azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: Yes, because...

The wall has 0 to do with racism.Actually for some it has everything to do with racism. With others, very little.You can't weigh the perception or popular beliefs of people accusing others of racism against the facts of impact in America caused by illegal immigration. Even if there is racism, building the wall is managing something illegal, and we are justifiably being reasonable to close off the access points into our country, regardless of who is on the otther side trying to enter illegally! "A memo to all, equally required, you will not be discriminated against, because you are ALL equally banned from entering our country illegally! Black, white,Mexican, Italian, Irish Muslim, Male, Female, Young, Old... All of you regardless of race religion, Age, Sex, all of you Immigrants we tell you equally, Don't come hwre illegally! All of you are welcome to come the legal way, so, come here that way!Its illegal, we have every judicial, logical, even humane reason to close it our borders That being said, this is not an issue presenting anyone an opportunity to call Trump, or others in government, or border control, or your fellow Americans ..."Racists"That is absolutely a false unsubstantiated accusation. You can't say that because, we want to stop ullegal entrance of immigrants, forcing immigrants to come in legally, that we are racists that hate Mexicans.It doesnt matter if some truely are racist, because there ARE some who are racist. But building a wall can't be a symptom you identify as racism, because the issue isnt whether or not we hate or like Mexicans. Its actually whether or not we should allow the illegal immigration that is outbof control and COSTING billions!!And also,Did you mean billions ot trillions? I havnt seen estimates in the trillions.I have seen estimates in the billions.
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: No, because...

The wall has 0 to do with racism.Actually for some it has everything to do with racism. With others, very little.You can't weigh the perception or popular beliefs of people accusing others of racism against the facts of impact in America caused by illegal immigration.Even if there is racism, building the wall is managing something illegal, and we are justifiably being reasonable to close off the access points into our country, regardless of who is on the otther side trying to enter illegally!So you start by saying that it has zero to do with racism, then you acknowledge that for some people, it does have to do with racism. That's self contradicting. "A memo to all, equally required, you will not be discriminated against, because you are ALL equally banned from entering our country illegally!Black, white,Mexican, Italian, Irish Muslim, Male, Female, Young, Old... All of you regardless of race religion, Age, Sex, all of you Immigrants we tell you equally, Don't come hwre illegally! All of you are welcome to come the legal way, so, come here that way!That only works if you make a norther wall as well. Nobody's proposing that, which makes it clear that it is directed towards Latin American immigration. That doesn't make it racist in nature, but it does make this statement of yours rather...illegitimate.Its illegal, we have every judicial, logical, even humane reason to close it our bordersThere are indeed plenty of legal reasons to do so, there are logical reasons both to do so and to not do so, and there are humane reasons to do so and to not do so. There are also economic reasons to do so, and economic reasons to not do so. Stop making this a black and white issue; it isn't.That being said, this is not an issue presenting anyone an opportunity to call Trump, or others in government, or border control, or your fellow Americans ..."Racists"It does when people such as SlapShot say we need the wall to keep "wetbacks" out. Those are the people for whom racism is a factor, and those are the people who deserved to have their racism called out. That's it.You can't say that because, we want to stop ullegal entrance of immigrants, forcing immigrants to come in legally, that we are racists that hate Mexicans.And I never have.It doesnt matter if some truely are racist, because there ARE some who are racist.Which was my entire original point that you, for reasons that aren't clear, disputed.But building a wall can't be a symptom you identify as racism, because the issue isnt whether or not we hate or like Mexicans. Its actually whether or not we should allow the illegal immigration that is outbof control and COSTING billions!!Again, I never claimed that "building a wall" is a "symptom". I said that for SOME people, racism is a relevant factor in their desire to build a wall. I even made it clear that it wasn't prevalent in the majority of supporters. You are arguing against something I never said.And also,Did you mean billions ot trillions?I havnt seen estimates in the trillions.I have seen estimates in the billions.Yes, I did indeed.
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: Yes, because...

