BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
The US should withdraw from all of it's non-essential military bases in Japan

Ever since the fall of Japan in 1945, the United States has maintained a large military presence in the Japan- especially in the Ryukyu island chain (Okinawa). However, there are multiple flaws and issues with a standing US force in Okinawa, which I will be outlining in a few points below. Contention 1: American GIs in Japan continue to cause problems among the local population. Application 1: On September 4th, 1995, three U.S. servicemen - U.S. Navy Seaman Marcus Gill and U.S. Marines Rodrico Harp and Kendrick Ledet, all from Camp Hansen on Okinawa, kidnapped a young 12 year old Japanese girl, ducktaped her eyes, and gangraped her. Rape in Okinawa still continues to this day: http://english.ryukyushimpo.jp... Application 2: Okinawans oppose US military using civilian ports, instead of the ones designated to them. Another example is the opposition to noise pollution in Kadena Air Base. Contention 2: US soldiers don't have to go through Japanese courts = Less punishment for their crimes/Easy for soldiers to escape punishment "The USF differ greatly from ordinary Japanese society. There are some cases, such as leaking official secrets or rape, where a court martial is stricter than Japanese courts; but if a US service member commits other sex crimes or manslaughter due to drunk driving, depending on the status, distinguished service, and wishes of the complainant, in order to protect the honour of the military and the person concerned, or in order to avoid complex legal procedures, it is possible to allow them to voluntarily retire instead of being dishonourably discharged or imprisoned." (Asia Pacific Journal, Rumi Sakamoto) Contention 3: The JSDF (Japan Self Defense Force) needs to get back on it's feet and not rely on the US to defend Japan. In order for the US to not have to continue 'babysitting Japan', we need to withdraw and help develop/encourage the JSDF to adequately defend Japan by itself. Finally, I would like to end with a simple fact that it's common sense to let a country deal with it's own affairs- and, the US is in a great position to help Japan do so.
Drug legalization

Drugs are bad and kill people, therefore ban all the drugs? Sure, 50,000peole died due to herroin overdoses, but 280,000 people die of fast food overdoses in the US annually as well. {1} Fast food as well can ruin your life, and kills more people than drugs- are we going to ban fast food because it's bad for you?I don't accept this idea that we can force people to be better people- and so far the war on drugs has turned out just like Prohibition- more drugs, more violence, and more organized crime. Back then it was Al Capone, now it's El Chapo. {1}. http://wvdhhr.org...
Drug legalization

The government may not "have the right" to tell you what you can and cannot put in your body, but this time, you should probably listen to the government. Ever wonder why certain types of drugs are illegal? Hmm... Maybe because most of them ruin your life and kill people. Herron for example killed over 50,000 people in the year of 2014, and it is rising rapidly. There are so many terrible drugs that will kill you, and/or ruin yours and your loved ones lives, just think of if the person you cared about most overdosed on something as "simple" as Heroin, or cocain, etc...
Corruption Is A Tax On The Rich And Does Not Affect The Poor

Yes I thought about that after I had posted it, so we will discuss the Poor becoming corrupt no more. True it isn't all money, but don't the corrupt need others to survive? One corrupt man really couldn't do anything on his own, so it is in everyone's best interest to allow all the relief efforts to go to where they are supposed to go, if they keep it all it's only a temporary fix. The quote is very interesting, however can you find one that is more recent, because changes to the system have been made to it so that it helps those who need it, ten years is quite a long time after all. If you make it to the Supreme Court because of one man bribing EVERY court judge/jury along the way then you are extremely rich, let alone if you somehow manage to win over the Supreme Court with bribes they are going to be found out removed and replaced with someone better who won't accept bribes. Let alone the odds, while not impossible, but highly unprobable that every judge/jury on your way up will accept bribes, is slim to none. If a poor man accuses a judge of accepting bribes to the right people, say the police or an agency responsible for that, whose jobs are to do stuff like that, then I am sure that they would have no problem in getting it investigated, and the guilty found out.
Corruption Is A Tax On The Rich And Does Not Affect The Poor

