azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

Banning tabacco cannot be a serious proposition. Let say you ban it today, the black market will be up and running by tomorrow and awareness will drop. Besides there are many practical uses for tabacco even if it might be somewhat detrimental to the users health. Banning things does not solve anything, regulation and or education are the more important thing to focus on. We didn't ban fast food because it was unhealthy, we educated people on the fact and let them make they're own decision. Thats the difference between living in a free society and living in North Korea, lets keep it that way.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

i think it very bad for the human body they should legalize it i mean now becouse life would be better
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

Freedom of choice is the most profound and critical aspect of this issue. The government nor thy neighbor should have the power and authority to prohibit anyone that wants to smoke. America would only have to relive the events of alcohol prohibition and live in the current events of illegal substances. This is black market. Society doesn't benefit from a black market.Although tobacco kills 500,000 people a year, what good would it be to prohibit it when there is a drug in the cigarette that purposely is a addictive substance. It wouldn't change the fact many deaths will occur because people will still smoke.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: yes

Although tobacco kills 500,000 people a year, what good would it be to prohibit it when there is a drug in the cigarette that purposely is a addictive substance. It wouldn't change the fact many deaths will occur because people will still smoke. The purpose in prohibiting smoking isn't for the benefit of the smoker. I could care less about the smoker. My problem is with all the hundreds of thousands of kids that get diagnosed with lung cancer per year due to second hand smoke. It's not only kids either, smoking harms everyone around the smoker including the smoker him/her self. Also with something illegal it becomes harder to obtain, with it becoming harder to obtain the amount of smokers dwindles. When something is available to the masses through public stores then it is easy to obtain. When the only way to get a substance that is illegal is through back alleys it becomes harder to obtain. Get it?America would only have to relive the events of alcohol prohibition and live in the current events of illegal substances. This is black market. Society doesn't benefit from a black market.What are you talking about ... ?
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

tobacco should be legal at age 14 there nothin better than putting in a dip of snuff after school
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: yes

This site is for intellectuals, not mental patients. Though we do appreciate you trying to sound like your IQ is above 40, it just isn't and there is no point in pretending. Thanks again, but if your brain can't process what a debate is just you know go frog gigging and muddin'. I am sure these are leisure activities even your small attention span can handle.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

Looks like you angered somebody - and on the first day of your return, too.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: yes

Yeah, I'd say so. Judging by the quality of the " arguments " put forth, I wouldn't even give them the respect of calling him a ' somebody '.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

Matter of fact, there shouldn't even be a age limit. You should be able to smoke at any age.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: yes

No, this is like alcohol; you need to be mature enough to know the pros and cons first, otherwise we'd have a bunch of elementary schoolers running around with a smoke in their mouth.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

Smoking tobacco is a persons choice. They know what harm will become of them. And it does help the government with money when they purchase it. It should stay legal because really its a persons choice to smoke it and if they were to take it away our economy will go down the drain more.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

Smoking tobacco is a person's choice, not the government's. Banning tobacco will only create a black market.Marijuana and Tobacco are some of the least harmful drugs, and so many people take them that banning them is hardly effective.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

No! Let people live their lives... government needs to stay out of it. Smoke 'em if you got 'em!
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

Its anyones choice if they want to smoke tobbacco or not. anything can kill you these day. you could die just stepping out your damn door. There is no reason it should be banned. thats what this country is about, freedom. Its smokers faults there smoking
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

A lot of revenue depends on them. That is the sole reason it hasn't been banned yet. This will be a huge stake at loss. It'll be a really huge risk to the nation while the boom is so far away. It is bad thing... That cannot be changed.Though the mental output can be manipulated. There should be constant check on people. Counselling so that the market crashes. Banning is also not a good solution since it can lead to illegal activities.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: no

No, it should not be banned anymore than soda pop or candy should be banned. There is no cement proof that tobacco actually causes cancer. Perhaps cancer is rather caused by genetics like obesity. Is sugar the cause of obesity? Or is sugar and a genetic disposition the cause of obesity? Perhaps some people smoke because it is enjoyable and relieves stress, or they bond over a few cigars. So why should the will of a few be imposed on everyone.At one point in history onanism was said to cause blindness. Now it is accepted that is does not. Or what if I said the world was flat instead of round. Look out your wind does the ground not appear flat.I rest my case.My view is largely supported in this article:http://www.lcolby.com/b-chap1.htm
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: no

yes.tobacco should be banned cause of anyone over 18 has take their own decisions.if they want to use they should use. if government sell the tobacco, people are allowed to use it.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: no