actually you said this, i was resoponding back to you, my point was and still is, just because some people are racist against Mexicans, that doesn't make it wrong to prevent Mexicans from coming in illegally.Its wrong to accuse everyone of racial motivations.So even if " its all about racism for some, as you said, and others very little (to do with racism)" neither have a bearing on should we build or not build the wallYou- Actually for some it has everything to do with racism. With others, very littlemy answer to you was this part-You can't weigh the perception or popular beliefs of people accusing others of racism against the facts of impact in America caused by illegal immigration.Even if there is racism, building the wall is managing something illegal, and we are justifiably being reasonable to close off the access points into our country, regardless of who is on the otther side trying to enter illegally! "A memo to all, equally required, you will not be discriminated against, because you are ALL equally banned from entering our country illegally!Black, white,Mexican, Italian, Irish Muslim, Male, Female, Young, Old... All of you regardless of race religion, Age, Sex, all of you Immigrants we tell you equally, Don't come hwre illegally! All of you are welcome to come the legal way, so, come here that way!
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: No, because...

First, I never claimed it was wrong to try to stop illegal immigrarion. Second, I specifically said that it was a minority who was racially motivated.Why do you continue to respond to things I never said?
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: No, because...

Ok cool, sounds good. We should stop illegal immigration.
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: Yes, because...

For what reason? As I have pointed out, the economic justification is questionable. Do you have a different reason for wanting that?
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: Yes, because...

Wanting what, I don't want to build a wall blocking Canada.There isn't enough concern regarding illegal immigratin for that.So focus, should be in the Southern border, because thats the biggest problem area
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: Yes, because...

Except you have already established that the purpose of the wall isn't to address the largest part of the problem, but to address a part of the problem. You then continued to say that the intent was to block immigration of all races.Now you are saying that you don't want a northern wall because it wouldn't address the largest part of the problem, meaning the only immigrants you are actually trying to block are Hispanic.Now I'm definitely not calling you racist, I'm just addressing "A memo to all, equally required, you will not be discriminated against, because you are ALL equally banned from entering our country illegally!Black, white,Mexican, Italian, Irish Muslim, Male, Female, Young, Old... All of you regardless of race religion, Age, Sex, all of you Immigrants we tell you equally, Don't come hwre illegally! All of you are welcome to come the legal way, so, come here that way!" from you.
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: Yes, because...

Do you actually understand what you are saying?Or are you brainwashed?
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: Yes, because...

I can understand what I am saying just fine. Considering your consistent refusal to respond to what I am actually saying, it would seem that you can't understand what I'm saying.
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: Yes, because...

Can u provide numbers from each nation, how much illegal immigration from each in the US?Then also detail their entrance points.Also which Nationalities of immigrants are most likey to fall into the 1/2 you mentioned that stay beyond visas.A Border on one entrance point, does not take away fom strategies needed by other access points.We want all illegal immigration to stop.Here we are addressing the wall for that entrance point. A wall on the Northern Border is illogical. So they use intelligence and drones and other methods.Expired visas, if they are already here, a wall is ovviously not a strategy to apply. So they need to up technology and tracking visas.Refugees are a huge terror threat. No to all! And the views of women as cattle and the treatment of female children is an unacceptable mentality, and we cant vet them to the degree needed to safely bring them in without a huge risk.Unless they can reasonably illiminate the risk, then the answer is NO!So now I addressed a few other entrance points. And Im sure Im a "racist" because of the refugees, but public safety is mandatory.
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: No, because...

I already gave you the CBO report on the national cost of illegal immigration. Anything beyond that is pointless for this actual conversation, especially considering you seem incapable of understanding that I never accused you of being racist, and have only responded to things that you mentioned.
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: Yes, because...

That only works if you make a norther wall as well. Nobody's proposing that, which makes it clear that it is directed towards Latin American immigration. That doesn't make it racist in nature, but it does make this statement of yours rather...illegitimate.There is much less illegal immigration coming from Canada, although it's also a concern. Especially, in regards to terrorism. But, the Southern border has been a probem for decades!. Its illegal, we have every judicial, logical, even humane reason to close our bordersThere are indeed plenty of legal reasons to do so, there are logical reasons both to do so and to not do so, and there are humane reasons to do so and to not do so. There are also economic reasons to do so, and economic reasons to not do so. Stop making this a black and white issue; it isn't.We have to stop it. Its not a question of what is humane, no one wants to see people hurting, but they are Mexicos issue, not ours. Many countries are similar. I'm for people helping people, charity is a good thing, but if they can't come here legally, they can't come, and their condition of life in Mexico is not a factor to let them cross the border.That being said, this is not an issue presenting anyone an opportunity to call Trump, or others in government, or border control, or your fellow Americans ..."Racists"It does when people such as SlapShot say we need the wall to keep "wetbacks" out. Those are the people for whom racism is a factor, and those are the people who deserved to have their racism called out. That's it.I agree, people who are racist don't understand what American is. We are 1 American Culture, a multi- cultural, a-racial societyl
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: No, because...

