BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
the only perfect political system is anarchy

Anarchy is the most perfect form of social governance that could ever be implemented. 'every man for himself', 'land and history unto the victor'. Anarchy is the natural order of society as every other form of governance places the lives of its people in the hands of an elect or inherent representative(s). Obviously any form of governance affects hundreds of factors in an individual's life and the society's structure so to keep the debate as concise and comprehensive as possible the different sectors of humanitarian structure shall be categorised as - infrastructure -ex- shelter and transportation , sustenance -ex- food and water, entertainment -ex- art and religion, environment -ex- pollution and biodiversity, development -ex- education.
Abortion

The gentleman has chose to not respond to his second round. He has also chose to close his account here on Debate.org, therefore forfeiting the debate. I hoped that this debate would have been a productive one, however it started that way, it did not end that way. I encourage the audience to vote for CON, myself, since I stood my ground and did not choose to take a coward way out. Thank you for starting this debate Sean and I am sorry you chose to end it prematurely. Take care. Live Hard. Love Harder. ~ Ryan A. Rush
Abortion

resolution: Abortion should be legal Is that ok with you? Since he has provided no argument I'll start with these simple arguments: 1. A fetus is not a human, so it shouldn't be against the law. 2. The mother has the right to decide whether she wants a child or not, because raising a child is hard work. 3. We kill things all the time. Having an abortion is the same as wearing a condom. I'll let you take it from there.
Abortion

For the sake of this debate I have taken the position of being against the very controversial issue that is abortion. Personally I am oppose to abortion. I believe that taking the life of a human being, or soon to be human being, is always an evil, never a good*. However, if one looks at my profile they will see, under my opinions on political issues, that I am undecided on this issue and I truly am. I very much would like to discuss this issue and maybe through this will I come to a verdict of rather or not I am for abortion or against. Does a woman have the right to do anything she wants to her body? Or is/should an abortion be consider as murder since one is taking the life of a child or soon to be child. Abortion: the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus [1] Debate: a contention by words or arguments: as a : the formal discussion of a motion [2] Let this be a formal [3] and civilized discussion, nothing more, nothing less. I will not accept name calling and or puns for the negative. Terms such as "baby killer!" and others will not be permitted in this debate. I respect the opinions of those who see abortion as an okay and just thing to do. I believe that greatest tool in a debate is accepting the fact that you may loose and if you do not accept the fact that you may loose then you will never win. So with out further delay I would like to open this debate to the honorable gentlemen or madame to answer my question: should abortion, of any kind, be legal under the law in the United States of America? * The only time I would personally seek an abortion for someone is in the case of if the child and/or children endanger the livelihood of the mother, in the case of rape, or in the case of incest. [1] http://www.merriam-webster.com... [2] http://www.merriam-webster.com... [3] http://www.merriam-webster.com...
Weed should be decriminalised

In conclusion, I would like to add that marijuana leg./dec. would only available to adults aged 21 and over, so for students, it would still be illegal. If this happens, adults would do it more often and introduce it to their kids. The kids, or students, would smoke pot enough so that the illegal use of it on school campuses would increase. This increase will produce more crime in our communities. May I also state that marijuana decriminalization will encourage the use of other drug legalization in our country, one by one, so that eventually drug use will become extremely common and one of the leading causes of deaths in America. I do not wish to see our country follow down this path, and by doing this we will also be influencing many other countries, bringing our world to a drug-ridden state. I believe my argument is better. I have provided more sources and have debated all 4 rounds, whereas my opponent imposed one sentence in R1, his main arguments in R2, and forfeited R3 and R4. Thanks for the debate, and of course, go America.
Weed should be decriminalised

