azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: First gay couple on disney channel
Side: The kids are too young

The "minor" flaws in your argument are what you are using to prove your main thesis.No even slightly true. Here, I'll break down my argumentation if it's hard for you to do it yourself:1. "There are many habits and aptitudes which are not inborn, but at the same time are not chosen" - this is a well-known fact. Social conditioning which happens from birth, creates a huge amount of acquired prefferences, tastes e.t.c. These things are not inborn, but neither are they consciously "chosen". If you deny this you are blind to the facts.2. So, the line of reasoning in which we say "Did you choose to...." -> "No" ->"Then this is inborn", is fallacious.The only flaw is that I didn't spell this out for you at the start, and gave you a chance to follow the "drug addiction" line which I only used to illustrate things.Nothing in my main argument depends on that line.You said it was impossible for a genetic component to drug addictionThere is at least some kind of evidence in favor of this, while every survey which had "proved" genetic origins of gayness has been either shown to be irrelevant or its results were not repeated by independent researches.I don't know anything about your stupid laws other than what I have heard from you.Telling someone it is normal for them to have gay tendencies is going against that part of the law. You are promoting gay propaganda.First of all, I haven't told you anything about any laws apart form giving that link to the debate.Second, if you are not joking about and really mean what you say, you are truly retarded. You cite the law which forbids attracting interest to homosexual relations. How is that "promoting gay propaganda"?. For the alternatively gifted, again: a kid can have homosexual urges due to hyper-sexuality, and the law does not allow anyone to propagate a concept which says : "These urges mean you are gay". Everything else is your fantasy.Speaking about STUPID laws, here's a good example: the recently adopted Californian bill which allows boys to go into girls' restrooms, if these boys think they are really of the opposite gender. There are many other stupid "politically correct" laws adopted by your moon-bats, I'm glad most people don't support them.No, it means you dodged my question because you realized your position is incredibly stupid and contradicts yourself.You are like a dumb bimbo from high school who thinks maths is "stupid" because she can't understand it. I did not dodge the question, you just didn't understand my answer.Society first pushes people who have psychological problems to subconsciously choose gayness, and then stereotypes it as "inborn" - this is disgusting.
Debate: First gay couple on disney channel
Side: It's about time

No even slightly true. Here, I'll break down my argumentation if it's hard for you to do it yourself:1. "There are many habits and aptitudes which are not inborn, but at the same time are not chosen" - this is a well-known fact. Social conditioning which happens from birth, creates a huge amount of acquired prefferences, tastes e.t.c. These things are not inborn, but neither are they consciously "chosen". If you deny this you are blind to the facts.2. So, the line of reasoning in which we say "Did you choose to...." -> "No" ->"Then this is inborn", is fallacious.The only flaw is that I didn't spell this out for you at the start, and gave you a chance to follow the "drug addiction" line which I only used to illustrate things.Nothing in my main argument depends on that line.You have changed your entire line of argumentation.There is at least some kind of evidence in favor of this, while every survey which had "proved" genetic origins of gayness has been either shown to be irrelevant or its results were not repeated by independent researches.And, you disproved a genetic link to gayness by saying that addiction has no genetic link. You also claim that addiction has a genetic link.Second, if you are not joking about and really mean what you say, you are truly retarded. You cite the law which forbids attracting interest to homosexual relations. How is that "promoting gay propaganda"?. For the alternatively gifted, again: a kid can have homosexual urges due to hyper-sexuality, and the law does not allow anyone to propagate a concept which says : "These urges mean you are gay". Everything else is your fantasy.You are promoting the idea that it is normal to have homosexual urges you propagandist.Speaking about STUPID laws, here's a good example: the recently adopted Californian bill which allows boys to go into girls' restrooms, if these boys think they are really of the opposite gender. There are many other stupid "politically correct" laws adopted by your moon-bats, I'm glad most people don't support them.You are comparing freedom to go into a bathroom that you feel you belong in with to a fine for saying it is ok to have gay sex? At least you recognize how stupid your law is. I agree that your law is just as stupid as our law.You are like a dumb bimbo from high school who thinks maths is "stupid" because she can't understand it. I did not dodge the question, you just didn't understand my answer.YOUR ANSWER DIDN'T SCRATCH THE SURFACE OF MY QUESTION. Your answer was playing hockey while my question was playing baseball.Society first pushes people who have psychological problems to subconsciously choose gayness, and then stereotypes it as "inborn" - this is disgusting.That's way better than the alternative of pushing people to choose something and then say they were fully responsible for their decision and should be punished. Not saying you do that, but your version isn't really that disgusting.
Debate: First gay couple on disney channel
Side: The kids are too young

