azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Do you think that kids should learn about their own country instead of different countries
Side: No

The ancestors of Saxons come from part of what is now considered Denmark, which is most certainly Scandinavia. You will notice I said the ANCESTORS of Saxons, not Saxons themselves. If you are going to be condescending, make sure you are at least right. At least you followed it up with more racism, however, so that makes it better.Next, there is no such thing as "Fascist-communist rule". Those two groups have been at violent conflict for a long, LONG time. "Most Slavic immigrants people I know are rough, rude, mean, insult Britain yet using our education system and they are chavs. Most of them seem to be of such a low intellect they are not capable of low end, manual jobs like fruit-picking and brick laying." He says, after a whopping 16 years experience. My god."Muslims can not integrate into society as their beliefs and values contrast to ours. Your average Briton is not likely to be for example actively homophobic, nor likely to be explicitly sexist or sympathize with killing animals inhumanely. However Mulsims tend to have opinions on the contrary. Furthermore many Muslims have the never to expect us to change to suit them, not vice versa, despite them being the foreigners here. They expect us to adopt sharia law and live their lifestyle." You ignored my question. If they can and have integrated into the United States, why can they not in Britain? You are just repeating claims I have responded to in the past, which accomplishes nothing. People change when cultural integration occurs, so why can that supposedly not happen in Britain as it has in the U.S.?
Debate: Do you think that kids should learn about their own country instead of different countries
Side: Yes

Nope Saxons where from Germany. If you'd done some research you would have realized that Saxony is in fact in Germany.Communism under the Soviet union was fascism. Stalin was just as totalitarian and just as fascist as Hitler. If not more. Lots of people view Fascism as being extreme right, the opposite of communism which is extreme left but this is fallacious. Communists go so far and so extreme they are just a fascist as any far-right person. He says, after a whopping 16 years experience. My god.Judge me by my tender age if you wish. But everyone in Britain knows that's the jobs the Poles end up doing. Whether they are 12, or whether they are 90. It is common knowledge. My tender age helps me understand the low levels of intellect of these people as being at school means I know that all of these Polish kids do shit on every single, fucking Assessment we do. One kid even failed his Food-Tech exam. How can anyone be so retarded they can't pass a subject as piss easy as Food-Tech? You ignored my question. If they can and have integrated into the United States, why can they not in Britain? You are just repeating claims I have responded to in the past, which accomplishes nothing. People change when cultural integration occurs, so why can that supposedly not happen in Britain as it has in the U.S.?Well they haven't migrated to the USA yet. You guys detest them as much as we do.
Debate: Do you think that kids should learn about their own country instead of different countries
Side: No

"Nope Saxons where from Germany. If you'd done some research you would have realized that Saxony is in fact in Germany." For the THIRD time now, I never said the Saxons were from Germany, I said their ANCESTORS were. As in the people that immigrated to Germany and become the Saxons. "Communism under the Soviet union was fascism. Stalin was just as totalitarian and just as fascist as Hitler. " No, not at all. Communism under the U.S.S.R was Authoritarian Leninist Communism. The fact that it was as authoritarian as Fascism does not mean their ideologies are the same. Communism as an ideology IS on the extreme left, and Fascism as an ideology IS on the extreme right. " My tender age helps me understand the low levels of intellect of these people as being at school means I know that all of these Polish kids do shit on every single, fucking Assessment we do. One kid even failed his Food-Tech exam. How can anyone be so retarded they can't pass a subject as piss easy as Food-Tech?" Actually, it does the exact opposite. It means you have had limited life experience, and thus you believe that the small population of ethnic groups within your school is sufficient to judge millions of people. You will find, as you get older, that it most CERTAINLY is not."Well they haven't migrated to the USA yet. You guys detest them as much as we do." Tell that to my neighbors, they will be very interested to know that they apparently have not immigrated to the United States. Tell that to the 2+million Muslims that live in the United States. And no, not all Americans "detest" Muslims. Only the ignorant ones do.
Debate: Do you think that kids should learn about their own country instead of different countries
Side: Yes

I have just checked the Wikipedia page which has confirmed that the Saxons WERE from Germany. It did not mention Denmark at all. I know you're not saying they're from Germany but you're wrong because they are.Communism as it was carried out by the Bolsheviks is indistinguishable to fascism to me. They are both totalitarian and both evil. Either way it has kept the Slavic countries behind and polluted them.The fact is in Britain at least the Slavic people do take up the jobs reserved for the bottom dregs of society. This is not even a bloody stereotype it is a fact which you are the first to dispute.I've heard that lots of Americans do exhibit the logical belief of Islamophobia. The name makes it sound ignorant but it isn't. Through out history they have pillaged and destroyed like all religious people. Religious people in general are stupid and violent.
Debate: Do you think that kids should learn about their own country instead of different countries
Side: No

