BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Series 1 Episode 3 : Heroin Legalisation

My opponent has broken a rule I believe that is a conduct violation , before I present my views I would like to apologise to the audience but my computer often prevents me from structuring my paragraphs very well and this may be the case . Society should make rules that benefit society we should not invent random laws just for the sake of it we have to analyse how these rules would work in our world . Governments around the world spend millions on the war on drugs and why do we have to continue doing so when there is so many benefits to legalising heroin that I could think of right now at the top of my head . Heroin legalisation would lead to 1) The illegal black market for heroin getting much smaller 2) The quality of heroin improving and therefore reducing the number of overdoses 3) less prisoners 4) tax money 5)the cost of heroin dropping therefore heroin addicts will no longer have to commit crime in order to get their next fix . There is simply not a sufficient enough reason to prohibit the use and sale of heroin as a recreational drug . The Pros outweight the Cons . It's time to fight the government for our rights to do whatever we want with our own bodies . I hope my opponenet will present his case next round as the burden of proof is shared .
Islam is a religion of peace

First thank you for taking me up on this debate. I want to make it very clear that two of my best friends in University are Muslims (practices of Islam) and although I hope I do not offend anyone; we must criticize everything to determine what we know. For the name of freedom of speech, and to make the world a better place. If you are a Muslim reading this and may get offended here is your warning. DO NOT CONTINUE READING. Offenses here on in are the responsibility of not ME but that of the reader, Those interested for a serious debate may continue. Apostasy: In accordance with Islam, I ask my opponent what is the punishment for leaving Islam? It will not be found in the Qu'ran, because it is found within Sharia law. The punishment is death. Only in the circumstances of converting under duress and/or suffering a mental disorder does this not happen. I ask the audience is this peaceful? I think not. It gets worse. For women, they must either convert to Islam OR be put to death with no chance of escape. This is under the fiqh, or Islamist Jurisprudence. Source: Heffening, W. (1993). "Murtadd". In C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel, W.P. Heinrichs, et al.. Encyclopaedia of Islam. 7. Brill Academic Publishers. ISBN 978-90-04-09419-2. Salman Rushdie: An author whom wrote the Satanic Verses caused immense controversy. This is due to a character whom was not based on -though closely related too in the Islamic World- the prophet Muhammod. This turned violent with several protests in Islamic countries, and has received criticism for freedom of speech. Furthermore several people died including assassination attempts on Rushdie's life for 'blasphemy' and 'disbelieving'. To this DAY, Rushdie had to hide in fear for his life after Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini of Iran issued a fatwā ordering Muslims to kill Rushdie on sight. Several deaths and bombings resulted in this. Iran continuously sends him a so-called valentines day card kindly reminding him of them looking to kill Rushdie. How is this peaceful exactly? Source: "Rushdie's term". Retrieved 15 February 2007. http://en.wikipedia.org... Punishment for Women: The Qu'ran supports not only slavery, but the beating of wives within the house holds. "4:34 Husbands should take full care of their wives, with [the bounties] God has given to some more than others and with what they spend out of their own money. Righteous wives are devout and guard what God would have them guard in the husbands' absence. If you fear high-handedness from your wives, remind them [of the teaching of God], then ignore them when you go to bed, then hit them. If they obey you, you have no right to act against them. God is most high and great. (Haleem)" -Qu'ran Not only does this show that Islam is NOT of peace, but a religion that SUPPORTS domestic violence. What morally normal person believes in this exactly I ask you? Finally: Islam means to 'submit'. And seeks not to rest until every individual is under the banner of Islam. Muhammod was very successful in spreading the religion NOT by charisma, but by the tip of the sword. I shall continue on these points later. Thank you for your time, good luck to Pro!
Spanking In Schools