There is much less illegal immigration coming from Canada, although it's also a concern. Especially, in regards to terrorism.But, the Southern border has been a probem for decades!.As you said, it is also a concern. So if you want to live up to your claim that this anti-immigration platform exists sans-race then you need push for the Northern wall. Otherwise that claim, which you made last post, is rather illegitimate.We have to stop it. Its not a question of what is humane, no one wants to see people hurting, but they are Mexicos issue, not ours. We don't have to stop it. As for if it is a question of what is humane, you are the one who mentioned humane reasons to stop it, I just addressed you bringing it up. Additionally, they are human issues, regardless of nationality. This "we've got ours, f--k you" mentality is dangerous on an international level.That being said, this is not an issue presenting anyone an opportunity to call Trump, or others in government, or border control, or your fellow Americans ..."Racists"It does when people such as SlapShot say we need the wall to keep "wetbacks" out. Those are the people for whom racism is a factor, and those are the people who deserved to have their racism called out. That's it.I agree, people who are racist don't understand what American is.We are 1 American Culture, a multi- cultural, a-racial societylSo why the hell are you disputing me based on things I didn't say if you agree with what I actually said?
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: Yes, because...

You dont make ecinomic decisions based on appearing or not appearing racistThat is one of societies biggest problems internallyIts ridiculous!And you stated earlier "not everything is a black and white issue!"This ridiculous thought pattern is just that.We are creating racism, by allowing it to make decissions for us, and everyone is basing their opinion on it.You ARE imprisoned by politically correct mentality.Your mind like others is trained to this racially infused ideology, that is taking away everyones freedom to say, think, do, and be free to have reasonable common sense without making the racial score card even.Its stupid!
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: No, because...

Yet again, your response has nothing to do with the comment you are responding to. I never said we should make economic decisions based on appearing racist. And to say that fear of appearing racist is a bigger problem than our crippling debt, our horrid social mobility, our obesity epidemic and dozens of other things is pointlessly hyperbolic.Fear of appearing racist is an INCREDIBLY small issue compared to the actual, legitimate issues this country faces.Now. Can you please start responding to what I actually say?
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: Yes, because...

Did you say, if we build a southern wall, primarily affecting Mexicans, then we have to build a Northern one, or its racist?
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: No, because...

No. This is the last chance I'm giving you to respond to what I actually say, or I'm just going to ignore you. I specifically stated that it had to do with your previous claim, not racism.
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: Yes, because...

Addressing these borders separately, and unequally is not racism.They are differnt issuesThey are different terainsThey are differnt in every possible wayThe answer is differentThe approach is differentAnd to say its racial not economicalWhy would we spend billions to keep Canadians out, when they are not comming here that way.Many Canadians and people close to the borders keep passports to go in and out for work or pleasure.If anything the focus would be on intellegence, making sure people in border control arent accepting bribes, and letting in terroristBut thinking if we address 1 with a wall (expese, and just simply changing the environment, with a wall is wrong.1st of all the border in the North would cost billions more, and it wont produce a reasonable cost vs value, and would not keep out terrorist.2nd of all the environmental damage, wild life and vegitation, NOT to mention flooding etc from blocking water flow and absorption.It would create NATURAL DISASTERS for everyone on both sides living near 4 out of 5 of The Great Lakes!
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: No, because...

Why do you continue to form responses that have nothing to do with what I actually said?
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: Yes, because...

Am I reading what you said incorrectly?I said this, and its an accurate fact: There is much less illegal immigration coming from Canada, although, it's also a concern. Especially, in regards to terrorism.Terrorism and illegal immigration is handled differently. A wall wouldn't address the northern issue;And a wall would address the southern issue.Also If a wall cost 30 billion on the Southern border, which is1,900 miles, and The Candian Border is 4000 milesAnd the terrain is pretty flat in Southern BorderAnd Mountainess Wilderness in Northern BorderThe cost per mile would be significantly higher on the Northern Border.Do you agree with this statement?
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: Yes, because...