"I have just checked the Wikipedia page which has confirmed that the Saxons WERE from Germany. It did not mention Denmark at all. I know you're not saying they're from Germany but you're wrong because they are." For the FOURTH time, I never claimed that the Saxon's were not from Germany. Are you intentionally ignoring what I am actually saying?"Communism as it was carried out by the Bolsheviks is indistinguishable to fascism to me." Again, you are referring to Totalitarianism, as opposed to the ideologies behind the parties we are referring to. Yes, both are totalitarian and both were indeed "evil". This has not made the Slavs bad people."The fact is in Britain at least the Slavic people do take up the jobs reserved for the bottom dregs of society. This is not even a bloody stereotype it is a fact which you are the first to dispute." Alright, let's have some fun: Provide statistics regarding the occupations of U.K. citizens of Slavic descent."I've heard that lots of Americans do exhibit the logical belief of Islamophobia. The name makes it sound ignorant but it isn't. Through out history they have pillaged and destroyed like all religious people. Religious people in general are stupid and violent." Having an issue with a religion is one thing. I hate Islam as a religion, with a burning passion. Using that as an excuse to hate PEOPLE is when it become ignorance. I hate Islam, but I have met plenty of wonderful Muslims. "Religious people in general are stupid and violent." Statistically speaking, you are unbelievably wrong. I am the last person to defend religion, especially the ironically named "Enlightened" religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam and, in a sense, Hinduism), but the overwhelming majority of the adherents of these religions are not "violent" at all. I sure remember my militant atheist days as a teenager :P
Debate: Do you think that kids should learn about their own country instead of different countries
Side: Yes

Actually this is not a yes or no issue. Yes students should be taught about their own country's history and how it affects them and the rest of the world today. However, it should be recognised that the teaching of the histories of other countries will inform the pupils about the world in which they live, broaden their outlook, enable them to make more informed decisions and judgments about world events.
Debate: Do you think that kids should learn about their own country instead of different countries
Side: No

If you are referring to the United States, then American History is taught at almost every level of our educational system. The same goes for Europe, though they spend a lot of time teaching about neighboring countries (since European history is a bit more collective than U.S. history), and many Asian countries, specifically Korea, Japan, and China, spend significant amounts of time teaching about their political and cultural history.Out of curiosity, what made you think that kids are not taught about their home country's history?
Debate: Do you think that kids should learn about their own country instead of different countries
Side: Yes

I didn't say that that kids are not taught about their own country its just that most schools talk about other countries more than they do their own. When I was in Middle school we only had one grade that taught us some U.S history. All the other grades taught us stuff from Europe, Asia and so on. Even now we don't learn all that much in our own county and all we learn is for other counties so that is one reason why I had made this debate in the first place I hardly know anything about my own country and yet I know more about places that I don't think I would ever need to know.
Debate: Do you think that kids should learn about their own country instead of different countries
Side: Yes

Out of curiosity, what country are you referring to? It is hard to respond in depth to your post without knowing that.
Debate: Do you think that kids should learn about their own country instead of different countries
Side: Yes

The main county I am talking about is the U.S, This county seem that it is more important to learn about other counties than it's own. I don't know how it is in other countries though.
Debate: Do you think that kids should learn about their own country instead of different countries
Side: Yes

United States overall curriculum places more emphasis on our our history than almost any other country in the world. Your personal experience may differ, but we offer more self-centric history classes at almost all levels of education than the overwhelming majority of countries. It is possible that the schools you went to offered them as electives instead, however.
Debate: Do you think that kids should learn about their own country instead of different countries
Side: Yes

Like I had said it could be different in other places yet to where I am from in this country they hardly even talk about it. There is no electives to which this subject is available and they only teach about other countries. There might be some talk about it but they don't really teach us anything new. There is a lot to talk about for this country and yet they don't.
Debate: Do you think that kids should learn about their own country instead of different countries
Side: Yes

But the thing is, that isn't true within the United States. If your local curriculum is like that, then that is one thing, but that would make it abnormal by national standards. On top of that, compared to most places, there really isn't that much to talk about for our country, considering our history only really dates back to the 18th century.
Debate: Do you think that kids should learn about their own country instead of different countries
Side: No