I will now summarize this debate and make a closing statement. Con has presented arguments that are self-contradicting: Should spanking "be banned from everywhere," including children's own homes, or is it "the parents [sic] choice" whether or not to spank their children? I have shown that spanking should not be banned universally, and I have also demonstrated that if parents are allowed to spank their children, it is also their right to choose a school that will do the same in an appropriate manner as well. My opponent also mentions studies that have shown that spanking "causes problems later down the road," but he has failed to present any of the studies in his sources. On the other hand, I have cited sources that show that corporal punishment is very effective, and I have also presented a testimonial from a teacher who was grateful for the ability to apply it in class due to its effective nature. Con has thrown claims around willy-nilly throughout the debate, but has not been able to back up any of them. The one piece of evidence my opponent has presented, i. e. the case of a child who went home to her mother with bruises on her bottom, has been shown to be unconvincing at best. The mother of the child was upset that the school was not implementing corporal punishment correctly, not that the school was enacting corporal punishment. The child was most definitely at fault, and faced a few bruises on her bottom as opposed to something that might appear in her permanent record. If anything, spanking was the correct decision in this case; it just should have been implemented differently, which only shows that supporting corporal punishment is better than abolishing it, as it can then be refined and implemented better. In addition to successfully refuting all of Con's points, I have done the following:-I have shown that spanking is similar in many ways to other forms of punishment that society imposes; to oppose spanking in schools (or in general) would be to argue a much greater point about punishment in general. -I have shown that spanking provides teachers with another tool to keep their classes progressing smoothly. -I have shown that spanking has benefits, largely due to its immediacy and proven ability to keep children from misbehaving. -I have shown that spanking is actually a great alternative to other forms of punishment imposed in schools, in that it does not potentially ruin a child's future. In closing, from looking at the exchange between Con and me, one must conclude that corporal punishment in schools is appropriate if carried out correctly, just like any other form of punishment society must use at various levels of misbehavior, whether the punishment is to send a criminal to prison or even to punish a dog to keep it from becoming unruly. Spanking should not be eliminated from schools everywhere, and if anything, it should become a more widespread practice.
Spanking In Schools

First I feel the need to comment you on how convincing you are. Spanking in schools has been eleminated in many states including Iowa where i live. Im neutral when it comes to spanking by parents, but im school? I think not. We teach our kids not to hit, but when we spank them we are hitting their bottoms. While you bring up a good point str chudies have shown that spanking causes problems later down the road. Also, instead of a bend over and let me swat your butt, why not do a detention or a in school suspension. How would you like it if someone that you barely know walks by sees your on your phone and says okay stick that butt in the air. I would be a little concerned. And with just a spankingby a parent the CPS gets all huffy puffy. Why dont they do that when a kid gets spanked in school? It just makes no sense at all. Thanks for challenging me Sources: cnn.com
Homosexuality is a sin and if one continues in the sin, then it will sadly lead that person to hell.

As you will see from the comments, my opponent no longer seems to be on this site. I offered him the opportunity to make his final statement via the comments page anyway, but he has not done so. That said, I have no interest in winning debates by default. I would therefore request that when voting, people base their votes on the two completed rounds and not simply award me the victory just because my opponent forfeited his final round. Thank you.
Make a very boring story.

I woke up in the morning and brushed my teeth, and then ate breakfast. I didn't have anything to do, so I spent all day on Debate.org. I saw this topic, and accepted it, and wrote a very boring story. This story was really, really, really, really, really really boring, but I wanted it to be really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really boring so I wrote another one. Unfortunately, this story was only really boring, so I had to write another one. This one was really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really boring, but I thought it was too boring so I wrote another one. I spent the rest of the day on a new story, and this one was incredibly boring, so I used it in this debate. The end.
the water we drink is more dangerous than the air we breathe

I'll focus on the health risks of air pollution this round. There are a few types of air pollutants, but the most severe are ozone and particle pollution. Exposure to ozone can cause accelerated aging of the lungs and aggravated lung conditions, such as bronchitis.[1] Particle pollution is made of fine particles of material (such as soot), and is associated with higher risk of heart attacks and asthma.[2] [1]http://www.sbcapcd.org... [2]http://www.sbcapcd.org...
the water we drink is more dangerous than the air we breathe

Air pollution has been linked diseases such as emphysema, as well as heart and lung diseases. Children are especially vulnerable.[1] It also has effects on the bodies of wildlife.[2] Air pollution has extremely widespread effects; the air reaches every single human being and animal on Earth, whereas water sources vary among regions. [1]http://www.stateoftheair.org... [2]http://www.mothersandothersforcleanair.org...
the water we drink is more dangerous than the air we breathe

Definitely the water we drink is more dangerous than the air we breathe. Water pollution is documented as a contributor to a wide range of human disorders. it also destroys the lives of many aquatic animals. clean drinking can be a normal thing for us but it is like a gift from heaven for a wide range of population in poor countries. water pollution not only spoils our health but it also gives us a nasty and disgusting looks. why do you think we really feel pitty for the people living in slums even though most of them are having basic facilities it is only because of their surroundings, their water availability we feel pity for them. I strongly feel that all of us have the right to enjoy the precious gift of nature and not spoil them .
Resolved:Airplanes run on magic

When you walk through a storm Hold your head up high And don't be afraid of the dark At the end of the storm Is a golden sky And the sweet silver song of the lark Walk on through the wind Walk on through the rain Though your dreams be tossed and blown Walk on walk on with hope in your heart And you'll never walk alone You'll never walk alone When you walk through a storm Hold your head up high And don't be afraid of the dark At the end of the storm Is a golden sky And the sweet silver song of the lark Walk on through the wind Walk on through the rain Though your dreams be tossed and blown Walk on walk on with hope in your heart And you'll never walk alone You'll never walk You'll never walk You'll never walk alone. YNWA
Resolved:Airplanes run on magic

