azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: yes

I have been a smoker for a long time. However, I am of the view that the tobacco should be banned because (a) it is addictive (b) it takes away many choices after it becomes an addiction (c) its use has many health-based issues and it is scientifically proven (d) it has an economic value, which money saved, can be used positively.Tobacco can only have limited usage for medicinal purposes and like many kinds of poisons, shall be banned except for scientific and medicinal purposes. The argument about "free trade" etc. does not hold good. If we extend the same arguments, the world should have been free of hunger, poverty and many diseases by now. Period.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: yes

There is other side/aspect to this argument. People who claim that they can be killed by smoking as by anything else DEPEND on the WELFARE SYSTEM or Free Medical Service system in countries like New Zealand. WHY the Government and people's taxes shall support someone's bad habits and the medical issues generated due to those bad habits. Why that enormous burden on public exchequer shall not be utilised for better medical care to those who live a healthy lifestyle and keep away from tobacco - chewing or smoking or intaking in any other manner whatsoever!? I am all for ban on tobacco products in market - every kind, except for medicinal and scientific purposes.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: no

In the united kingdom smokers pay huge amount of tax on their cig and tobacco around £5/6 for 24 so if you smoke lets say 200 a week to make this easy your paying an extra 50/60 tax a year. Additionally, there is evidence to show that smokers, within the UK, put more money into the nhs than what they take out meaning that the tax payer isn't paying for the implications of the bad habit the bad habit is allowing for more medical treatment to be available.Furthermore, please tell where you would find the money lost through the tax on tobacco if you banned it your looking at finding billions of pounds suddenly needing to be found a lil fact In 2009/10 tax year it was estimated to be £10.9 billion. Taxes as a result would be soaring taxes to fill this gap.....
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: yes

I have smoked for 22 years and am having a terrible time quitting. It is a nasty habit. There is nothing good about tobacco. It is proven that it kills thousands of people yearly. How can tobacco companies get away with killing people knoingly. Isn't that murder. Anyone else who knowingly kills another person let alone thousands upon thousands of them would be charged with 1st degree murder. What makes these people any better. Oh, that's right it's because the government makes millions on taxing cigarettes so they will just look past the whole killing people thing. Prescription drugs that have adverse affects get recalled, so why not tobacco. It's not right to purposefully go around getting people hooked on something you know damn well will be almost impossible for many of them to quit and will kill tonz of people nad anyone who can do that for a living to make a profit off of someone else's suffering should be embarrassed to be a human being, and should not be allowed to keep doing this to people for one more second. And the government should be ashamed for allowing this to go on for so long. They are all putting money before peoples lives. Shame on you all.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: yes

The issues of tobacco smoking are complex, Only the individual user can change his/her mental attitude as to the deep seated need for polluting their bodies /and the whole environment with numerous toxic substances, We as a society have allowed many other polluting elements into our everyday existence, creating a no win situation. Tobacco smoking is one of the most invasive yet preventable habits. By respecting ones own body, and taking responsibility for their own actions, goes a long way to stomping out this destructive habit, thereby bringing down the criminal Tobacco Empire, The truth of the matter is Anyone taking up smoking is causing many people through second hand smoke untold misery, and morally speaking is inexcusable.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: yes

I'm very worried about a family member who drinks too much and smokes too much, its time to ban it we don't need drink to get high or cigs, we can get high with things like music and just having fun by other means even sex if you like.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: yes

you only don't want to ban tobacco because you are way to addicted to it if you were not like me then you would want to ban it.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

Yes, tobacco is very bad for you, but mostly because the cigarette companies add so many harmful chemicals to their products, like tar, formaldehyde, ammonia, nail polish remover, CO2, and many more.I don't think they should be banned, because the industry is full of money and if cigarettes were banned, the economy right now might not be able to handle it. However, cigarette companies should be held accountable for the things they put in cigarettes. I think they should go back to just plain old tobacco or be fined if otherwise.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: yes

people die all the time! get rid of them all of my parents smoke and my grandmother got cancer a couple years ago and my other grandmother was put in a hospital 2 days ago cuz of it
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: no

If you believe tobacco should be banned because too many people die from it, then I guess we should also ban alcohol, processed foods, and fast food chains. Believe me, I strongly detest the tobacco industry and everything it stands for. I'm going to be a doctor and I firmly believe that we should all avoid smoking and drinking and eating poorly. But to legally ban something simply because it can ultimately cause cancer? What happened to free choice? Maybe I want to smoke because I don't care about my body?At the end of the day, banning it won't solve anything. Especially because typically making a product illicit enhances the desire to use it in a rebellious way. The true solution is to heavily tax these products so that the revenue they create can offset the cost of medical care and preventative care.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