If you want to be literal about every specific term, I'm willing to play it that way. Legalization is the one that has been the national issue. They are so similar that arguing one over the other doesn't hardly matter. I will fight for the good of America on this issue. Legalizing/decriminalizing marijuana will not benefit the country in any way. Therefore I see no point in leg./dec. it. You say that you don't think that many people tend to get hurt be marijuana. This is not true. I suggest you do your research a little more before you engage in a debate. Short-Term Marijuana Effects -Rapid heart rate -Increased blood pressure -Increased rate of breathing -Red eyes -Dry mouth -Increased appetite -Slowed reaction time -Distorted sense of time -Paranoia -Magical or "random" thinking -Short-term memory loss -Anxiety and depression http://www.webmd.com... Marijuana consumption can lead to death. http://www.ksl.com... states, "...One study found marijuana users have a 4.8-fold increase in risk of a heart attack during the first hour after smoking because of the drug's effect on your heart rate." This can be backed up by the fact that the "...Effects on the cardiovascular system can include increased heart rate, dilation of blood vessels, and fluctuations in blood pressure." http://en.wikipedia.org... Yes, people have their agency, but leg./dec. this drug will put innocent lives at risk as well. "A recent study review published in the British Medical Journal found people who used marijuana within three hours of driving were nearly twice as likely to cause a crash as sober drivers. People who use marijuana in combination with other drugs or alcohol also pose an increased crash risk, research suggests." http://www.ksl.com... So yes, pot can kill. Just because alcohol is legal, doesn't mean we should decriminalize every new drug that comes our way. Tell me, would your mind be changed if you had a loved one killed by a driver under the influence of marijuana? I'm not willing to participate in a community with drug dealers on every street. This isn't Mexico. Let's not push it to be. Alcohol is bad enough.
Weed should be decriminalised

I never actually mentioned legalizing weed, although I am completely for it. I asked if you believe it should be decriminalized which is not quite the same thing. If it were to be decriminislied the only effect it would really have on society would be that when a person is found to have weed on them it is treated as a condition to be treated rather than receiving fines for something so petty. And while admittedly Legalization probably should be used only for things that are good for the country this is quite clearly not the case, last time I checked alchohol and tobacco were legal, alchohol alone is responsible for countless deaths throughout history and has killed more infinitely more people than marijuana ( partially because marijuana kills literally no one). I do have some problems with your argument, if weed were to be legalized students would not be suspended as it would be legal, therefore they are doing nothing wrong. Seeing as there are literally no deaths directly related to the consumption of marijuana, I don"t think that many people tend to get "hurt" by marijuana, atleast not in comparision to the amount of people who die as a result of taking other legal narcotics and drugs such as alchohol and tobacco. The Fact that people are given resposiblity to moderate the amount of alchohol they consume but not marijuana is insulting. We"re given the freedom to wreck our bodies with alchohol, or abuse pharmaceutical drugs such prescription pain and anxiety medications, all of which have the potential to have lethal overdoses. My argument has nothing to do with any of the negative effects marijuana may or may not have on an individual, (although im happy to go into this) It is the fact that we are not given the right to choose what we consume. you can say it"ll cause schizophrenia or lung cancer etc.. but that"s a risk each individual should be allowed to make on their own, I don"t see people telling me I cant drink alchohol because it causes liver failure and is responsible for thousands of deaths each year. Your arguments have shown a real lack of common sense, you just state your personal opinion without even giving it much thought, you just like to place blame on weed when you do not understand something" you see some students misbehaving and you think they must be smoking weed, so I suppose the states where it is illegal all the students must be fantastically behaved and never causing trouble? If you had ever smoked a joint you would probably know that it isn"t the type of high that encourages you to cause trouble, infact your far more likely to just sit around doing not particularly anything.
Weed should be decriminalised

Absolutely not. Legalization should be for things that are good for our country, and weed certainly is not. If we legalize weed, there will be more car crashes and more deaths. There will be more students getting suspended for smoking weed on their school campuses and more parents getting upset. Families will be torn apart, and it will do us absolutely no good if we legalize. Perhaps you could have a loved one hurt by marijuana, and you will definitely end up regretting legalizing it. I live in a marijana-legalized state, and let me tell you students here keep getting into trouble. It is only the beginning of a drug-infested America. Do not legalize it.
Free will doesn't exist

RebuttalsThough one may have the illusion of free will due to the possibility of more than one outcome, it still does not grant one free will. One is controlled by the physical laws of the universe which are predictable. "One must be able to control at least one of these in order to have true choice: 1.The previous state of the universe - How the universe was configured at the moment prior to you making a decision. 2.The laws that govern the universe - The physical rules that will determine how the universe transitions from one state to another, namely from the previous-state to the next-state."[1] We have no control over either of these circumstances, making it so that we are run in a predictable patternWe can still face the possibility of multiple realities, but this doesn't guarantee us free will at all, it just makes it lose predictability. We are still governed by the physical laws of the universe. We have no ability on our own to govern these rules, making us still in essence governed by them. [1] JLS21 in the comments
Free will doesn't exist