Firstly, nothing In your argument has proven that airplanes run on magic, All you have done is make wild accusations without providing any evidence for those outlandish statements. The real reasons that airplanes manage to speed down the runway and eventually lift off, is because they are aptly built with a lot of scientific thought put into them.. No official scientists will back up the claim that airplanes run on magic but they will defend the position that airplanes run due to a set of mathematical laws and physical principles. Here is an article that helps to understand how airplanes work. http://science.howstuffworks.com... http://www.livescience.com... Note; none of the sources claim they are run by magic. Conclusion; My opponent has not provided any meaningful reason or evidence to take his claim true that airplanes are run on magic. Therefore the resolution as it stands has not been confirmed by Pro.
Resolved:Airplanes run on magic

If you've ever wonder why those stupid flight attendants tell you to turn of your electronic devices its because airplanes run on magic! If you've ever asked a flight attendant why, they'll tell you that the electronic signals from your device can interfere with the airplanes navigation. Well, I can tell you now that is a lot of bull sh*t! There is no lift or thrust! A couple of dumbos went down to Kittyhawk and glued some sticks and old pants together and they f*cking flew! And no one knows why! Now we're just rocketing through space on a 30ton dumpster running on God knows what magic! So when they tell you to turn off your electronic devices just do it because who knows what could f*ck this sh*t up! Do you really want to dick around with magic? Then turn off your Twitter boxes, and video games for five seconds while you soar through the clouds like the Sun God of Hollow and just read your f*cking Sky Malls.
Long skirts are not fashionable

I wouldn't think it very fair if I took advantage of the opportunity to post arguments in this round and the last one when my opponent will clearly only have one round to do so. I will extend the opportunity, once more, for my opponent to present their arguments as both Pro and Instigator. If my opponent fails to present any arguments in the final round, I will uphold my position in this debate as Con by showing the audience why I negate the resolution that Long skirts are not fashionable. I thank the audience for their continued patience, and now return the floor to my opponent once again.
Long skirts are not fashionable

The resolution is clear: Long skirts are not fashionable. I would like to start by defining the key terms found in the resolution for clarification purposes. DefinitionsSkirt: a free-hanging part of an outer garment or undergarment extending from the waist down; a separate free-hanging outer garment or undergarment usually worn by women and girls covering some or all of the body from the waist down. [1]Fashionable: currently popular; dressing and acting in a way that is currently popular. [2][1] . http://www.merriam-webster.com... [2] . http://www.merriam-webster.com...
are aliens real

Yes they are real because different people have reporting seeing aliens and also seeing ufos. Some people even report alien abductions even though people dont belive them. And its basically impossible for earth to have the only signs of life on it. Other planets probably have some signs of life on them but they just havent been discovered yet. And these other living organisms from another planet would be known as aliens. As most people say seeing is believing thats why most people believe that aliens exist because they have seen aliens before. Or maybe they have seen ufos. They galaxy is too big for us too be alone.
On Human Nature

Confirmation bias is difficult to refute, as few people are sufficiently open-minded to accept all ideas and information at face value. With extremely opinionated people, this is doubly the case; they are often unwilling to admit the validity of an opposing or alternative argument as they view it as a sign of weakness that either their pride or ego will not allow them to concede. Few people, especially those in comfortable situations, long for change and are therefore resistant to a change of opinion. I will admit that humans have a confirmation bias, but I would point out that it is not always the major factor in decision making. I tend to find, during the developmental years of one's life, exposure to various outside powerful influences and especially immersion in a particular environment tends to result in confirmation bias in later years, For example, it is rare for young adults to stray from their parent's political opinions while still living with them, as they are exposed to generally one-sided arguments and evidence that only supports that side. But as they go to college, many of these political opinions are changed by immersion in a different environment of intellectual equals and are more free to express different political opinions. For that reason, I would say that exposure to a certain environment is the primary determining factor in human decision making. It is worth noting that few young people tend to be extremely opinionated as they are often unsure of themselves as people and what information to believe from the various influences they are exposed to, but older people tend to be more "set in their ways" and favor certain arguments regardless of the surroundings, as they have discovered who they are and have committed to a particular opinion. Confirmation bias may determine opinions of older people, but the situation through which we influence the young is how we will affect our future.
On Human Nature