Of course tobacco is malevolent physically and mentally. However the problem is not the substance, it's the abuser. People use these materials like smoking and alcohol and drugs to self-medicate and get a buzz, but they rely on it instead of fixing themselves. So instead of spending god knows how much tax dollars trying to eradicate it and keep them away from it, why don't we instead focus on these people's troubles and reduce the need for it altogether.Think back to Prohibition.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

You know p6667, I've been smoking longer than most of you have been alive! The government taxes the hell out of tobacco and in all the years I've been smoking I've not been asked, NOT ONE TIME, if I need help with quitting and that our tax dollars might pay for it. I'd love to know where this money goes!
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: yes

Tobacco doesn't compare to other drugs in terms of buzz. Alcohol makes people feel good and more outgoing. Cigarettes don't do much besides getting you addicted and making you look like an idiot.Good point about tax dollars though. The War on Drugs has shown us the futility of trying to enforce a ban. But there are better ways to curb tobacco use, like taxing the hell of it, for example.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

tobacco is a stimulant while alcohol is a depressant. the only reason why people think they feel good is cause they get really stupid when shit faced. but really, anyone who has drunk a lot doesn't actually feel good. it's a party drink, and it fucks you up.it doesn't drown away emotions, just makes you sadder. this is why people are much more likely to commit suicide when intoxicated. smoking usually makes people feel like they can work harder while not altering their mind or body majorly. it's a boost, while relaxing them at the same time.plus, drinking and driving is a much bigger endemic than second hand smoke (mainly because second hand smoke has been proven as a TRUE killer). it's considered just as harmless as fueling up your own car.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: yes

"it doesn't drown away emotions, just makes you sadder."This sure as hell isn't what happens to me. Or anyone I know for that matter. Have you ever been drunk?When I'm drunk I feel confident, outgoing, and yes happy.Note that I'm talking like 6 beers here, not completely shitfaced.And even the few times I've gotten shitfaced I didn't feel sad, I felt basically the same as before, only drunker. You do understand that the word "depressant" doesn't mean "makes you feel sad", right?I can't tell what you're trying to say in your last paragraph. What do you mean by "second hand smoke has been proven as a TRUE killer"?Anyway, drinking and driving is indeed a problem -- that's why we have laws against it.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

right, put words in my mouth.it only makes you sad when you were sad to begin with. it eliminates ability to control your emotions.but w/e, i'm only going by what psychologists say.and, like i said, second hand smoke has not been proven as a true killer.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: yes

"it eliminates ability to control your emotions."No, it diminishes your ability. Important difference. Even when I've gotten completely shitfaced, I have never violated any of my core values, and I've had opportunities to do so. I have done things I probably wouldn't have done sober, but that's half the point of getting drunk."and, like i said, second hand smoke has not been proven as a true killer."Actually, that's the opposite of what you said.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

o, then i've made a typo and i apologize.i meant to say "hasn't".
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: yes

Well I think you're honestly wrong, if tobacco was never created there wouldn't be any abusers. how can you abuse something that wasn't created. its all about money and the government don't care what happens to you they keep this product to keep the money going and the population down. its messed up but so true... people shouldn't be blamed by a temptation that is shown everywhere. would u get mad if u saw someone tease a baby with candy and them not give it to them it? that's the same thing here.. they're teasing people and giving it to them.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

Good Lord no! The government wants their fair share, the hypocrites! They will never ban it and I don't think it should be but I'd like to see it more fairly taxed!
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

If tobacco is banned then, as stated previously by someone, the government would just find something else to make money on. Ya know, marijuana is made illegal and yet cigarettes and such aren't, and they're much more bad for you than such other drug. Do you hear of Cancer patients smoking cigarettes to help them eat without hurting their lungs. The only con of the example stated is loss of short term memory. But no, cigarettes and other tobacco products are addictive stimulants that people say help relieve stress but actually strengthen it. It hurts your lungs and shortens your's and others' lives. Plus it makes you smelly. My argument is rather twisty and doesn't fit at all with my view, and it has really nothing to do with the debate, but I figured that I should just put that out there. Marijuana was selected as an example, by the way, because it is one of the very few drugs that isn't actually really bad for you at all yet is still illegal, whereas tobacco (a substance of horrible side effects and no pros at all) is legal. So... yeah.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

