azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: No

My comment that it was unnecessarily restrictive was referring to this.And both Cartman's responses: "By default it doesn't exist. Otherwise, everything would exist.", "Logically everything doesn't exist by default. You have to show it exists."and my response: "If you're going to just assume it exists without evidence - just go ahead and do this with god (what you're doing anyway) and skip trying to justify the constituent parts in the same way."apply to your claim that somehow it is 'unnecessarily restrictive' to just assume it exists without any evidence.(See also: Russell's teapot and the dragon in my garage)You need a moral law to say anything is wrong no matter how smallIf you have subjective moral law, you can say something is subjectively wrong.In order for a person to say something is objectively wrong, there needs to be both an objective morality and a reliable way for the person to access it.I asked for evidenceOk - I will not watch your kid for free. Our argument is now proved.I was actually referring to the countriesAs to spousal rape being legal, my link named: China, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and India.My other link showed that spousal rape was legal in the US until recently. It is still not treated equally to non-spousal rape in several states ref.As to the rest, the issues I raised are being dealt with in all countries.There can be a case for someone justly killed someone else.Exactly. Is this process of justification objective?self-defense is a poor reason not to get pregnant or to get an abortion.Your comment applies mostly just to abortion rather than self-defense generally.We discussed why abortion should be considered self-defense in our other debate hereYour arguments for consent and responsibility to the child (/person posing harm) would not apply to the generally accepted self-defense right - so, perhaps you can address that.more often than not, mercy killing is taken as murderWhich just means sometimes it is and sometimes it isn't - ergo, subjective.Stealing is always wrongJust saying so does not address the cases I provided where people "justify" stealing (necessity, spying, eminent domain, etc.)Just because its allowed without any repercussions that doesn't make it any less wrong.Actually, that is exactly what it means. If one type of rape has severe penalties and another type has none, that means that the people in control deem that it is less wrong/more justifiable.The jail persons rape is just as morally wrong as their child rape.Do you think everyone would agree?If I don't understand theft, does that make it nonexistent or unattainable?Yes, it can be nonexistent/unattainable for you even if it is attainable by a population with control over whether you stay in an asylum.If people don't understand right from wrong, we do treat them differently than people acting with intent.
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: No

In the end there is only one truth not many truths. It's time to know the truth! Investigate, it's critical, now!
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: Yes

Just because opinions are different does not mean there is not a definite answer. Just because a question is question is complicated and people disagree does not mean there is not one single answer
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: No

A single answer can't be assumed to exist if there are multiple answers.
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: Yes

If 1/3 = 0.333 repeating, does 3/3 really equal 1 or does it equal 0.999 repeating? There is a singular answer to this question which is 1. But if you do not know geometric series, advanced uses of pre-calculus, or calculus, the answer SEEMS to be both, but this is from a lack of knowledge. The same principle can be applied to morality. There is a singular answer to questions, it just requires an understanding of psychological, biology, and general sciences. For example adultery and/or fornication. The modern idea of morality is nihilistic when it comes to sex. But sex before marriage increases chances of divorce dramatically unless the person you have sex with ends up being your spouse, which is unlikely if the standard doesn't exist. Why get married, why not just have sex with whoever you want whenever you want? The only time children do not have development problems or harmful emotional dispositions is when a man and woman are married and marital problems are relatively low. People can argue morals from a nihilistic view but that doesn't excuse or make the the psychological ramifications of their actions disappear. Knowledge about all of the psychological and biological principles in the Hebrew Law is a very convincing argument for God. Cultures had bits and pieces of morals that make sense biologically and psychologically but no culture has the wealth that the Hebrew Law has.
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: No

does 3/3 really equal 1 or does it equal 0.999 repeating?Ah - brings me back to my very first postThe only time children do not have development problems or harmful emotional dispositions is when a man and woman are married and marital problems are relatively low.Baloney.
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: Yes