You did spell it out and you were wrong in the way you did it. Now you are just passing it off as fact.I'm sorry if I was wrong. What's the correct way to spell something out, without offending your feelings?Great, you don't understand what I say, and now you don't understand what you say.I understand what you say, I don't understand why you're saying it.What I am saying is that your statements about my words are just your fantasy.These contradict each other.Nope. Not everything that happens is normal. Teens may try drugs and that's not normal - in the sense it should not be viewed as norm.Again, brushed off as fact.There are statistics that more than 50% of the population have had their first sexual experience with a person of the same sex. Only about 3% of the population are gay. So, nothing is brushed off.What the hell do you think goes on in bathrooms?The answer depends on whether a sexual predator is in the bathroom.Worthless.The "born this way" concept is worthless.Interesting, that looks completely different than your previous responseTo me it doesn't.Plus, your least resistance thing doesn't make any sense because you have arbitrary rules on what to resist.I explained the principle, so it's not arbitrary at all.Thank you for pointing that out. Good thing I said that before you repeated it.Did you say it to yourself?The social projections? In America we recognize that it is normal to be straight, and we don't care if you aren't. You sound as if you guys hear something about being gay and assume everyone thinks that's the normal thing to be. You are blowing it way out of proportion.Social role projections. "You're not a man if you don't...". This sort of bullshit.Maybe there's less of this in America, but it's thriving in post-soviet Russia.
Debate: First gay couple on disney channel
Side: It's about time

I'm sorry if I was wrong. What's the correct way to spell something out, without offending your feelings?Well, for one, not calling me a liar when I was right would help.I understand what you say, I don't understand why you're saying it.What I am saying is that your statements about my words are just your fantasy.No, you are also saying you don't know what you are saying. Just saying. ;)Nope. Not everything that happens is normal. Teens may try drugs and that's not normal - in the sense it should not be viewed as norm.You are against hypersexuality, too.There are statistics that more than 50% of the population have had their first sexual experience with a person of the same sex.Haha, Russia is gay.The answer depends on whether a sexual predator is in the bathroom.If he does something bad he will be in trouble.To me it doesn't.Even with me reposting? See, you are a complete idiot.I explained the principle, so it's not arbitrary at all.Sure it is, the norms to not follow is what you have deemed as bad. That's known as arbitrary.Did you say it to yourself?I said that you aren't doing what I had just posted, since I am the only one here with a brain, yes it was just to myself.Social role projections. "You're not a man if you don't...". This sort of bullshit.Maybe there's less of this in America, but it's thriving in post-soviet Russia.Except you back the notion "You're not a man if you don't have sex with women."
Debate: First gay couple on disney channel
Side: The kids are too young

Well, for one, not calling me a liar when I was right would help.I'll remember that. You've been wrong so far, your main counterargument against me has been misinterpreting my words.No, you are also saying you don't know what you are saying. Just saying. ;)I never said that in this debate. Do you have voices in your head?You are against hypersexuality, too.No really. But teens should be taught how to control it rather than to embrace every sexual impulse.Haha, Russia is gay.That wasn't statistics on Russia.Even with me reposting? See, you are a complete idiot.I see that you're a complete idiot. What you reposted had the same meaning as the other quote.Sure it is, the norms to not follow is what you have deemed as bad. That's known as arbitrary.I have shown why they are bad so it's not arbitrary.I said that you aren't doing what I had just posted, since I am the only one here with a brain, yes it was just to myself.You have yet to show you're "with a brain". You can't even remember what you'd said one post ago.Except you back the notion "You're not a man if you don't have sex with women."I don't back that notion. A man can abstain from sex and still be a man.
Debate: First gay couple on disney channel
Side: It's about time

I'll remember that. You've been wrong so far, your main counterargument against me was misquoting me.How would you know? You can't even recognize your own words.I never said that in this debate. Do you have voices in your head?I don't expect you to be smart enough to recognize you are an idiot. You didn't say those words directly, no one would really expect you to say them.That wasn't statistics on Russia.No shit, they weren't real for anywhere.I see that you're a complete idiot. What you reposted had the same meaning as the other quote.You added an entire second part that was completely missing from your first post that actually answered my second question which you didn't do originally which I was accusing you of.I have shown why they are bad so it's not arbitrary.Not once have you posted any reason why gay sex is bad.You have yet to show you're "with a brain". You can't even remember what you'd said one post ago."Not saying you do that." It is a webpage. I can just scroll up and see in plain text those 5 words. Just because you don't bother reading my posts doesn't mean I didn't take the time to type it.
Debate: First gay couple on disney channel
Side: The kids are too young