No.tobacco should not be banned cause of anyone over 18 has take their own decisions.if they want to use they should use. if government sell the tobacco, people are allowed to use it.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: no

If tobacco should be banned for killing people, should not alcohol also be added to that list. Alcohol kills just as many people. Heck why we're at it why not ban starches and butter. We could control obesity better by banning candy, fast food shops. When does it end, because some people don't like something and has a greater voice (or louder) they have the right to interfere in others lives. Alcohol is a lot more dangerous then tobacco will ever be.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: no

I will agree to ban tobacco if you will agree to ban all fast food restaurants, foods that are high in cholesterol and transfats. I would also like you to ban watching more than 1 hour of television per day. And I would like to impose a fine on people who don't exercise regularly. The cost of fat people to our society is just as deadly as smoking. If we're going to start cracking down on unhealthy activity, let's not be half-assed about it.Coke and Pepsi! Gone! Alcoholic beverages gone! If you're more than 20 pounds overweight, you will be required to join a court-mandated fitness program.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: no

Yes smoking it kills you...yes there is evidence that passive smoking is harmful however if smoked out of the range of a none smoker why not ? In the end it is my body if i wish to smoke why shouldn't I ?Furthermore, it is harsh to say but there is a money issue i live in the UK and the tax on cigs are high. The tax taken from smoking pretty much funds a large part of the nhs and other such things. If we were to ban smoking , meaning no one buying them, where would the money that the gov just lost come from ? Taxes in other areas would go soaring up which i would love to see since it might teach alot of the anti smoking a brigade a harsh truth that smokers, though it may not seem, help them by keeping their taxes etc lowAlso i would not want to even imagine what an uprising would happen through out the country the amount of smokers going against the gov etc imagine the prisons it would be chaotic..
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: no

I am a pipe smoker, age 21, no health problemsAs for my first argument, the tobacco industry holds about 660,000 people just in the manufacturing and distribution sections, this doesn't include the farmers or the retailers. Taking away tobacco would lead to unemployment rates like never before. the farmers cant simply plant other crops because all of their equipment, sheds, and barns are made specifically for tobacco. The loss of all these jobs means less taxpayer revenue going into the all ready in debt government.Argument number two, As for the health concerns, most of them apply only to cigarettes. Most if not all pipe and cigar smokers do not inhale, leading to the only major health concerns or cancers that they develop as being oral which in most cases are easily removed or cured. This being stated the average pipe smoker lives on average two years longer, yes longer, than the average non-smoker. This means that the only logical thing that should be banned would be cigarettes.Argument number 3, secondhand smoke is the smoke that is inhaled while being around someone who is smoking. If you dont like the fact that someone is smoking around you ask them to please put it out, if that doesn't work simply get up and walk away. There is absolutely no reason you would "have" to stay around someone who is smoking. I do have a problem with people who smoke cigarettes around their kids all day long though they shouldn't have to be exposed to so much smoke on a daily basis, if your going to smoke with children go in te garage or outside and do it. This doesn't apply to pipe or cigar smoking in my opinion just because of how infrequently kids are exposed to the smoke. A normal pipe smoker sits down and relaxes while enjoying his favorite blend, relaxing cant easily be done with children running around. Leaving your kids in your car while your stuck in traffic is worse than having them around smoke for a few hours a week.So in conclusion, should tobacco be banned, no, there is no need for it.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: no

tobacco creates so many jobs it creates 662,402 direct jobs and 1,150,111 indirect job.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: yes

and how many direct deaths and indirect deaths does it cause?
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: no

People have the right to smoke. You can't force people to do things based on your own personal opinion. I personally don't smoke because i understand the dangers involved with it, but if someone else wanted to do so i wouldn't care. They are making a decision to smoke. They know it's going to shorten their life, but they still smoke because it gives them pleasure. Anyway, my point is that we can't shove our personal ideologies down peoples throats. By the way, I don't believe that the Government has any reason to ban any "illicit substance," these drugs only affect the user.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: no