At first I have been to almost all the states in the U.S and I also went to a lot of schools in this country and they all was pretty much the same. None of them even taught a little of this country history, But there is a lot to talk about our history if we get into all the details and people can learn a lot about this country.
Debate: Do you think that kids should learn about their own country instead of different countries
Side: Yes

How many schools did you examine the curriculum of and at what grade levels?
Debate: Do you think that kids should learn about their own country instead of different countries
Side: No

I could not tell you exactly how many schools I had went to over the Untied States, but the grades I can tell you. The grades mostly consisted of 5-9 so far.
Debate: Do you think that kids should learn about their own country instead of different countries
Side: Yes

It is hard to tell how comprehensive your Middle School curriculum experience has been, but judging American education standards based almost entirely on Middle School curriculum isn't overly legitimate. In depth history classes generally take place Sophomore, Junior, and Senior year of high school, though many Middle Schools do teach classes with a good amount of American history in them.
Debate: Do you think that kids should learn about their own country instead of different countries
Side: Yes

You may just not be there yet.Nearly every state requires US History be taken before graduation.ref
Debate: Do you think that kids should learn about their own country instead of different countries
Side: Yes

I don't mind to be insulting but US history is very short.. how many times do you want to go over the same thing?
Debate: Do you think that kids should learn about their own country instead of different countries
Side: No

I think you want to direct that to the OP (The Eccentric). I think we spend too much time on U.S. history, I was just pointing out to him that this country spends a disproportionately large amount of time on our history.
Debate: Do you think that kids should learn about their own country instead of different countries
Side: Yes

I'm not the OP 11wolf is.
Debate: Do you think that kids should learn about their own country instead of different countries
Side: No

They should learn about both, because both will affect them later in life.
Debate: Do You Think That Nudism Should Be Accepted In Public?
Side: yes

We live in a free country, correct?There is no good reason to outlaw nudity.
Debate: Do You Think That Nudism Should Be Accepted In Public?
Side: Yes

Right on, it is a fact that we are told what to do and when to do it. The way we dress or not dress should be a gift of freedom as we know it!
Debate: Do You Think That Nudism Should Be Accepted In Public?
Side: Yes

I just want to clarify that it should be a right, not a gift.
Debate: Do You Think That Nudism Should Be Accepted In Public?
Side: Yes

Why do people have such a greater disapproval of my post opposed to yours? I would think they would have attacked the comment which is not only the highest, but made an argument that is wholly more blunt; that there is 'no good reason to outlaw it'. I mean I completely agree with you mate, I just don't understand why nobody is posting their dispositions towards your position :(
Debate: Do You Think That Nudism Should Be Accepted In Public?
Side: Yes

Because you were challenging the functionality of clothes while I was challenging the attempt of government to restrict one from choosing to wear or not wear clothes.Clearly they disagreed with your reasoning and not mine.
Debate: Do You Think That Nudism Should Be Accepted In Public?
Side: No

Yes*
Debate: Do You Think That Nudism Should Be Accepted In Public?
Side: Yes

Agree. nudity in public should be legal everywhere. Liberty is open to all ideas and forms of expression.
Debate: Do You Think That Nudism Should Be Accepted In Public?
Side: yes

Everyone was given the same body parts. So what if men have a penis and women have boobs and a vagina? There is nothing to be ashamed of by going naked in public. If we were supposed to wear clothes we would have been born with clothes on.
Debate: Do You Think That Nudism Should Be Accepted In Public?
Side: yes

It is Ecolgically friendly, less laundry,less need to use deodorants,though some clothes shops would go bust!
Debate: Do You Think That Nudism Should Be Accepted In Public?
Side: Yes

THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH NUDITY. AT THE END OF THE DAY IT IS ACTUALLY OUR TRUE, NATURAL STATE. MY PARTNER AND I BOTH EMBRACE OR NUDITY AND HAVE VISITED BEACHES AND PUBLIC AREAS ABROAD WERE IT IS LEGALLY ACCEPTABLE TO BE NAKED IN PUBLIC. OUR LOCAL PUB HAS A REGULAR TOPLESS BARMAID NIGHT EVERY THURSDAY AT THIS ALWAYS GO VERY WELL, AND THERE IS NEVER ANY TROUBLE OR WHAT SOME PEOPLE WOULD OFTEN SAY OR REFER TO AS GRATUITOUS ABJECT SEX AND NUDITY, AND MY PARTNER VERY OFTEN JOINS IN BY SOME TIMES GOING COMPLETELY NAKED. A GOOD NIGHT IS ALWAYS HAD BY EVERYONE AND WE NEVER HAVE ANY TROUBLE.
Debate: Do You Think That Nudism Should Be Accepted In Public?
Side: No