"poor have a much harder path into becoming corrupt" we are discussing how corruption affects the poor and not how they have aharder path into becoming corrupt due to lack of money. corruption needs to be minimised so that it DOES NOT afect the poor at all.....the rich have an easy way to get their things done...jus handing down money n voila!. it isn't that the poor have no aceess to education at all...loads of poor people are more learned for some jobs...if not more let me say equally learned and educated..... don't you think they should be given a fair opportunity for some job? but for that same job some rich guy bribes whosever is concerned and gets the job easily... dont' you think this is affecting him? in the second point you talk about "withholding debt cancellation will only penalise ordinary citizens, not the corrupt leaders." 'that money given to countries was being used for its intended purpose not to raise up the "Corrupt" ' if the money was actually being used to raise up the corrupt...half of the relief fund money won't be missing..and its not just money...even other commodities these suffering people require somehow just reaches in a really small amount "We saw the lorry of food relief arrive and the chief told us two weeks later that one-and-a-half bags had been received for distribution to 116 households." Kwale, Kenya 1996 [1] i don't agree fully with you on the point of judges following the law and not making it ..but just to tell you it was an expression.....if you lose a case in the local court you can go to the high court fro another trial...and if you lose it their as well..and if given the permission i suppose..you could go to the supreme court....the highest court in a counrty...and tell me..if the person you are fighting against happenns to bribe the jury/judge here...how do you expect to win your case? you say that corrupt judges are found and removed.....but even if a poor guy asks somebody for help and tells him about this corrupt judge and all...exactly how many people do you think will actually believe in him and decide to help him..i think ver few..and those very few may not have the power..
Corruption Is A Tax On The Rich And Does Not Affect The Poor

You make a great point sdeora, however I disagree on many points. 1. "u say that d poor don't have enough money to bribe and thus they are not affected" I did not state that, if you look back it says basically the poor have a much harder path into becoming corrupt then do the rich. Which is not even remotely near that. This is more to clear up any misunderstandings though. 2. The part about the flooded areas and the money never reaching them, and it affecting the poor. I have done some research in this area and found the following on this website http://www.ncca.org.au... in a section of this they cover if money disappears into the pockets of the "Corrupt." To summarize what they say in the World Bank study in 2005 found that money given to countries was being used for its intended purpose not to raise up the "Corrupt" it even states that "In addition, withholding debt cancellation will only penalise ordinary citizens, not the corrupt leaders. Turning our backs on the people who live in countries where corruption is a problem will only make matters worse." 3. "judges..whose word is law...those people who we look up to n those who give us a hope of justice and help have steeped down to bribes." Now I do believe that some judges do steep to bribes, but these judges are quickly found and removed. From the website http://www.bls.gov... I quote. "Judges are in charge of trials. They make sure that trials are fair. They resolve differences between lawyers. They read the law to decide what lawyers can and can't do....They also tell juries about the law.....To make their decisions, judges research legal issues. Judges also write about their decisions and legal opinions. Sometimes, they ask lawyers or law clerks to help with research." So the judges word is NOT law, but what they say is law in the sense that it already is a law and they are upholding it. They can't simply go Poof this is now a law, hit their hammer and say guilty. Now while some cases are decided by a judge, not all countries in the world have a jury, but most do, so in that case you would have to bribe several people. In some cases not represented by a jury you will have three judges. Once again I state that a judge represents the law, not makes it, and that accepting bribes is a crime! 4. "they can't afford to bribe them [Judges]" while this is true they couldn't their are ways to protect against this, including those already mentioned above. One may appeal in a court of law, which means that the briber would have to bribe several judges instead of one. So the poor who can't bribe the judges will be fine they simply request an appeal and if their is a valid reason, say the Judge erred in the application of the law (Bribery), or many others they will go to a new court with a new judge who will hear this case.
Corruption Is A Tax On The Rich And Does Not Affect The Poor

i certinally disagree on that.....u say that d poor don't have enough money to bribe and thus they are not affected...but hey..take a look at their condition this way... there's some flood-affected area...n funds from all over the country are collected for the people's help...but only 1/4th of the relief fund ever reaches there? what about the rest? the money is lying in the bank accounts of so many different corrupt officials.. now won't u say that these poor people are certainly affected by the rate of corruption?? even the judges..whose word is law...those people who we look up to n those who give us a hope of justice and help have steeped down to bribes.........aren't the poor affected by it?they can't afford to bribe them...so they lose cases where dey were bound to win...
Corruption Is A Tax On The Rich And Does Not Affect The Poor

Well when one does not have the money to bribe, say like the poor, would not be able to bribe and therefore would be the least effected by this "Corruption." They wouldn't have the ability to become corrupted when the access to money is so small, they would have to work to get something done, they could not slip their boss a couple thousand dollars for that new promotion, or bribe anyone to help them, they would have to do it the Good Ol' Fashion way, work. The Rich on the other hand would be very susceptible to this as they have all their money and want things fast and easy. They would be more likely to become corrupt by bribing others to get things done easily. So basically the poor have a much harder path into becoming corrupt then do the rich.
Communism is an ineffective system and should be abolished