There is already plenty of limitations on tobacco in most western countries. Although the US does not regulate chew nearly enough. Banning it all together like prohibition would do nothing for the current population. Unless if a country is willing to ban it for several generations, I do not believe there would be any effect.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: no

Smoking is legal, so, I don't think it should be banned. Also, States make too much money from the sale of tobacco.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

no, because those that enjoy smaoking should be able t. Fairplay that they arn't aloud in pubs, clubs and pretty much every other building but allow people to have a quick ciggee!
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

Fuck that. i know it's not eloquent but prohibition never never works.
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: no

No, they should not. People are who they are for a reason. They should not go about changing that.
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: yes

No, they should not.First of all the notion of illegalizing transgenderness is nonsense jargon, people are transgendered, dress them up in the clothing meant for their biological sex, but they will still be transgendered. Unless you disagree with the actual scientists who studies them, who's confirmed that they are indeed transgendered, and the opposite sex mentally. Even if you do, basically you are saying that we should force a national dress code on the country, that we should demand the american people (or wherever you are from) to make sure we dress by specific social customs. I know I don't want my country telling me how to dress, and I'm not even transgendered.
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: no

I see you condoning every stupid thing...."scientists who studies them, who's confirmed that they are indeed transgendered, and the opposite sex mentally."No. They are sick mentality. There are some stupid thought people grow up with from childhood. If they never mentioned it in their childhood to anyone to be corrected........they grow up realise they are now matured and its time for an adventure.They have been swimming in a pool of studity for so long..........
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: yes

You say .....They have been swimming in a pool of studity for so long..........Looks like you drank the contents of the pool you idiot
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: no

What about you who has never been satisfied with drinking from a sea of stupidity.........You even froze your brain
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: yes

You say ......What about you who has never been satisfied with drinking from a sea of stupidity.........I know normal people would not be satisfied drinking from a pool of stupidity ... you truly are an idiot you don't even know what you're saying anymore you nasty brute
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: no

You explained it better (that you are stupid) but you still don't get it. You need to unfreeze your brain......
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: yes

Unfreeze your brain ? and end up supporting rapists the way you did yesterday no thanks ... you filthy brute ...
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: no

When did i support rapists?I even said a raped woman is right to stab a rapist in the neck.....Why are you such a liar...You sins are counting ....atheist.......whether you believe in hell or not..。Quit unnecessary lying...Is that how you win an argument ?
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: yes

You're a supporter of rapists read your posts you liar . You don't argue you fool you're the football of CD everyone kicks your baboon ass .. stop your lying you coward
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: no

Aren't you ashamed? You bloody liar...you have no scintilla of shame when you lie.....Am a coward.....and you are a bold and proud liar...If i really said so....how much do we pay here to copy and paste?
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: yes

Oh dear :) you are a supporter of rapists don't try and deny it you've been caught so take your medicine ... have you no shame ?Away with you and lick your wounds :)
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: no

I could have never thought i would meet an old man liar like you ...ever...You are losing your dignity....liar
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: yes

No , again you're the one who supports rapists making YOU the liar now you've been caught You're as usual to cowardly to apologise .Do we really need to post a list of your daily lies yet again ?Again I'm not judging as it's in your nature as you've admitted before that your people enjoy robbing white people or do ou now wish to deny that also ?You're shameless ....
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: yes

People are who they are for a reason.Yep. Transgender people are their preferred gender.
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: no

No, by definition they are not... biologically .
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: yes

And what exactly makes you so sure that biology defines gender? And beyond that, if you're interested in biology: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-there-something-unique-about-the-transgender-brain/
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: no

I meant to say neurology but it doesn't matter. The fact gender dysphoria is real documented thing that happens, we might not fully understand it, but it definitely does happen. "Imaging studies and other research suggest that there is a biological basis for transgender identity" That was in the article you sent me, and while it establishes to make the point that transgendered people's brains were not exactly like the brains of the opposite biological sex that doesn't mean that gender dysphoria isn't a real thing, or that people are making up their gender dysphoria in there head.
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: no

I do not think that they should be legal because a person is their gender whether they want to be or not. Your gender does not depend on your feelings, it depends on your hormones.
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: yes

I do not think that they should be legal because a person is their gender whether they want to be or not.So you want to make it illegal to cross dress, you literally want to force a national dress code on people, just so people don't dress by the social norms of the other biological sex? Why? What does that accomplish other than deprive people of happiness?
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: no