Ah - brings me back to my very first postMy point still holds, you're purposefully not acknowledging concepts. Yes 1/9 is equal to 0.111 repeating it is repeating implying infinity. If you remember from your high school Calculus course, as the number approaches infinity the difference 0.9 and 1 increasingly gets smaller until it reaches infinity and is essentially nothing, and in turn 0.9 repeating is essentially 1. Seems like there is two answers, but if you lay everything out and define terms, there is only one answer. The same principle applies with morality. Use solid logic, define terms, you get one answer.BaloneySocial studies are almost always biased, both religious and those trying to oppose the religious view. However, pay attention to your friends. I guarantee anyone that has lived in an unstable home has emotional baggage that influences their decisions with relationships. Sexual standards try to minimize the possibility of marital instability that comes from sexual jealousy, and ensuing lack of interest in the spouse that comes from extra-marital affairs.
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: No

My point still holdsNo, it doesn't.First, .9 repeating isn't "essentially" 1 - it IS 1 - thus, there aren't two answers at all - only 1.Second, even if we were to take the thrust of your point and say that sometimes one answer appears different from another when they are actually the same - that would certainly not always be the case.If one person says gay marriage should be illegal and another person says it should be legal - clearly those are not different expressions of "one answer".Social studies are almost always biasedSo, you think randomized, controlled, peer-reviewed studies of large cohorts are less reliable than talking to a couple of friends?Maybe you don't have too many friends - because I know a lot of people (including myself) that are products of very dysfunctional heterosexual marriages...
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: Yes

First, .9 repeating isn't "essentially" 1 - it IS 1 - thus, there aren't two answers at all - only 1.So there is only one answer. Thus was my point.If one person says gay marriage should be illegal and another person says it should be legal - clearly those are not different expressions of "one answer". Just because opinions differ does not mean the answer has multiple possible answers. For example, if homosexuality itself creates dysfunctional and in itself wrong, the question doesn't even arise. Should we kill a murderer or not and allow a possible escape? (alluding to the Joker) The answer is control yourself and don't commit murder in the first place ( the answer to the "One Bad Day" concept). So, you think randomized, controlled, peer-reviewed studies of large cohorts are less reliable than talking to a couple of friends? Have you read through the studies? The definitions of "bad behavior" is purposely ambiguous to allow researchers to confirm their own bias. The peer-reviewed studies are usually condemned both on the religious and non religious side. People you know and can communicate with are much more reliable because you KNOW them. Maybe you don't have too many friends - because I know a lot of people (including myself) that are products of very dysfunctional heterosexual marriages... Congrads you're alive and can hold a job. But the point I care about goes past what researchers can see. Are you selfless to the point of fault in relationships? Can you handle and control your emotions in extremely stressful relationship situations (no way to present those in an controlled experiment) and seek out to be sacrificial for the other person? This is very personal and I'm not faulting you or assuming anything but I do have alot of friend that have come from dysfunctional homes and most have tendencies that cause harm to relationships. The relationships they hold may be able to survive, but I wouldn't say they'd be better off coming from the home they did. The "sins of the father" is a very real concept.
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: No

Just because opinions differ does not mean the answer has multiple possible answers.It means that either objective morality doesn't exists or that it exists in a useless way - as people can't reliably access it.Should we kill a murder or not and allow a possible escape? (alluding to the Joker)Um, the Joker is fictional. Should we kill non-fictional murderers who live in reality where we have super-max prisons that no one has ever escaped from? What about people like Osama or the blind sheik where their imprisonment might be used to excuse terrorist activity?The answer is control yourself and don't commit murder in the first placeExcept all of the times where we allow it (e.g. self-defense) - or, presumably, if God tells you to, etc.Have you read through the studies?Many of them, yes.The definitions of "bad behavior" is purposely ambiguous to allow researchers to conform their own bias."Bad" itself IS ambiguous - as it is subjective.People you know and can communicate with are much more reliable because you KNOW them.I know many children of single-parents that are more well-adjusted than many people I know who grew up with married heterosexual parents.Can you handle and control your emotions in extremely stressful relationship situations (no way to present those in an controlled experiment) and seek out to be sacrificial for the other person?Can an astronaut? Ron Garan is a NASA astronaut, entrepreneur, humanitarian, etc. and was raised by a single mom.ref refDo you think that supports the idea that: "The only time children do not have development problems or harmful emotional dispositions is when a man and woman are married and marital problems are relatively low.""sins of the father" A) How is that relevant? B) Does the bible contradict itself related to whether children should suffer for the "sins of the father"?"I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me" - Exodus 20:5(and original sin, etc.)"The son will not bear the punishment for the father’s iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son’s iniquity;"- Ezekiel 18:20
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: No