Con has seemingly lied to you to win this argument. He has suggested a false dichotomy, there do not exist only 3 systems. To say this is to ignore the enourmous political spectrum in existance today. We can observe that as the spectrum increasingly controls the economy new sections of said spectrum come into existance. Say: communism without controls on fishing, communism without controls on corn production. I highly doubt that Con is ignorant enough to not realize this, he himself has shown his knowledge relative to what is falacious and what is not. Thus, I conclude that Con has lied to you about what he knows. Pardon me if what I proclaim could be considered a petty insult but this is extremely relevant to the debate. Neither the Pro nor the Con position should withold evidence or knowledge they possess relative to the motion. 1) Con has again committed a straw-man argument, what I have expressed EXPLICITLY is that currency (be it sea-shells or documents stating transactions) will always be present and will always be required. Even in barter economies we can observe that commodities such cows or slaves have been used in place of the exchanged material. Con has, yes, suggested a utopia. However, utopic systems may only exist in utopic worlds. Our world is imperfect! Society is not a construct. Organ life interacts, such is its nature. It benefits us, power structure is inherent in all human beings. If one were to remove said power structure another one would rise to fill the void. Unemployment is one thing, however, happiness is far more important than wether or not somebody goes to work everyday..The United States is far higher up in the hdmi index than Vietnam(1). Standard of living and quality of life should be valued far higher than unemployment rates. 2) Con has created a contradiction in his argument. Either there is a state, or there is not. Simple. If the government were to hand over its power to communes then the communes would become the state. Con has made up 100 examples and has not told them. The one example for where statehood has been non-existence is also incorrect. The Paris commune lasted literally a few weeks before it was overrun by the proper French military, to say that the small period of time in which it existed proves that it works shows lack of knowledge relative to the time needed to test a political ideology. 3) Are you saying that bio-polarity, scitzophrenia, a vast array of phobias , theft, down syndrome, developmental disorders ect are all social constructs? 4)Refuted. 5) People are NOT just shaped by society. And are you seriously saying this? If people were shaped by society people pre-disposed to a communist worldview would lack ambition. You're clearly grasping, I don't know what to say. Please either forfeit or actually commit to this debate.
Communism is an ineffective system and should be abolished

I did not make a false assumption on your position. Communism and socialism exist as an alternative to capitalism. Those are the only two choices in this period of history. Should we return to feudalism? I would also like to point out that you cite absolutely no references for any of your arguments. 1. Why would money be required to purchase food? You completely discard my argument of the collective as a unit of redistribution. You receive from the collective what you give to the collective. There is no currency in communism, the are no markets and there is no economy. What you are referring to is socialism, which is a transitional period. Unfortunately for you, this debate's resolution is 'Communism is an ineffective system and should be abolished' Society is a construct created by us and we are a direct result of it. It functions in a circular cycle. I never claimed the economy is detrimental, merely the fact that the point of capitalism is putting the economy before the people. The amounts of unemployment in the western capitalist world (the USA) is astoundingly high. It's 12% [1], compared to the socialist republic of Vietnam's 2%[2] The people will feed themselves through the collective. I've made this argument tens of times and I would like to see it refuted. As long as it is not, the resolution is discarded. 2. I never said corruption did not exist, I said that pre-supposing that corruption would exist is illogical. I'm not referring to anarchy, I'm referring to a large period of government to eventually destroy the state as a repressive body and hand power over the each individual commune. There have been hundreds of examples in history. Take the Paris commune[3] as an example. It shaped Paris, a formerly backward city, into an expanding metropolis. There was a form of power structure, just as there would be in communism. The power structure came from the democratically elected heads of the communes. 3. Again, I refer to the Paris commune. Such a society has existed; multiple in fact. There is no inherent human nature. We may have animal relatives, but we are not in the same stage of development. As a developed species we have an advanced worldview and mindset. We cannot abandon all hope of altruism simply because other animal species do not understand altruism. Humans ARE shaped by their societal enviroment. This is easy to prove. Why do you think shows such as Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad ect. are so popular? It's because of the culture we live in. Why do you think rape is inherent to commit? Because we live in a rape culture. 4. Still not refuted. You fail to prove how the collective as an administrative unit would fail. 5. This is an absolute appeal to emotion. Communism would work because humans are shaped by their society. If they grew up in a communist society they would be pre-disposed to an altruistic, communist worldview. Your arguments are weak and the resolution immensely fallacious. I hope I can guide you through the enigma that is DDO. References: [1]http://www.forbes.com... [2]http://www.tradingeconomics.com... [3]http://en.wikipedia.org...
Communism is an ineffective system and should be abolished