I smoke cigarettes and cigarillos occasionally but I've never had a habit of it. I'm okay with them as long as they are outside. Banning it would drive it underground and would just make the traffickers and Native Americans a lot of money.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

Any argument on the positives or negatives of cigarettes is quite honestly pointless. What you are suggesting is not greater education about the dangers of smoking or a government program to help smokers quit if they wish, but simply a complete ban on the product. This is not practical nor is it ethical in our society. We have seen this exact sentiment in the past, "because I think it hurts you and the people around you, I'm gonna make you stop doing it." Bad way to think because even if you do not get a ban, you still promote discrimination against the smoker which really doesn't help anyone. So really this entire argument comes down to one argument, does anyone really have the authority enforce their morals on another?
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

Making tobacco illegal doesn't solve anything. Its all about moderation. If anything should be made illegal it should be the nicotine and caffeine that makes it so hard to personally moderate these products we crave.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

Nope, we need to ban fast food first. It's just as bad if not worse than tobacco. Idk, I guess I really don't care all that much. Everyone acts like it's the only thing that kills you slowly but uh, I mean honestly, is it?
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: yes

everything is killing us slowly. even oxgen kills us slowly. i think it should be banned because it has such a high mortality rate. not to mention my parents smoke and i dont want them dying anytime soon. plus it smells horribly! it sinks into my clothes and it won't come out! does anybody have a cure for that by the way? i was thinking something with baking soda but i dont know.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: yes

The only cure for the cigarette smell is to smoke for about 3 years, then you won't be able to smell it anymore.Buy them online from overseas, you won't have to pay our exorbitant taxes.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

My point is, if they ban cigarettes, they're just going to find another vice to get people hooked on. It won't change anything.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: yes

It wont change anything? Seriously? It would change the fate of more than 3 million people on this planet a year. If there was no tobacco my grandma would still be alive. Of course my grandmother and about 2.6 million of those smokers are smokers by choice the other 400k+ are second hand smoke inhalers. People that are subjected against their will to breathe all of the chemicals that are inside of that little paper wrapped carcinogenic treat. It would change the lives of a plethora of people. Another vice? Like what? There is no other vice like that of tobacco, it is the vice of the world.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

You people just don't get it. I don't know why people can't see the bigger picture.Yeah, sure, okay, we ban tobacco. But what will happen? Two things: Either tobacco will resurface illegally and people will still smoke and chew and eventually the government will break down and give in like they did during the alcohol prohibition. OR, now here's the kicker and I'll say it again: People will find another vice. You see the fast food industry? The amount of heart attacks people get? What makes you think that today's smokers aren't prone to getting hooked on that shit? They'll feed it to their kids constantly and the obesity problem will probably rise.If you think the people who profit off of Tobacco have no way of finding something else to get people hooked on to die miserably you have a LOT to learn.If it happens, you'll see.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: yes

... What smokers get hooked on is a chemical that MAKES your body PHYSICALLY ADDICTED to the substance the chemical is called nicotine. You must realize that people do many things illegally and on a very large scale. But if it was legal? A gargantuan scale. If tobacco is made illegal the number of smokers will dwindle that I guarantee. The food industry? Last time I checked McDonald's wasn't selling carcinogenic McNuggets. Or were they selling food that had a physically addictive substance in it? Oh wait no probably not.You as a person just don't get it. Nothing is going to replace cigarettes, if cigs are banned nobody is going to call anything legal that they come out with ' the new cigarettes'. Tobacco has been used since the Indians were around! And it has not gone out of fashion yet!Food is nothing like tobacco! If people are shoving their face in with food are they going to kill their family? Maybe their son or daughter due to second hand eating? No they are not. You are radiating incognizance to the point of where I find it unbearable!
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

Well, i really agree that people should stop smoking for the environment and health of ourselves, and future generations. but banning tobacco is useless, just like prohibition of other drugs like marijuana and weed. They are illegal, but still tons of people worldwide do them. all it did having people hiding in places where police officers are unlikely to find them to do them. and the negative effects of it are, it caused more crime and mafia-fighting etc. Of the number of smokers today, the prohibition of tobacco will be a complete failure just like the prohibition of alcohol in the US
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

Well, i really agree that people should stop smoking for the environment and health of ourselves, and future generations. but banning tobacco is useless, just like prohibition of other drugs like marijuana and weed. They are illegal, but still tons of people worldwide do them. all it did having people hiding on street corners etc to do them. and the negative effects of it are, it caused more crime and mafia-fighting etc. Of the number of smokers today, the prohibition of tobacco will be a complete failure just like the prohibition of alcohol in the US
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