The born with clothes argument is silly. Clithes is a tool to protect you from elements and to protect others from loosing their eyesight.
Debate: Do You Think That Nudism Should Be Accepted In Public?
Side: Yes

Yes*
Debate: Do You Think That Nudism Should Be Accepted In Public?
Side: yes

I don't see why not, we weren't born with clothes therefore we don't truly need them.
Debate: Do You Think That Nudism Should Be Accepted In Public?
Side: No

Im not an expert in human body adaption. But if what i read was true, the human body adapt to coldness mentally and not physically. So if you place a baby by itself in extreme cold weather, it is more likely to survive with clothes than without. Of course there are other factors to the child's well being. Im not going to downvote you. I would usually say i would. But i understand your premise. I believe you should had said: because we weren't born with clothes, no law should say that we should wear clothes. There are views to consider. One view is that people have the natural choice to wear clothes. The other view is a contradiction to the first view. If i had a child and she sits on a deadly bacteria infected chair, i wouldn't want that for my child. In that view, i believe i have the choice to choose if my daughter could wear clothes or not. Not only it affects my emotions if she dies. But it affects me morally and selfishly because i want my legacy to continue after i die.
Debate: Do You Think That Nudism Should Be Accepted In Public?
Side: Yes

The question isn't whether or not clothes should be outlawed, it is whether or not any given person should be permitted to be in public without any clothes on.If you place a baby, unclothed, in extreme weather it is going to to certainly not thrive as well as it would if it had clothes. I am glad we are both in agreement that extreme cold, and a lack of clothing do not positively correlate with any given persons well-being.I appreciate you not downvoting me.Let me rephrase what I said: Considering we were not born with clothes, we should not be mandated to wear them. Hopefully my revamped argument is now more synonymous and understandable to what I already said (in your eyes of course).Those are definitely views to consider.Here is the ideal situation: wearing clothes is not mandated. Wearing clothes is a choice. People can choose whether or not they want to wear clothes. Those sentences are all quite related to each other. One might even go so far as to say they are saying the same thing. But of course you might have some form of idea to contribute (i.e. a different way to say what was already said ).So this debate which asks a simplistic yes or no question based off of opinion was answered by myself with the simplistic answer of ( essentially ): I believe nudism should be accepted in public as a choice. Now you might have noticed that I have reworded my opinion on the manner several times, as I can only hope that you understand my viewpoint is not that wearing clothes should be illegal ( as that is not what the question asked of me nor is it what I said ) but that wearing clothes ought to be a choice."There are views to consider. One view is that people have the natural choice to wear clothes.The other view is a contradiction to the first view."That my good sir, is complete genius. I am glad you explained to me that there are differentiating views in existence and not only that but that these multiple views don't agree with each other in a complete sense. Since I usually don't downvote people, I won't downvote you. I hope you think real hard about your next rebuttal if your next response is in fact a rebuttal ( considering your own position on the matter is unclear ), presumably you ought to be able to do that considering your enlightened thought process and that your name and picture is of the statue by Rodin which represents the ideology of thought.Until then, I'll be back in a couple of weeks to check up on ya.
Debate: Do You Think That Nudism Should Be Accepted In Public?
Side: No

Considering we were not born with clothes, we should not be mandated to wear themI agree with that somewhat because that agrees with my common sense. However, the question in response is: why? Why is the fact that we are born with no clothes gives us the choice to wear clothes or not wear clothes at all? In other words, what evidence is there to prove what you stated? What would make sense if God was real and He told us that it was ok to choose whether we want to wear clothes or not. But because we don't have that form of basis, you cannot make your judgement. Considering your own position on the matter is unclearNo, my position is not clear. I am on a little on both sides. Yes, it is contradiction but not a complete contradiction. And because this is not a complete contradictionsmakes my position still stand. That my good sir, is complete genius. I am glad you explained to me that there are differentiating views in existence and not only that but that these multiple views don't agree with each other in a complete sense.I sense your sarcasm. IF you were being sarcastic, at least be straightforward and honest. I don't need "b.s." Like i said above, i do believe there are differentiating views in existence that makes a complete sense. They are not complete contradictions which makes those two statements exist. 1. In my common sense, i don't think we should be mandated to wear clothes because weren't born with clothes. 2. I don't want my child to get sick. What would make them absolute contradictions if i was one hundred percent completely on either one of the positions.