azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: No

That has nothing to do with education and everything to do with indoctrination to a lifestyle !
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: Yes

"Optional classes" is in no way "indoctrination". You are trolling, OR you are misinformed. Pick one.
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: No

You are a homosexual, or you are not, or you take the middle ground supporting their dirty butt buddy behavior as a homophobe who is afraid to say what they do is wrong and is afraid to bend over and be their butt buddy for real instead of pretending like you support them.Which is it:A) A real life butt buddy of sodomite dogsB) Opposed to homosexuality and all sexual indulgences outside of a man and woman who become one flesh in marriagec) A homophobe who is afraid to bend over and be a real butt buddy while in fear of the faggots cannot stand up like a man and say what they do is perverted; wrong.My guess is that you fall under "A", and that is why you represent yourself as a faggot-fashion cartoon character.
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: No

No, that sounds a little gay.
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: Yes

lol.........................................................................
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: Yes

Yes it does. Less reproduction is happening so the worlds overpopulation becomes slightly less of an issue.
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: No

Homosexuality only seems to be making inroads in western societies, where there's already a negative population growth due to low birthrates, so it wouldn't help alleviate your mythical world overpopulation anyways.
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: Yes

Why should that be the criteria?
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: Yes

Because if there's no benefit, then it's a waste of valuable class time. Can you think of a reason why something that offers no benefit should be taught?
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: No

Because the class itself has benefit.That's kind of how many classes work. The topic itself does not inherently offer benefits unless one takes a class on it.Education and what not.
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: Yes

That's your opinion - mine is that there is no benefit to society in teaching homosexuality. Since you're taking me to task on my opinion, I'd think you could do a bit better than simply playing the contrarian without backing it up with why.
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: No

Lost my password (This is TrumpsHair).Homosexuality is a topic which many children know very little about, let alone other forms of sexuality. Children should be taught sexuality in general in their Sex Ed classes to that they can be knowledgeable on the topic (Again, like how classes are supposed to work). Without said education, they will be responding to situations from a position of ignorance, be it homosexual individuals not using protection, or heterosexual people assuming that homosexuals are child rapists (as an unfortunately large number do think), etc.Simply being educated on what it is would go a long way to alleviating the bigotry that exists in my part of this country. I'm not talking about having the teacher go on a "Gay is OK" lecture, by the way.
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: Yes

Fine, if preventing disease is your concern (ie unprotected homosexual sex), then simply have schools discourage homosexuality all together. Since homosexuality does absolutely nothing for the gene pool, from a cost/benefit perspective anyways, there's no logical reason to discuss it in a positive light. If schools are to reference it at all, they should approach it as something to be avoided. To say they should be taught something, SO THAT they can be knowledgeable on that thing, is merely begging the question. Why ought children be knowledgeable on homosexuality?
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: Yes

Fine, if preventing disease is your concern (ie unprotected homosexual sex), then simply have schools discourage homosexuality all together. Since homosexuality does absolutely nothing for the gene pool, from a cost/benefit perspective anyways, there's no logical reason to discuss it in a positive light. If schools are to reference it at all, they should approach it as something to be avoided.Which makes no sense for the purposes of education on a subject such as this. It seems, and correct me if I'm wrong, that you are under the impression that homosexuality (and sexual orientations in general) are something that is chosen. Am I correct?
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: Yes

No you're incorrect, I believe sexual inclination is not necessarily always something that is chosen. The sexual acts themselves, however, are most definitely a choice. So if anything has to be taught on this matter, it is that these acts are unnatural and deviant and should be overcome.
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: Yes

You've put yourself into a corner. You are saying that one doesn't choose the sexual orientation, which is a good start. You then say they do choose the acts (makes sense, considering most acts are indeed chosen). But you finish it up by saying the acts are unnatural, despite the fact that homosexual acts are done by dozens upon dozens of species (and the "deviancy" really is irrelevant).So your main argument left is that it is "deviant" (aka statistically abnormal). If we refused to teach anything that was statistically abnormal, we would truly be failing our children.
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: Yes

The homosexuals I know who would have benefited from being taught about how their sexuality would express itself beg to differ.The trans people I know who spent years thinking they were monsters and broken due to lack of education beg to differ.The bisexuals I know who thought they were "just confused" due to poor education beg to differ."humanity" includes the LGBT community, dontchaknow.
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: No

Well I don't know all those homos, trannies and bisexuals that you do, so your argument amounts to nothing more than your own relative feelings. Sounds more like they could've benefited from a visit to a shrink instead.
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: Yes

Why on Earth would you say something so absurd as that? Do you really think that anything other than strict heterosexuality is a mental disorder?
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: No

No, but your comments re: how they needed to be taught how their "sexuality would express itself" or "thinking they were monsters and broken" or how "confused" they were, really does sound more like a professional is needed, rather than a gov't educator.
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: Yes

Those thoughts are what happens when people aren't educated properly on sexuality. Not including LGBT things in sex education causes these things.Edit: To make my point clear, you said "There's no rational reason - homosexuality offers no benefit to society."I'm arguing that teaching kids about the different kinds of sexuality is of great benefit to society, because it stops the sort of emotional angst I mentioned earlier.
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: No

