azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Pedophile's aren't bad.
Side: False

I assume that you are of the opinion that no behavior is wrong, but I think differently. Some people are born psychopaths, and by your reasoning if they kill six people they should not be put to death because they have a different outlook on life. I am not a moral relativist, I believe that some behavior is so abhorrent that the person is no longer any use to society. One of the behaviors that should not be tolerated in any society is the harming of children by adults, whether sexually or otherwise.I also reject you trying to place homosexuality into the discussion because what two ADULTS do in the privacy of their own bedroom is none of anyone's business.An adult having sex with a 17 year old is not pedophilia.
Debate: Pedophile's aren't bad.
Side: True

Having sex with a 17 year old IS considered to be an act of pedophilia by certain states. If you weren't a dumb close minded bitch you might know that. If a teenager is going to have sex, what difference does it make who it's with? It doesn't. If a 29 year old virgin with no stds has sex with a 15 year old; how is that worse than a 16 year old having sex with the 15 year old? It isn't worse. Only in our bullshit excuse of a country is it worse. I can't wait until the U.S. goes down the shit hole that is deserves to go down. Fuck it. Fuck you. And fuck everyone who is a dumb fuck like you in any way shape or form. You deserve everything you are going to get.
Debate: Pedophile's aren't bad.
Side: True

You might like this song.
Debate: Pedophile's aren't bad.
Side: True

In no state is intercourse with a 17 year old considered pedophilia, although it may be considered rape. Pedophilia is a clinical diagnosis laid out by the DSMIV-TR and it has a consistent application throughout the entire country. The diagnosis concerns attraction to prepubescent children 13 years of age or younger. Someone attracted to pubescent children is a hebephile.
Debate: Pedophile's aren't bad.
Side: True

As I mentioned in my earlier reply to you (which you did not respond to) it is illogical to say that all pedophiles are bad when not all pedophiles act upon their fantasies or urges. Also, the vast majority of psychopaths do not commit murder and their personality attributes, while offensive to some, do not necessarily make them bad people. You are conflating thoughts with action, and condemning people for mental disorders which they never chose to have. It is not morally relativistic to argue that those who do no wrong to anyone should be treated as decently as others are. Further, those who do act upon their desires typically try to resist them first but lack adequate mental health support and access to do so successfully. This makes society at least marginally responsible for what happens.The main point: not all pedophiles act on their desires so not all pedophiles hurt children.
Debate: Pedophile's aren't bad.
Side: True

Not all pedophiles act upon their desires or fantasies, just as not all psychopaths are murderers (in the case of the latter, actually, homicide is an exception to the rule). Additionally, there is an important distinction between calling somebody bad and deeming an action to be bad. I am a determinist, so I consider pedophilia to be a consquence of biological predispositions and socialization (i.e. pedophiles do not choose to be pedophiles). I also think that the decision of pedophiles to act or abstain from sexu with children is a consequence of social failure or success in connecting such individuals with the care and treatment they need. Our society heavily stigmatizes mental ill-health and disorder, to the extent that it becomes actively counter-productive and people do not or cannot get the help they need. It is a gross over-simlpification of the issue to to simply ignore society's role.
Debate: Pedophile's aren't bad.
Side: False

How dare you compare gays to pedophiles. So because I am bisexual, you want to compare me to such a horrible person? Fuck you.
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are bad

Eh! It's not for me but to each their own .
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are bad

In the western world the Swastika has been strongly associated with Nazism and related ideologies such as Fascism and White Supremacism since the 1930s. Its use is now largely stigmatized in the west; it has notably been outlawed in Germany
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are not bad

Ok, so how does any of that info lead to the conclusion:"people should not sue swastikas as their avatar"?what are the conditionals, the conjunctions, the disjunctions, the value critiera, etc which leads to the conclusion?So far you have given info, do you have an argument?
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are bad

I have tried to give an argument, but I will restate it here. I propose that there are only two reasons to use a swastika as an avatar:1. Because you are a Nazi Sympathizer or,2. You don't care about hurting the feelings of Jewish people, or dependents of those who fought and died in WWII. Your desire for attention is more important than their feeling. You want so desperately to be unique, counter-cultural, that you don't care that Nazis shoved living men women and children into mass graves, gas chambers, and ovens. All this is just a joke for them. Please tell me any other reason why someone would use a swastika as their avatar.
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are not bad