Feelings do not determine gender. I am not saying that a certain sex should have a dress code, I am saying that the way you want things to be does not determine gender.
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: yes

Ok tell me how else do you illegalize being trans-gendered?
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: no

Because it doesn't make them happy, just perpetuates their misery and meaninglessness, much as giving heroin to an addict doesn't make them happy, just keeps them miserable.The altruistic thing to do of course is to rectify the psychological dysfunctions, rather than mutilate genitalia and lie to them and help them pretend to be something they're not, and is biologically impossible, as sex is determined by biology and chromosomes.And of course, not all 'social norms' are created equal - some are more virtuous than others, as defined by natural law, not the 'opinions' of the ignorant.
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: yes

Trans people have just as many rights as anyone else and have the right to wear whatever they want just like you do. Also maybe you should stick to one account "NowASaint".
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: no

It should be illegal because all it does is mainstream the delusion of a serious mental illness that needs to be addressed and cared for in a proper manner instead of just providing the option to change one's gender and subject them to more mental torment from society. They should be treated like a bipolar person or any other person experiencing a mental disorder.
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: no

Props, very well said-----------------------------------------------------------------
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: no

They should be moral, not legal.
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: no

I really don't have a problem with reservations. I don't presume to tell you how to live your life but I do have a problem with them having the sex of there body changed and then marrying someone without telling them.... You marry someone in good faith with the intention of having a family then they have to lie and say they are sterile ? Sorry its not right.
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: yes

You marry someone in good faith with the intention of having a family then they have to lie and say they are sterile ? Sorry its not right.You're implying that every single transgendered person is an amoral liar whom lie to their partners? I'm sorry, but that's absolutely ludicrous.The majority of people marrying transgendered adults are perfectly aware of their condition. Just remember that you can generally tell when someone's transgender or not, so if you're marrying someone and haven't noticed that they're a little too testosteroney to be a woman then you're a bit of a moron.Besides, why should it matter? Sex isn't the only way of reproducing/having children you mongrel. How do you think infertile people have children, or gay couples?
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: no

People act like they are transgender when they are really not. They just want to go into the different bathrooms. Some men do terrible things to women when they are alone, and a girl's bathroom is a perfect way to do that.
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: no

I always thought that its ok for them to be what they want to be. However, what happens when some guy becomes a girl and them marries a man without telling him and them can't give him a family he thought he was going to get.... What happens to his rights ?
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: no

they should be illegal because there has been many rapes due to transgenders,and it is scientifically impossible to change chromosomes which define gender and if they bring up feelings,they don't care how woman feel uncomfortable in bathrooms with them so why should we care for them
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: yes

If you succeed in declaring them illegal then what are going to do to them? Lock them up for it? Execute them? Subject them to brainwashing to realign them?There is no point at all to making them illegal unless you've got some sort of dictatorial brutality you're going to unleash. If you don't plan on doing anything besides labeling them as wrong then just leave them alone to live their lives.
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: no

Trans is a mental disorder so as such treat is how you treat other mental disorders.
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: yes

In other words you opt for the totalitarian brainwashing approach. Why don't you move to Iran, that's exactly what they do with trans-genders and homosexuals, that or they kill them.
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: no

? did not know they brainwash special needs aka, children with mental disorder, kids in school's.
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: no

You can't undo Aspergers or Down Syndrome with re-education, counseling, or drugs, yet you're acquainting undoing trans-gender issues with that. It would fail just the same.
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: yes

I dont know if you know or care, but you are on the "No" side here.Are you saying that gender dis-morphia is a disorder like Down Syndrome?When a person has body integrity identity disorder, we don't want to allow them to remove whatever limb they feel so intensly needs to be removed. We try to cure them. Is gender dis-morphia so different that the desire to remove a leg calls for mental healthcare while the desire to remove ones genitalia requires acceptance and support?Also, I will probably be banned withing a post or two so I may not get back to a response.
Debate: Should trans-genders be legal.
Side: no

The top of this column when I look at it on my screen says "yes". And I appear to not be the only one who thought it was yes.Regardless I stand by what I write.And no, I am not saying trans-genders are the same as Down Syndrome, I'm saying not everything that differs from the general population is therefore a "mental disorder" deserving to be treated like a mental disorder.