Actually, this politically correct racially motivated view thats being accepted, particuarly in under 30 age groups, and the band wagon if older Americans that are jumping on board, though idealism or intimidation is adding to every problem. Socially to economically.Including spending and deficiet.Even our conversation proves that.If we spend billions here on this then its only right we spend billions there.The entitlements, the education, the amt paid supporting and even paying tax refunds to illegals, is a huge attack on our economy, and governments finacial stability. Federal and State. And our local economies.Then you have the racial issue within. Its costing us, in money and values. And its also costing us freedom. Even freedom of thought.Its sad, and tragic. But it is eroding society, and its very damaging.It is just as damaging as the issues you mentioned. Because its a main contributing factor in a social breakdown, dividing our country and its keeping people in poverty.I don't care how much we "even" society.No matter how much money you throw at it, its a waste till people decide to bring themselves up. And work on their situation with positive solutions, uniting, not dividing. We need to take race out of it completely!
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: Yes, because...

"As you said, it is also a concern. So if you want to live up to your claim that this anti-immigration platform exists sans-race then you need push for the Northern wall. Otherwise that claim, which you made last post, is rather illegitimate."this is what you said, correct?
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: Yes, because...

Yes. Note I never said anything about racism there.
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: No, because...

Then please tell me why you are saying if we address the southern border with a wall, we should also address the northern border?
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: Yes, because...

Because you claimed your immigration stance had nothing to do with race, was intended to fix a part of a problem even if it didn't address the majority of it, and was intended in large part to stop terrorists. You then said that terrorists coming accross the northern border was a concern.So not only have you demonstrated that your platform actually focuses on hispanic immigration (again, not calling you racist) but you have inconsistent justifications for this piecemeal approach.
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: No, because...

I didn't say, what you said, i said None of what you said right here, makes sense to me.Bottom LineI do believe absolutely that the wall on the Southern Border would handle the largest entrance point of illegal immigration.Terrorism is a separate issue. I am not talking about the wall for anything but that area. Because its the only place that a wall is applicableOf course the entrance from there is predominately Mexican. Its Mexico! But I attached an article that says, they are coming that way through the Southern Border. It must be well knownI don't care what Nationality is coming in
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: Yes, because...

I didn't say, what you said, i saidNone of what you said right here, makes sense to me.Bottom LineI do believe absolutely that the wall on the Southern Border would handle the largest entrance point of illegal immigration.It would handle the point, but not hte actual immigration.Terrorism is a separate issue. I am not talking about the wall for anything but that area. Because its the only place that a wall is applicableOf course the entrance from there is predominately Mexican. Its Mexico! But I attached an article that says, they are coming that way through the Southern Border. It must be well knownI don't care what Nationality is coming inI'm done. You are repeating the exact same thing over and over and not addressing any of my points. I'm going to just end this thread right here and now.
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: No, because...

I never said a wall would handle every problem in "immigration"In pretty sure ot is 1 of many strategiesBut it will significantly reduce entrance from the Southern Border.Which is the bulk of illegal entrances, of illegal aliens annually And its not just Mexicans, they are com8ng from many countries that way, including other South American Countries and Asian Countries
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: Yes, because...

The wall wouldn't even handle half of all immigrants coming from the Southern border.I have tried to get you to actually take a stance on the practicality of the solution given the reduced effectiveness of it, but thus far you haven't.
Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: No, because...

Your diet of liberal media and opinions prevent you from seeing a complete picture. I do try my best to stick with media you would accept, since anything consevative doesnt counterbalance your media diet.Example: You hailed Obama as the deportation king or cheif, actually he deported less than Bush Jr on avg per year!So info you had is FALSELike I said before, statistics tell whatever story you want them to.http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-obama-deportations-20140402-story.html During the Obama adm. they added the count of caught at border returns to the deportatation amt. And skewed the numbers."Expulsions of people who are settled and working in the United States have fallen steadily since his first year in office, and are down more than 40% since 2009.On the other side of the ledger, the number of people deported at or near the border has gone up — primarily as a result of changing who gets counted in the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency's deportation statistics."