Because you are a Nazi SympathizerIt is unwise to take a concrete stance on Nazism in Germany, no matter which way your allegiance tends. You don't care about hurting the feelings of Jewish peopleI care very little for the feelings of people, simply because they are Jewish. I reserve the right to offend whomever I wish. or dependents of those who fought and died in WWIIHistory is written by the victor.
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are bad

It is embarrassing and de-legitimizing for this website to allow people to have swastikas as their avatar. Normal people won't want to use this website, if you allow people with swastikas to post their avatar everywhere. I know, I know, we want to allow freedom... bla bla bla... We only have 2 options: Allow the crazies to run this site or don't let the crazies run this site.
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are not bad

Why would we want "normal people", after all if they are so closed minded, they can't make good debaters. Wouldn't it be more embarrassing for the site to drive away their main target audience?
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are bad

Someone who uses a swastika as their Avatar is either:1. A nazi supporter or2. A complete douche bag.Only complete douche bags go around desperately trying to be nonconformist, constantly patting themselves on the back for how clever they are. They are the only people who would use it just to piss people off, so they can come in, and point out some useless fact that it was used by other people before the Nazis. Who freakin cares? Too many people have died too recently (within living Memory who fought the flag of the swastika). Use a yin yang like all the other douche-bags to pat yourself on the back with how clever and Nonconformist you are. You can pat yourself on the back all you want for knowing some useless fact that the swastika might have been used by someone else...According the Urban Dictionary Nonconformist are: “The most retarded, unpleasant conformists alive. In a pathetic attempt to boost their own self-esteem by being "different", nonconformists put down everything that is accepted and liked by mainsteam society. The problem is, this doesn't actually mean they aren't conforming. They're simply conforming to the standards of their counterculture.”To me, that is all the swastika is: a way to shout at the top of your lungs: “Look at me, I’m different”. Well grow up. Too many people have died too recently.
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are not bad

What about using the gay symbol (the multicolor rainbow) as their avatar? Or a swastika on the gay symbol. Would that mean that Nazi supporters are gay? Or that gays are a bunch of Nazis? Or a gay branch of the Nazi supporters? Or a Nazi branch of the gay supporters?Why should some symbols be allowed and others not? Who makes these decisions.Would it not be easier to just decide NOT to be offended by any of it? ;)
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: free speech

nice copypasta. As well, you are technically being worse for this site than I am. I merely have an avatar, you are triple (and sometimes more) posting all over this place.Please, organize your thoughts. otherwise, moderators will rape you.
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are not bad

Someone who uses a swastika as their Avatar is either:1. A nazi supporter or2. A complete douche bag.This is complete fascism mate, Ironically guilty of that which you highlight as fault in others.Any more hate propaganda? Any more negative sentiment? It's the fascist way of course. By the way the pyg is the only one that still uses the swastika avatar, so this is basically a personal attack, well, he has been around here a lot longer and is quite respected, and nobody save a few have ever had a problem with it.
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are not bad

Re: "Someone who uses a swastika as their Avatar is either: 1. A nazi supporter or 2. A complete douche bag."How is this fascism. I understand that you are able to state your conclusion, but anyone can do that. For instance, I once lived on the son, and the sun is very cold during the month of may...What is more impressive than just saying stupid things is actually being able to back it up. I'll give you the definition of fascism, and lets see if you can explain to me, with actual arguments, how calling someone a douche bag is fascist? Fascism: Fascism is a radical, authoritarian nationalist political ideology.How did my calling someone who uses a swastica a duche bag a fascist?Nazis are fascist: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism#Relation_with_fascism
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are bad

How is this fascism.Firstly, your entire premise is fascist. But as for an argument here it is. Anti-individualism is central to fascism, as is utilitarianism, a call to the greater good of everybody and not the individual.Fascism heavily controls media and, freedom of speech and representation, promoting hate propaganda on those that oppose this political ideal.Freedom of speech, representation and press is central to democratic politics.What you are doing is trying to gain consensus from peers that one person's method of representation is not for the greater good of the majority, you call for the controllers of this site to put a stop to the use of certain imagery simply because you think it is inappropriate.Furthermore the swastika and Nazi sentiment is, in general, mocked by popular media these days, Hitler has shown up and been used as a point of humor in shows such as family guy, the simpsons and the like, do you ring up television networks and complain about it? Probably not, what about the feelings of the Jews there.Also, I'm quite aware that Nazis are fascist, thanks, although your wiki-link was quite informative.
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are bad