As the proposition I defend one major contention, that communism is an ineffective system of government and should be abandoned. Communism has been proven time and time again to not work. Pol Pot's Cambodia, Stalin's Russia, Mao's China are all perfect examples of this fact. However, I understand that one could argue that we are creating a false correlation. Based on this I shall propose a number of reasons WHY communism did not work in these nations and never will. #1. One cannot merely control an economy and hope that said economy will not collapse. Economic growth is based on ambition and free market capitalism, not on government stimulation. An example is present day Japan, a year ago Japan began passing a number of stimulus bills with the hopes that this would pull Japan out of economic recession. The consequence of this fatal decision was that the Yen inflated (which led to a drop of export prices) however, companies did not increase workers salaries. This caused a drop in the HDMI index of the Japanese middle class. The federal reserve has also attempted this fatal technique, resulting in highly similar results. #2. Any nation which has the ability to put money into the economy also has the ability to pump money out and into their own hands. Authoritarianism is a broken system: the more authoritarian a system is, the more places corruption may occur throughout the structure. #3. Work incentives. Knowing people who have lived in communist nations I can safely say that in a nation where work incentives are not present, the inevitable result is a lack of commitment to one's work. When Doctors are paid the same salary as janitors the result is ALWAYS that they will work as hard as a janitor. #4. People are sinners. As sad as it is to admit, nobody is perfect. We all sin. People are not nice, we work because we want money. We work because we have ambition, nobody works because the utterly believe in the common good. If you remove ambition, again, people do not work. #5. The system changes nothing. People are the problem here, greed is inherent in all people. Capitalism is not what is wrong with capitalism, WE are what's wrong with capitalism. If we change the system, we change NOTHING, if we change the people's beliefs we change EVERYTHING.
Rap/Poetry Battle: Secular/Atheist versus Christian

Why accuse Christianity when it has no shame? A God who does miracles and we need back up claims? There's a lot of proof for which I aim: erosions from the Flood, empty tombs, and DNA But Ima tell Mikal that he's wrong and he'll pay. The definition of medieval happens to be much more than you think It's not Christianity that rules 1/3 of America's population, it's God, so let is sink We have a relationship with our Creator who designed us in a blink You believe that a BANG happened which formed something out of nothing with a BA-KINK. Sometimes your childhood is where you look rather than science class in school You remember when your parents read you books at bed and took you to the pool? Well some of those fairy tales they read inspired you later on in life And in the pool you didn't drown cause you had instructions which were precise Why do people shame you cause of beliefs that a book with guidelines is the truth? But looking at the Catholics who killed is irrelevant to this matter The modern day Catholics think you're wrong but they don't murder When evolutionists say there's evidence but "can't think of any at the hour" You see right through them and know it's a case beyond desire. I'd like to say a thing on my linguistic strings and on your behalf Myself and your foolish words make me laugh Me because I'm inexperienced yet proud like a new-born calf And you because there's no proof to say those things, from the floor up to the shaft. You're trying to win cuz you think you know it all You act like you know everything, like it's all an elegant easy ball But you don't know the truth (OK, it is hard to find and small) Studying the only true Word would lead you to find the God that's trying to call. You know, acts in this life come down to nothing It's all about your choice, not the earthly things I used to think everything happened for no reason But now to me there's a difference between judgment and treason There's hope in a salvation Jesus Christ's a whole new condensation He's a man who had a horrible abjection But to live for HIM is an easy adaptation that's because Livin for Him is better than living for abomination. Yes I believe that the Devil is real but what does this have to do with the crap religion gives out? I believe there's more to life than DDO, impressing, partying with shouts The Devil tries to bring down, make you fail, destroy you now I'm not a coward, Jesus gives me a blessing and I keep sharing God's Word and flow'rs. I'm saying, I'm not preaching That you waste your 80 years when at the end your thinking, "What's that I hear in my heart? What's that scientists are figuring? Evolution is wrong??! My entire life was a failure with some bling!" I hope my opponent realizes that Jesus never fails either I hope my opponent knows that I"m a die-hard, ready connoisseur Let"s pray that my opponent goes to Jesus so he doesn"t become a saboteur. With that, I"ve concluded Round 2 with much mixed feelings and pleasure!