1: It Pays For Our Government http://www.cbpp.org... As shown in this link, our tax dollars pay for much of our government. however, there is still a margin that is left to be payed. If taxes would apply to every item, we might have enough money to pay for half of the remaining debt we need to stay afloat as a nation. Case 2: We Need Them To Pay For Departments! Department of education, department of defence, these are a few example of what our tax dollars pay for. If everything were taxed, we might have to pay more money, but many departments would have a higher budget. That is why we need to have tax on everything. To help our economy, government, and departments! Thank you!