How would you know? You can't even recognize your own words.You're bad at telepathy. I see my own words and I see you writing bullshit about what I'd "said".I don't expect you to be smart enough to recognize you are an idiot. You didn't say those words directly, no one would really expect you to say them.I'm not an idiot just because a dickhead like you says I am. I didn't say "those words" either directly or indirectly.No shit, they weren't real for anywhere.Right, I was actually remembering Kinsey's data: 48% of men have had 1 sexual experience with person of same sex. But Kinsey is a known falsifier.However, here is a link which proves my statement that not everything teens do identifies their "orientation":http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-013-0219-5 You added an entire second part that was completely missing from your first post that actually answered my second question which you didn't do originally which I was accusing you of.I just elaborated on what's meant by "stupid and contradicting norms". But these words were in my preceding post, maybe you didn't notice them."Not saying you do that." It is a webpage. I can just scroll up and see in plain text those 5 words. Just because you don't bother reading my posts doesn't mean I didn't take the time to type it.Great. Now check the whole dialog:YOU: That's way better than the alternative of pushing people to choose something and then say they were fully responsible for their decision and should be punished.Not saying you do that, but your version isn't really that disgusting.ME: I don't do it, and the new Russian law does not provide punishment for being gay.However it's true that stopping the "born this way" indoctrination is just part of the solution. Teaching men to resist social projections is the other important part, and of course this is not mainstream in Russia.YOU: Thank you for pointing that out. Good thing I said that before you repeated it.-> Idiot detected! You only said it about me, while I also mentioned the Russian law. I did that, because I could not guess what the hell you meant by: "That's way better than the alternative of pushing people to choose something and then say they were fully responsible for their decision and should be punished." - were you speaking about me, or also the new law?But now, once I've put it all here, I'm sure you'll skip the subject and enjoy having made me write so much in vain.
Debate: First gay couple on disney channel
Side: It's about time

You're bad at telepathy. I see my own words and I see you writing bullshit about what I'd "said".I was referring to you saying that 2 different passages were the same even when placed together. Since you can't see those words were yours I assume you can't see any of your own words.I'm not an idiot just because a dickhead like you says I am. I didn't say "those words" either directly or indirectly.You said them indirectly. You implied the shit out of those words. Hehe.Right, I was actually remembering Kinsey's data: 48% of men have had 1 sexual experience with person of same sex. But Kinsey is a known falsifier.Haha, you quoted false data and quoted it falsely.I just elaborated on what's meant by "stupid and contradicting norms". But these words were in my preceding post, maybe you didn't notice them.I quoted your previous post, they weren't there. Plus, you didn't answer the question with anything that wasn't completely arbitrary.Idiot detected! ... I could not guess what the hell you meant bySee, we look at the guy who can't figure things out and we have found the idiot. were you speaking about me, or also the new law?I wasn't talking about either. But now, once I've put it all here, I'm sure you'll skip the subject and enjoy having made me write so much in vain.You didn't have to type all of that out, you could have just said you were wrong and moved on.
Debate: First gay couple on disney channel
Side: The kids are too young

I was referring to you saying that 2 different passages were the same even when placed together. Since you can't see those words were yours I assume you can't see any of your own words.I never said they were the same, stop lying about such minor things.I said they meant the same.You said them indirectly. You implied the shit out of those words. Hehe.Suit yourself, if that's what you want to see in my words. First rule of sanitarium janitors - not to argue with madmen.Haha, you quoted false data and quoted it falsely.He's a known falsifier to those who oppose LGBT. The actual gay rights movement had been started in the USA by this guy and his "research".And I don't have to remember these figures to the percent. What important is that 48% is still > 10 times 3%, which would prove my point in case the data was correct.See, we look at the guy who can't figure things out and we have found the idiot.Yep, I can't figure out what the hell's going on in your head. The way you wrote that phrase it could mean anything. But here you go again, playing that dumb game where you don't quote your phrase, but imply that its meaning is clear, while it's not.I wasn't talking about either.Then you weren't talking about anything, so there was nothing to figure out for me.You didn't have to type all of that out, you could have just said you were wrong and moved on.Since this is a side-line and a minor issue I might have considered admitting you're "right", just to stop the silly brawl which is irrelevant to the issue being discussed. However I see that you tend to treat any such "confession" as proof that you're right about everything.
Debate: First gay couple on disney channel
Side: It's about time

I never said they were the same, stop lying about such minor things.I said they meant the same.It's impossible, one was only half finished.Suit yourself, if that's what you want to see in my words. First rule of sanitarium janitors - not to argue with madmen.I hope you quote them better than some of the other quoting you have done on here.He's a known falsifier to those who oppose LGBT. The actual gay rights movement had been started in the USA by this guy and his "research".And I don't have to remember these figures to the percent. What important is that 48% is still > 10 times 3%, which would prove my point in case the data was correct.You said the statistic was that over 50% of someones first experience. I don't care that you quoted the percentage wrong.Yep, I can't figure out what the hell's going on in your head. The way you wrote that phrase it could mean anything. But here you go again, playing that dumb game where you don't quote your phrase, but imply that its meaning is clear, while it's not.The dumb game? I never implied that the meaning was clear. I "implied" that I said it. Now that you know what I meant, you still don't believe I said it.Then you weren't talking about anything, so there was nothing to figure out for me.And, you were dumb enough to try to figure something out, good job.Since this is a side-line and a minor issue I might have considered admitting you're "right", just to stop the silly brawl which is irrelevant to the issue being discussed. However I see that you tend to treat any such "confession" as proof that you're right about everything.How the fuck would you know? You haven't confessed being wrong about anything.
Debate: First gay couple on disney channel
Side: The kids are too young