My topic for human nature: Human nature has a confirmation bias.I will use the definition from a Princeton site: "Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is a tendency for people to favor information that confirms their preconceptions or hypotheses regardless of whether the information is true.[Note 1][1] As a result, people gather evidence and recall information from memory selectively, and interpret it in a biased way."http://www.princeton.edu...(Where it says [Note 1], you can't click on it here, but you will be able to do so in the link I provided). Evidence for the confirmation bias: "A great deal of empirical evidence supports the idea that the confirmation bias is extensive and strong and that it appears in many guises"http://psy2.ucsd.edu...The evidence is more detailed in that pdf. It talks about the vital things such as the experimental studies.
no such things as zero

It's true that everything has to be something. 0 is more of an intellectual number. A thought. Let me give you an example, how many cars are there in the world? Close to a million or more right? That's a material number. But how many cars do i have? 0. I don't have a car. Therefor, 0 is an idea, an imaginary, intellectual thought based on the principle that there is something, but you don't have it. I have 0 cars. 0 planes. Or even 0 apples.
It's time to crackdown on Lesbian impostors

First of all, I should like to welcome my opponent to this site and also thank him for approaching this particular debate in a suitably light-hearted manner. Secondly, I should like to accept all his points regarding the issue of semantics as they are undeniably fair an accurate. Instead, I should like to focus on the residents' of Lesbos' valid case - that being that the term "lesbian" has been hijacked and used inappropriately, thus besmirching their good name. This has not only damaged their pride but also their trade. For example, if someone offered to sell you a shipment of "Lesbian tea", you might refuse assuming that it would be made out of sustainably-sourced, decaffeinated, organic nettles and that a percentage of the profits would go to fund wimmin-only drama workshops for the performance of non-gender specific, carbon-neutral, dolphin-friendly plays about the stigmatisation of menstruation in sub-Saharan Africa. Similarly a businessman from Lesbos might do a nice line in sandals that fasten without laces which he markets as "Lesbian Strap-Ons". This would obviously have the potential to create a measure of confusion and may well deter more conservative customers from making a purchase. Of course, homosexual women should have dedicated places to meet, just as gentlemen of a homosexual persuasion have. These establishments should be called "gay" bars as the word "gay" applies to both male and female homosexuals. Indeed, men of whatever sexual persuasion should be allowed into gay bars that cater mainly for women just as women are allowed into gay bars that are manly patronised by men - but that's a matter for a whole debate in itself! In the final analysis, gay men don't have a separate word to describe their sexuality and nobody thinks there's anything queer about that, so why should gay women have to have their own term? I therefore contend that the word "Lesbian" (capitalised or otherwise) should be legally reserved exclusively to describe an entity originating from the island of Lesbos. Thank you.
It's time to crackdown on Lesbian impostors

This is my first debate so please be patient with me if I break any conventions. I assume that my worthy opponent offers his argument with his tongue wedged firmly in his cheek. This debate seems to me to come down to an issue of semantics. There are of course very few (if any) 'Lesbian' bars or clubs in London or anywhere else there are however numerous 'lesbian' establishments. The capital letter in this case denotes a proper name as in English, Indian etc. wheras like gay clubs, strip clubs etc. no lesbian establishments would capitalise their title in this way. Also the specific examples of Florida orange juice and French Champagne are consumable products that claim a particular origin. Obviously an establishment located in England is not claiming to have originated anywhere else. While I admit I have never been to a lesbian club or bar, I would be extremely surprised if they sold any products described as being lesbian. Lastly there are many 'Indian' restaurants in England (and especially my home town of Birmingham) that serve food produced and prepared outside India admittedly prepared in a (with varying degrees of authenticity) Indian style but often cooked and served by Brits of Pakistani, Bangladeshi or even white European origin. No one is trying to close down these establishments or the many 'Mexican' restaurants with entirely British staff. While I applaud my opponents sense of humour, surely common sense must prevail and a Con vote is inevitable. Thankyou.
It's time to crackdown on Lesbian impostors

In preparation for this debate I conducted a thorough study of the "Lesbian Scene" in London and as a result of my tireless research have uncovered the shocking truth that few, if any, of the many Lesbian bars and clubs in the capital actually sell Lesbian food or drinks - or even employ staff from the Greek island of Lesbos. Indeed, so anxious were the management of these bogus "Lesbian" establishments to cover up their scams, many of them refused me entrance when I asked if I could go in and poke around. In America, you are legally prevented from selling a product labelled "Florida Orange Juice" if the fruit was grown and packaged in, say, Mexico. Similarly, in Europe, only sparkling wine produced in the vicinity of the town of Epernay may be sold as "Champagne". Now the residents of Lesbos are fighting in the courts to protect their geographical status and to prevent fraudsters from trading on their proud name. I submit that governments around the world should support the islanders' cause by insisting that most of the products sold in Lesbian bars and clubs do actually come from Lesbos. Please refer to this explicit, high quality Lesbian action video for further information. Thank you. http://www.youtube.com...