Hypothetical Example Suppose you were walking down a path and it splits into 2 directions that you can choose. The universe then splits into 2 different alternate realities, one where you go down the left path, and the other where you do down the right path. Let"s say you are in the alternate reality where you went down the left path; nothing necessitated that you go down the left path. You could have been from the other alternative reality where you went down the right path. Since an action took place that was not necessitated, then by definition it was done by free will. Note: This is a simplification. If true, these free will split universe events would most likely occur at the quantum level. Evidence for the Example Although it is impossible to observe the universe splitting into alternate realities, we can make predictions if we assume this happens. If the described scenario does happen, then we would expect to find seemingly random events occur in nature, since which alternate path we go down is completely random and unpredictable as opposed to if there was a single deterministic timeline. Pro conceded that there is evidence that quantum physics has uncertainty and unpredictability, so this is evidence that my free will scenario is correct, as they can easily be explained by the universe splitting into alternate realities. Pro has the burden of proof to show that my free will scenario is false.
Free will doesn't exist

All things are led by the principles of chemistry. Chemicals react in nearly predictable patterns*, and since our entire existence is made of chemicals, that means the entirety of existence runs in predictable patterns. We may not know the exact means of the nature of our universe nor the probability involved in it, but nonetheless the fact is reached that all things are predictable. "The brain is just a bunch of nerve cells that fire as a direct result of chemical and electrical events, with no room for free will."[1] This in turn means we have no free will. *It is said that in quantum physics that their is certain amounts of uncertainty governing chemistry principles. This only renders it unpredictable in its entirety, if these theories in fact turn out to be true. [1]http://www.slate.com...
Free will doesn't exist

Free Will-the power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate; the ability to act at one's own discretion The debate is rather self-explanitory. As pro, I shall argue against the existence of free will. Con shall debate for its existence. Round 1 is to be acceptance and declaration of definitions. Any round forfeits will result in the forfeit of the entire debate unless the other individual pardons the other in a later round.
Free will doesn't exist

necessitate definition is: to make necessary: require [1] Free will is defined as "the power to acting without the constraint of necessity" And since I demonstrated a scenario where there is no single required outcome for a given action since two realities could result from a single action, and therefor demonstrates free will by definition. I gave evidence of this example. Pro failed to refute that example. Pro did not fulfill burden of proof. Vote Con. [1] http://www.merriam-webster.com...
Free will doesn't exist

JLS21 in the comments is not a credible source.I don't see why not, I feel it good to give him credit.I gave an example of a possible scenario where an action is not necessitated and therefor by definition caused by free will. Pro gave no reason as to why my split universe scenario is false, nor did he counter my claim that this scenario has an action that is not necessitated which by definition is free will. "it just makes it lose predictability" is not an argument. Action was necessitated by the nature of the universe, which based on its chemical principles caused the action before it happened. Anything that ever happened was caused by something before it, removing the possibility of free will. The universe may have split possibilities but this doesn't provide free will, and it does in fact get rid of the predictability of the universe, but this matters little in this argument.
THBT America or United States Of America, Has Done more wrong than Right

Well my opponent forfeited. Here is a few American inventions post-1992: Segways ja vascript Adobe Flash http://en.m.wikipedia.org...(after_1991) There is more, but I want to move on to contributions to humanity We rank 13th in donating to other countries. http://m.philanthropy.com... My opponent can redeem himself, so I will keep it short.
THBT America or United States Of America, Has Done more wrong than Right

When i look at USA, i think of how big of a super power, how well it stood against communist ideas and extremists, how much good it has done for the world. but when on looks deeper, the truth surfaces, USA's wrongs do outweigh the rights, they've caused and got involved and escalated many wars in the past, when we look back and Vietnam or Afghanistan or Iraq, we see the blood that has been spilled, the time has come for USA to answer for their sins. the time has come... for TRUE JUSTICE
Pc Is Superior To Console

Yeah it has been fun man. all of the things you said are 100% true man, i would rather have a super market place and it is quite true that casual gaming with the family is more catered to consoles, i have literally nothing else to say about that. So i'll leave it here Now for the sick fire, I must correct you now. What you're referring to is past tense. It's more like "It's everyday bro WITHOUT the Disney channel flow".
Pc Is Superior To Console