Avoiding the argument proves nothing.
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: Yes

In the same way multiple answers doesn't assume a single answer, multiple answers doesn't exclude the possibility of a single answer. I wasn't avoiding the argument I just through that was common sense
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: No

It doesn't matter if there is one answer or multiple. That is a red herring. You never actually engaged in the argument. The guy said that you have to prove objective morality exists before you can claim it is responsible for something. You saying that it is possible for a simple answer from something complicated had nothing to do with the discussion.
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: Yes

Actually it does matter. From the biblical standpoint morality has never ever presented morality as some magical law or contract that the deity abstractly made that man had to follow. It has always been presented as God's instruction manual to his creation from the deity that created their body. It was actually atheists and agnostics that straw-manned arguments to put morality as some abstract law, that many Christians stupidly use. Morality has always been the balance between the good of society and the individual, and is why the founding fathers of American wrote the form of government that they did. It very much DOES matter that there is a single answer because that means a form of good can exists besides what God describes as how our body and psychology works.
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: No

The Bible describes very well exactly what a subjective morality would look like. "Here are some rules to live by. Break those rules when I say to".It was actually atheists and agnostics that straw-manned arguments to put morality as some abstract law, that many Christians stupidly use.It isn't a strawman, it is called reading comprehension.It very much DOES matter that there is a single answer because that means a form of good can exists besides what God describes as how our body and psychology works.You are begging the question. You are presupposing a single answer so that you can presuppose what that answer is so that you can presuppose the answer leads to God. You don't need to bother with the part where you tell us that there can be one answer. No one said there can't be one answer.
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: Yes

The Bible describes very well exactly what a subjective morality would look like. "Here are some rules to live by. Break those rules when I say to".Which ones?It isn't a strawman, it is called reading comprehension.See aboveYou are begging the question. You are presupposing a single answer so that you can presuppose what that answer is so that you can presuppose the answer leads to God. You don't need to bother with the part where you tell us that there can be one answer. No one said there can't be one answer. The guy said that you have to prove objective morality exists before you can claim it is responsible for something. If there is only one answer then morality is objective.
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: No

Which ones?I am actually having a problem finding any that don't fit that description. How about killing people. Let's start with that.The guy said that you have to prove objective morality exists before you can claim it is responsible for something. If there is only one answer then morality is objective.Your argument that one answer is possible proves nothing.
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: Yes

I am actually having a problem finding any that don't fit that description. How about killing people. Let's start with that.There is a difference between senseless killing and justice. People cherry pick circumstances and verses to prove this argument. What they fail to remember is that God did not give the Israelite's their promised land till the sin of the current inhabitants of the land was past a certain point. The previous inhabitants of the land worshiped Moleck (spelling maybe wrong) and would ritually sacrifice children through burning and had sexual orgies with all genders that included animals which would lead to widespread STDs, not even mentioning the relationships problems. The Israelite's being used by God as judgment was not senseless as you portray it. Next example?your argument that one answer is possible proves nothing if one answer is not only possible but how God decided morality then all other actions besides the one answer would be wrong and in turn morality would be objective
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: No

The previous inhabitants of the land worshiped Moleck If people believe in him enough to sacrifice their children to him, why is Moleck not the true god?
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: No

The Israelite's being used by God as judgment was not senseless as you portray it.We see many instances in the Bible where God carries out the punishment Himself. It is senseless to have moral people have to kill people to appease God.if one answer is not only possible but how God decided moralityThis is a premise that you have not once tried to demonstrate. then all other actions besides the one answer would be wrong and in turn morality would be objectiveYou are saying that God would have to have objective morality which proves that God exists. Great circular reasoning. There is nothing to suggest that God or objective morality exist.
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: No

Thou shalt not kill - now go kill the Amalechites, the Midianites, witches/fortunetellers, gays, stubborn children, adulterers, men/women/children/animals etc in towns that believe in other gods, etc., etc., etc.ref refAnd, even though I am the definition of good, I'll kill nearly everyone and everything on the entire planet.
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: Yes