And, you were dumb enough to try to figure something out, good job.What do you mean, dumb? I don't have a time machine, and could not see into the future when you said "I meant neither" to my "That's way better than the alternative of pushing people to choose something and then say they were fully responsible for their decision and should be punished." - were you speaking about me, or also the new law?"How the fuck would you know? You haven't confessed being wrong about anything.I was referring to to other debates.Everything else is a waste of my time.In the beginning of this argument, you asked me 3 stupid questions, I answered them. You did not prove my initial claims wrong, I mean these:------------------------------ 1 ----------------------------pakicetus: They can abstain from homosexual behavior, but they can't stop being gay.ME: This is bullshit which is generated by dickheads from mass media and has nothing to do worth[with] science.Give me a link to any scientific article which claims to have proved that gayness is "inborn" and "immutable", and I'll show you the paragraphs in it which say "these results may mean", "this can be interpreted as", e.t.c.Nothing has been proved, although they've been boasting about this for more than a decade.The truth is, most of the statistical "research" has either been proved false, or the results were not repeated by other scientists who did the same surveys.Also this remains true:-------------------------------- 2 -------------------------1. "There are many habits and aptitudes which are not inborn, but at the same time are not chosen" - this is a well-known fact. Social conditioning which happens from birth, creates a huge amount of acquired preferences, tastes e.t.c. These things are not inborn, but neither are they consciously "chosen". If you deny this you are blind to the facts.2. So, the line of reasoning in which we say "Did you choose to...." -> "No" ->"Then this is inborn", is fallacious.Everything else, like how we understood each other's words, is completely irrelevant. You seem to have a talent for misunderstanding people, or maybe a talent for pretending that you misunderstand. Either way, I have no intention of playing your silly games. If you have something to say about (1) and (2), not stupid questions like "Did you choose to be straight", but something concrete - then I will answer.
Debate: First gay couple on disney channel
Side: It's about time

You seem to have a talent for misunderstanding peopleRight back at you.
Debate: First gay couple on disney channel
Side: The kids are too young

Right back at you.Thanks. But I didn't need talent to misunderstand you.You started the dialog by asking me 3 stupid questions, the first one was:YOU: "Did you choose to be straight?"My mistake was to dispute the implications of this, so when I asked you:ME:"No, I didn't choose to be straight - so what?"YOU: Answer to something else.ME: "So, what was your argument? I was answering the implied argument as I understood it, but to continue debating I have to know whether or not I understood correctly."YOU: "Maybe I don't actually feel like debating you."So, it was your talent for keeping away from the central issue and debating some rubbish, that kept this debate going. And my lack of talent for guessing your thoughts, however I suspect there was not much to guess: you began with the stupid mainstream "Did you choose to be" stereotypes.
Debate: First gay couple on disney channel
Side: It's about time

Thanks. But I didn't need talent to misunderstand you.Your talent comes from misunderstanding after being told what is meant. That does take talent.
Debate: First gay couple on disney channel
Side: The kids are too young

Your talent comes from misunderstanding after being told what is meant. That does take talent.You refused to tell me what you meant by asking your initial question "Did you choose to be gay", and what were the implications of my answer "No".Until you answer that, there's no way for me to understand your initial argument.
Debate: First gay couple on disney channel
Side: It's about time

You don't understand other things, why would I want to spend time elaborating only to have you not understand me?
Debate: First gay couple on disney channel
Side: The kids are too young

I could understand or misunderstand other things only in context of your main argument.And I did not ask you to elaborate, but to state your initial claim. The question fo "addiction" could only be discussed in light of it.
Debate: First gay couple on disney channel
Side: It's about time

I am bisexual Srom. This is very personal for me. Do you really think I am this horrible person or am I guilty of a fallacy>
Debate: First gay couple on disney channel
Side: It's about time

I almost agreed with your point but then you had to go a step further and say 'support what is wrong'. So yeah.
Debate: First gay couple on disney channel
Side: It's about time

The only thing which should sicken any one is how you much displeasure you get other two people who love each other being happy together.
Debate: First gay couple on disney channel
Side: The kids are too young

Okay if two people who love each and our happy then why don't people marry their dog or horse? Or sister/brother if that's the case? They love each other now don't they?