yeah ok i kind of expected a response like that i knew there are a bunch of loopholes in my arguments and you saw through them, well played. the only thing i can really argue in favour of consoles is the family friendly part. now what i mean by that is that if you wanted to play a bunch of games as a family (casually in other words) then you'd 100% go for a console as it look more appealing and less technical then any pc. yeah you kinda destroyed me on pretty much everything LOL. well it's to be expected since i'm arguing for consoles. i mean i picked this argument hoping for a fun Challenge the thing i said about the interface by the way. i meant that a console UI is very easy to access all the apps as soon as you turn on the console no sign ins or updates (like steam does for me like every time i shut down steam for some reason lol) and unlike PC many games have separate launchers which is again time consuming a few examples are: (fallouts 3-4, Overwatch, deus ex mankind divided not sure on that one haven't played it in a while, every ubisoft game, every origin game and i guessing a few many more. whereas with a console you just press on the game and it loads right to the intro scene or the main menu. and about your "many digital markets argument" yes variety is good but would'd you rather have a supermarket that sells everything or tonnes of fruit stall selling one or two of something? personally i think the supermarket idea is more convent and "family friendly" (that's the only thing i got over you so i'm squeezing all i can from it lol) so honestly i think you've won this by a land slide but hey. i tried my best and mummy said that's all that matter :3 and i can't beat that sick fire of a last sentence you shot me with so i'll just correct you in spite XDD "it's the not THAT it's THE"
Pc Is Superior To Console

I'm sorry if I come off as attempting to get an easy win, it's not my intention. I just Enjoy seeing what the other side thinks of the argument. Addressing your first comment: How exactly is it more family friendly? I assume you are referring to family game time on the Wii, kinect or just playing something with you family, but alas this is not the case. People assume that console is better due to portability, and cheap pricing. I will attempt to prove that it is false by creating a computer from the pricing of the Xbox One S https://pcpartpicker.com... This computer is equal/ more powerful than the Xbox One S (and all other consoles) in almost every way, as well as having a 1 TB hard drive, that would cost you an additional $40ish dollars if you were to buy an Xbox One S with a Terabyte hard drive. Also enabling V-Sync inhibits the ability for frame rate to change constantly. I do agree that a controller is more inviting, that's why i have one for my Pc. With the Xbox One Controller all you need to do is plug it in via micro usb. As well the One S can be used wireless via Bluetooth. Racing and platforming games are indeed superior with a controller, that is why many PC gamers have one on hand. For the people who want to step up their game though, they should definitely consider mouse and keyboard. Especially for FPS titles such as Battlefield or Dirty Bomb. Mouse and keyboard are much more accurate than that of a controller. Oh and speaking of Dirty Bomb, which is a PC exclusive, is a great example of the quality of exclusives for pc gaming here is a list of PC exclusives (including some of the most popular games such as Dota 2 and League of Legends) This list contains most if not all pc exclusive titles from 1977 to 2013. Most/ if not all games on this list are not on console nor will be. https://docs.google.com... This list contains 4457 PC exclusives. Console on the other hand contains rough 1000 exclusives all together Now onto the microphone controller argument. PC does bundles too http://www.bestbuy.com... this contains a pc with a mouse and keyboard, but enough about that you want to know the headset work around. The console included mics are not good at all, they are quite cheaply made. They are made as a place holder until you purchase one from a first or third party producer. For PS4 many of those headsets are usb/ aux compatible, and those headsets are also compatible with PC. Xbox microphone setup is peculiar, but you can still use aux compatible headsets on pc, but for Xbox use you will need an adapter (my brother has one right now and uses it on my PC frequently). http://www.xbox.com... https://www.ebay.com... And lastly, the argument of console having a better interface than PC but that simply isn't the case. Xbox is more user friendly and I do agree with that, but PC has more variety with more digital marketplaces catering to each individuals needs. to name a few G2A.com Steam.com Battle.net Origin.com Ubisoft.com These services allow player to pick and choose their favorite of the bunch for optimal enjoyment. It's everyday bro with that Disney Channel flow (damn, bars)
Pc Is Superior To Console

hey man welcome to debate.org my dude this is like my 2nd one hahah nice oh and by they way try not so stay on this website to long. much like crystal meth it'll suck you in and keep you there untill irl everyone you loved has turned there back on you............ :) anyway first up it's obvious you picked this topic for an easy win but you're in for a reality check ok so console gaming is far superior to pc gamin for a many of reason: just a few of those reason are it's more family friendly then pc it sets a standard for quality (60fps 720p or 1080p) whereas pc i found constantly changes frame rate which is annoying on my eyes a controller is a lot more inviting than a keyboard when it comes to accessibility . consoles have a very good interface and can give you quick and easy access to multiple apps consoles almost always come with a microphone an one controller so it's like a starter pack which more people will be more enticed to buy that a console is very cost efficient for the specs it has where as pc can cost a bit more for the same specs and finnaly console can offer many console exclusive game which are very good (bloodborne, tomb raider, halo) sources: my brain/common sense (joke) you move to prove my dude (damn, bars)