I am taking each argument one at a time, so that you can respond to the one that you don't like... my last post gave the definition of a douche bag. Please refute my argument... Don't just call names... I explained why someone with a swastica is a Nazi or a douche bag... all you did is call my a fascist... but you didn't explain why I am a fascist... All you did is call names... I gave actual arguments, that no one has responded to. I gave my belief that someone would only use a swastica because they supported Nazism, or they wanted to be seen as counter-intuitive... All you have done is call me names... No one has disputed my claim that those are the only valid reasons to use a swastica... is so you can pat yourself on the back for being unique, or so you can support nazies... I gave an argument. Please explain to me a a reason for using a swastica that doesn't involve nazism, or doucgh-baggery.
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are not bad

A douche bag is an implement for the rinsing of body cavities. also, why all the ellipses? Which words are you omitting? If this is a second point argued, I'm stumped as you seem to be repeating the same point, but anyway, your description of a fascist is broad and over simplified, your definition of a douche is colloquial and slang, so for actually giving an argument you fall short.As far as providing an argument outside of these facts, I've seen personal opinion, I've also seen the irony of your intention, hence I pointed it out. I did think you'd get the point, but you obviously need deeper explanation on the details of fascism, and the definition of a douche bag.No one has disputed my claim that those are the only valid reasons to use a swastika... is so you can pat yourself on the back for being unique, or so you can support nazies..Why should anyone? The use of a swastika is a personal choice, one that anyone is free to make, it is only the observer that can attribute a value to that use of the swastika without asking the one that is using it. Your labelling of the swastika user is authoritarian and anti-individualist, so is therefore...?
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are bad

re: "Any more hate propaganda?"Just saying that something is "hate propaganda" does not make it so. All I said is there is no good reason to have a swastika. You could have explained a valid reason, but instead you chose to call me a fascist. I made a logical argument. If you feel that my logical argument is hate, then you have more problems than I can help.
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are not bad

Just saying that something is "hate propaganda" does not make it soNo? What does? Have you not a negative sentiment?All I said is there is no good reason to have a swastika.This is your opinion, one you're entitled to. But bring it to a public forum, label those that oppose it douche-bags and attention seekers and you seem to be propagating...?I made a logical argument. If you feel that my logical argument is hate, then you have more problems than I can help.If you feel that you have exercised logic, then you have one glaringly obvious problem, logic would tell you that with out evidence, you can not make a claim, as the burden of proof is in your corner, you make claims about people you don't know, without evidence of any negative sentiment in their actions, yet still shoehorn them into two categories to fit your taste.One more thing, please put all your disputes in one post in future as it is a pain in the ass and I can read a continuous piece of writing.
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are bad

Because of its use by Nazi Germany, the swastika since the 1930s has been largely associated with Nazism and white supremacy in most of the Western countries. As a result, all of its use, or its use as a Nazi or hate symbol is prohibited in some jurisdictions. Because of the stigma attached to the symbol, many buildings that have contained the symbol as decoration have had the symbol removed. Steven Heller, of the School of Visual Arts, has argued that from the moment it was "misappropriated" by the Nazis, it became a mark and weapon of hate, and could not be redeemed.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika#Post-WWII_stigmatization_in_Western_countries
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are bad

When in jr high I drew a swastika on my notebook with the words' "Surf Rules". It was a surf brand. My mother, having served in WW2 as a WAC had seen human skin purses & lamp shades & the horror that it represents, got really angry & explained what it was about. This is what it represents... innocent people dying the most horrific deaths, people even being accused of being Jewish or helping a friend that was Jewish were murdered & raped in these camps, painful experiments resulting in death of women & unborn twins & children. It isn't a laughing matter the torture that these people have been through because of Hitler & his comrades.
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are not bad

Damn, yo. Swastikas did all that?i thought it was Hitler and those scientists...
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are bad

Not worthy a rebuttle. The symbol brings back memories that many would rather forget. Having worked in the hospital for a few years I've had a couple patients that had the numbers tattooed on their arms. Perhaps you might find that an amusement too?
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: free speech

I feel so sorry for all the holocaust survivors who come to this site and see my avatar and instantly have a flashback.all 0 of them.I have a friend who did DMT and had a really bad trip where he thought he was being raped by angels. he has considered coming to this site, but I'm not sure on what to tell him after seeing that a member of this forum has the word "Angel" in their name.
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are not bad