I understand the general point but how is .999... onto infinity the same as there being a god if you can't prove there's a god other than opinionated proof which is definitively not proof by the concept of being debatable proof. 1 is 0.999...etc can be proved on paper but it doesn't say much about god. It feels like saying "humans call yellow a color therefore black people are worse than white people." I don't see how the statement holds up because the causing argument is provable but everything after "therefore" is not proven by that logic and is still an opinion even though the part before therefore is a fact, its not a relevant fact. or it might be but I don't see your logic. how does 0.999999..... and so on being 1 say anything about god. you proved that some things aren't debatable very nicely. now how does that apply to god?
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: Yes

It's pretty simple really.1)Is it moral to rape a woman?2)Is it moral to molest a child?3)Is it moral to walk into your neighbor's house, steal his things and kill him?4)Is it moral to look at a goat ready to pounce upon it in a ghastly attempt to fornicate with said goat in an effort to bring forth little half human half goatlings?I think not. Thus? You are wrong. Any questions?
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: No

Widely accepted subjective moral views are not proof of objective morality.If morality is objective you have to demonstrate its source. You cant demonstrate a source. As such it is subjective. Is rape immoral? Ancient peoples didnt think so. Hell even the isrealites from your own holy book said it was ok if shes from a different tribe. But today its horribly immoral. Society changed. Culture changed. MORALITY changed. Ie: morality is subjective.Is it moral to molest a child? Same thing as above. In islam they say sure why not. Morality is different between cultures. Ie: morality is subjective.You just asserting that all these things are immoral to you in 2016 is not proof that youre right. Once again, you actually have to demonstrate a source of objective morality
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: No

First off you'd have to prove morality's objective. Next off morality is greatly a construct of remorse, which is proven to be wired into your brain at birth because there is a part of the brain that controls it. Morality can be learned from surroundings, and humans choose the "don't kill other humans" morality because it works the best.
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: Yes

Not just wired into the brain, it's the brain that put conscience to reasoning. Conscience is conscience the brain justifies or condemns conscience and that the part that is wired into the brain.Like ISIS knows murder is wrong but their brain goes against the conscience that will eventually condemn them, saying every reason it's right to do the opposite. Then conscience becomes dull, and darkened, and slippery slope, they are not even aware how evil their actions are. But in front of God their excuses of the mind won't exist, just the judgement of their deeds weighed against the conscience, which the law of God is written!!! On 2 stone tablets soul and heart !!!!!!!Romans 25 But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, 6 who will render to each person according to his deeds: 7 to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life; . 8 but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation. 9 There will be tribulation and distress for every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek, 10 but glory and honor and peace to everyone who does good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 11 For there is no partiality with God.12 For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law; 13 for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified. 14 For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, 15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, 16 on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.Their own conscience will testify as a witness against them!!!!
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: No

There were moral laws long before any of the bible was penned, and I find it impossible to believe that you think people would not have figured out you shouldn't kill people without some commandment from a god. Furthermore doing something because you are threaned with violence if you don't does not make you moral.
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: Yes

Yes. When I was a kid I remember being told"one day the land that is now Syria will be bombed into oblivion, the Russians will be allied with Iran, an epic battle will begin to rotate around Northern Israel, the U.S. will be a mere shadow of its former self, Christians will be genocided in the Middle East, and Christians will be beheaded. My oh my. I never thought we'd actually be right here in this exact position in my lifetime, but...here we are.
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: Yes

Yes there are arguments on a list that's a mile long. Do you have any evidence for the magic "not God" that manifested reality from its magical "not Godness"? No? I didn't think so.
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: No

This is circular reasoning. If I believe there to be no god, any book that is claimed to have been written by this god cannot be used to argue his existence.
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: No

Not only do you know shockingly little about the ideologies you discuss, but you have managed to create quite a substantial number of unsubstantiated conspiracies to go along with it.
Debate: Are There Any Good Arguments For Gods Existence?
Side: Yes

How did I create conspiracies that already exist?So I point them out, therefore I create them?