If the idea of banning something is done in deference to the wishes of a vast majority of people, then smoking should be banned. In fact, Galileo was imprisoned because he went against the popular theory of the geocentric theory of the solar system. However, if we go by scientifically researched facts and direct experiences, then we have no ground whatsoever, to really ban smoking.It has not been proven that smoking causes cancer or in fact any damage to anyone whatsoever. One just has to google for research on tobacco, and you will find the research publications which give you the truth about the effects of smoking. In fact there is a school of thought which has found that smoking reduces / delays the onset of parkinsons disease and even alzheimers disease, improves alertness, and improves memory among other things. I have known, -and am sure that many others have- many people who have been smoking for many years altogether and they have no cancer, or any other diseases. I have not come across any person whose death has been diagnosed as arising from smoking. In fact, I have come across more people who had nothing to do with smoking ( active or passive ) and who have died of lung or other cancer. The human population is divided into those who are prone to cancer, and those who are not. Studying the correlation of smokers who die of cancer and ignoring smokers who do not died of cancer results in a spurious correlation.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

Myth one: Tobacco reduces the productivity of our workforce, therefore bad for the economy.Counter Argument:(1) Tobacco Companies have actually provided a significant amount of jobs for the unemployed.(2) Tobacco Companies are integral in the growth of our GDP, given the amount of smokers there are in society.Myth 2: Tobacco is poison to the body and therefore is morally wrong.Counter Argument(1) Smoking stimulates open-mindedness as it allows conservatives to interact with risk takers and to explore alternative philosophies to life.(2) Smoking can be a catalyst in aiding people to be more focused on socially positive attitudes by taking a stance advocating quality of life vs economical productivityMyth 3: Smoking is bad for your health(1) It prevents mental illnesses by providing an outlet for stress(2) It protects you from worser addictions such as:- sexual addiction leading to rape- heroin addiction leading to broken homes
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: yes

Myth One is right, but the others....Myth 2: Tobacco is poison to the body and therefore is morally wrong.Counter Argument(1) Smoking stimulates open-mindedness as it allows conservatives to interact with risk takers and to explore alternative philosophies to life.(2) Smoking can be a catalyst in aiding people to be more focused on socially positive attitudes by taking a stance advocating quality of life vs economical productivityMyth 3: Smoking is bad for your health:Yeah, it is.(1) It prevents mental illnesses by providing an outlet for stress:True, but it harms your body, called video games or trolling.(2) It protects you from worser addictions such as:- sexual addiction leading to rape:How?- heroin addiction leading to broken homes:How?
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

of course second hand smoke might be unhealthy, but if you arent smart enough to move away from someone smoking then well you might as well start smoking in the first place.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

I hate to say no. It does indeed kill, and deform babies. Believe me, I want none of it. But considering the numbers of acohol users when was banned makes me think that banning it will do no good. Banning acohol started gangs, and caused an underground industry to arise, and the government got no share. That's why they unbanned it, to get money, it's heartless, I know, but it's fact. As long as the government is making money from it, they won't ban it. I have friends who smoke tobacco, saying they want to quit. We need to start showing more and more programs to quit, to drain out the tobacco industry, and we won't have to ban it.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: No

SHOULD IT....bit to late to ban it now. I cant stand smoking , I wish I never started, its a dirty, addictive, stinky, costly habit......i tell myself i am stupid for just handing over 200 bucks to a hypnotist to try and quit. Ive tried patches,they gave me nightmares. Ive tried cold turkey,that just turned me into an even bigger bitch than i am now. I cough and wheeze and take another puff from the poison.My skin is grey and sallow and leathery.I cough phlehm every day. If you ban smoking, i will die,Or, go to jail for asault,or i will just go back to smoking the bark curls of gum trees(experimented at 7). I started smoking cigarettes when i was 11. I am now 37. I regret ever starting. My advice to kids- dont even start.My advice to non-smoking adults-good for you. In this day and age, we are well educated about the bad affects of smoking.If only this education was around long ago.BTW- a man has just sparked further research into the debate of smoking/second-hand smoking causing lung cancer.He has lung cancer and firmly suggests that smoking/second-hand smoke, is not the cause of lung cancer.....Ive lost the add but when i find it again i will post a link.
Debate: Should tobacco be banned?
Side: yes

Put a cigarette in stagnant water and let it rot a little, then remove it and put it in a tub. Every time you want a cigarette, sniff it.