Not worthy a rebuttle.And yet, here we are.The symbol brings back memories that many would rather forget.The frailty of the few is no reason by which to restrict the liberty of the many.Having worked in the hospital for a few years I've had a couple patients that had the numbers tattooed on their arms.I fear this constitutes an appeal to sympathy. You should be aware that such never works here, especially not with me.Perhaps you might find that an amusement too?I think you are maligning Mr. Pyg unfairly. He has never professed opinions which suggest that he finds the extermination of Jews to be amusing.
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: free speech

Freedom of Speech. If someone wants to tell the world, how much of an ignorant bigot they are, they certainly have that option.
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: free speech

Unless the swastika is being used "ironically". Only after reading some of the other debates have I realized that you're referring specifically to ThePyg. After being on this site for some time, I don't recall ThePyg saying anything inherently racist.
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: free speech

I don't remember either and I'm around here a while. .
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are bad

The use of a swastika is inherently racist. It is a banner under which millions of Jews were shoved in gas chambers and people-ovens.
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are not bad

A symbol can not be inherently anything, other then perhaps a shape or what identifies it as a particular symbol. It has no inherent meaning, but rather it's meaning is derived from its interpretation; as is evident by the various meanings derived from all sorts of symbols. Consider the peace symbol for example, the one that is a hand with two fingers up.
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are bad

Casper. You are right. In English speaking countries, of Human beings, on the planet earth, who are alive at this time, the swastika is a racist symbol. I din't not think I would need to explain that that is the subset of people that I am talking about with you ass-holes, but I guess I have to use small words with you, and explain things that normal people would just understand.
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are not bad

The use of a swastika is inherently racist.As demonstrated, sir, an ironic usage is an exception. It is a banner under which millions of Jews were shoved in gas chambers and people-ovens.Many terrible things have been done under the banners of the crucifix and the flag of the United States, but that does not compel us to demand their withdrawal.
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are bad

re: "As demonstrated, sir, an ironic usage is an exception"I don't get the irony of having a swastica. Is the following a joke: "I hate Jews, ha, ha, just joking"....How is this irony? re: "Many terrible things have been done under the banners of the crucifix and the flag of the United States"When? You guys have got to stop just stating your conclusion. Anyone can state conclusions. You have to back it up with evidence... when have people used the flag of the united states as a call to arms to genocide? You think America is just as evil as Nazi Germany? Just because everyone
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are not bad

I don't get the irony of having a swastica.You don't see the latent irony in placing a swastika amid a field of rainbows? I'm afraid it seems quite apparent to me, sir. And to display any symbol when one professes opinions contrary to those associated with the symbol is by definition ironic. To this day, I have never observed Pyg to be a Nazi. Furthermore, sir, I suggest you look beyond antisemitism and see that there was more to Nazism than that.When?The crucifix was the symbol under which the holy land was subjugated, it was the symbol under which was performed the genocide of the South American peoples and it was the symbol under which thousands of Huguenots were slaughtered in France.The United States flag, under the auspices of which the United States military carelessly slaughtered hundreds of Iraqi civilians, before which were thousands of men killed during the civil war, in whose realm was slavery so abundant, is a similarly blood-stained symbol. You guys have got to stop just stating your conclusion.I like to give the benefit of the doubt, sir.You have to back it up with evidence... when have people used the flag of the united states as a call to arms to genocide? There are more atrocities than genocide, sir. And not incidentally, the united states flag was flown when the native American tribes were systematically butchered and forced from their lands.You think America is just as evil as Nazi Germany?I do not believe either are or were evil.Just because everyoneQuae?
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are bad

re: "To this day, I have never observed Pyg to be a Nazi."Using this logic, you could wear a KKK outfit, but as long as you never say anything racist, you are supposed to be given the benefit of the doubt?If you honestly don't think swastica's all over this website, wouldn't make a Jewish person feel unwelcome here, then screw it... I give up. I'm just making you an enemy, and I want nothing to do with you. If you can't say that Nazi Germany was evil, than I want nothing to do with you.
Debate: People should not use swastika as their avatar
Side: Swastika are not bad

Using this logic, you could wear a KKK outfit, but as long as you never say anything racist, you are supposed to be given the benefit of the doubt?The old adage "never judge a book by its cover" applies and stands here.If you honestly don't think swastica's all over this website, wouldn't make a Jewish person feel unwelcome here, then screw it... I give up.This is a site where people are supposed to express and argue opinions. Surely a Jew would relish the opportunity to argue with an antisemite?I'm just making you an enemyThat, sir, is what people normally do when they appeal to sentiment and cannot actually argue against any of my points.If you can't say that Nazi Germany was evil, than I want nothing to do with you.Your loss, sir.