You're assuming homosexuality isn't immoral, thus you claim people aren't educated "properly". I think it is immoral though, thus there's no benefit to society to teach immorality to kids. Do you think my comments on homosexuality are immoral?
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: Yes

I think you are sorely mistaken, and that homosexuality isn't remotely immoral. There is no reason to think that. They're not hurting anyone, it's consensual sex between willing adults, so why would it be immoral?
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: No

A man marrying his dog doesn't hurt anybody either. Do you oppose that? If so, on what basis? Whose standard are we using for morality? I'm using God's standard, thus homosexuality is immoral. What moral authority are you appealing to, in order to claim that it isn't immoral?
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: Yes

The dog can't consent, so it's hurting the dog. I'm using the idea that, so long as something is safe, sane, and consensual, it is okay. Incidentally, and I'm not trying to cause offense here, but where in the Holy Bible does it state homosexuality is against Gods will?
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: No

Ok, so now I know why you're using that argument, but tell me why anyone else should have to adhere to it? What authority do you have to impose the idea that whatever is "safe, sane and consensual" is somehow okay? If someone disagrees with your moral code, who is right? Ultimately you're arguing for subjective morality.Leviticus 18:22 (and elsewhere) refers to homosexuality as an abomination to God.
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: Yes

True, but by restricting things like LGBT lessons you too are imposing your personal moral code on others. The difference is, my moral code allows people to make their own decision (there's nothing in "safe, sane and consensual" that forces you to be homosexual), whereas refusing access to classes like this simply because they disagree with your personal beliefs causes real tangible harm to people (I made this point elsewhere on this board, but I've known a few people who thought they were broken, or monsters somehow, because they didn't know it was okay to be gay/bi/trans)Leviticus is of the Old Testament, and that has sections that demand I be stoned to death for working on a Sunday, and its opinions on rape are frankly horrific. Why is it okay for me to wear clothes of mixed fabric (which somewhere in Deuteronomy states I'm not allowed to), but unacceptable for me to love another man?
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: No

You're approaching this as if it's "ok" to be homosexual. You presuppose that homosexuality is normal and moral - but on what basis I wonder? From a naturalistic point of view, homosexuality is abnormal and not beneficial to our species. From a moral perspective, without God there can be no objective morality, only subjective opinions, so one can't really say that it's right or wrong. Without an objective authority, how do you claim it's "moral"?
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: Yes

Aside from the fact that holding up Leviticus makes you cupable for condoning murder of many, many people, who are you to tell anyone something is morally wrong if it isn't hurting anyone and is consensual?Ultimately, you are arguing for subjective morality as well. You just don't see it as such :P
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: No

Same as you I guess, since you get to tell people that something is morally right just because it meets your arbitrary standards of being consensual and not hurtful. That's fine if you want to live that way, but why do you get to impose those standards on others? It's actually not my subjective opinion, I'm merely a messenger reporting God's message. He's the One who decides what is and is not moral. I'm arguing for His objective morality.
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: Yes

That's fine if you want to live that way, but why do you get to impose those standards on others? We are discussing an optional class on LGBT matters. That isn't imposing anything. If nobody wants the class, nobody will attend it.It's actually not my subjective opinion, I'm merely a messenger reporting God's message.Other people who also follow your Gods message disagree with your interpretation of it. Furthermore, there are other religions out there. Why should your chosen religion, and your chosen interpretation of said religion, dictate choices can and can not be provided to others?
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: Yes

No, I get to tell people that I find something to be morally right. I can also argue with people as to why the Harm Principle is, in my opinion, the most legitimate standard. As for imposition, it's the only standard that can be legitimately applied, particularly in societies predicated upon Post-Enlightenment Liberalism such as Europe and the United States. Anything beyond it is an undue infringement upon negative freedom.And yes, it is subjective, you just don't think it is :P. You still "chose" (I hate that word as it relates to religion) your particular belief system, and your morals are still uniquely your own within that given belief system as well. So it is definitely still subjective.
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: Yes

Dogs are incapable of consent, either sexually (meaning that what is involved is rape and thus harming it) or legally, which means one can not marry it.Additionally, you are using your opinion on what God's standard is; an important distinction.Since you can not prove your morality, and nobody else can really prove their morality, why not just accept the Harm Principle and move the f--k on (I mean that for everyone, not you)?Seriously, you can hold that it is immoral, but people still need to understand the basics of what is actually involved simple for the sake of being educated.
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: No

NO. Where does it stop? We are already seeing some bullshit about a man who swears he is a 6 year old girl. And people who are supporting pedophilia. And Bestiality. This is why my kids won't be going to a public indoctrination center before they are old enough to think for themselves. "OMG he is comparing Pedophilia to gay rights!" Yeah, so what. Every reason gays give for being gay can be used for pedophilia. If they can use those reasons why wouldn't Pedos? "Because its wrong" wasn't being gay at one point "wrong"? Where does it stop? I am all for gay rights but the LGBT cult is too far.
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: Yes

heterosexual sex uses the same arguments as homosexual sex. The difference between them and pedophilia or beastiality is consent. A child or animal can give no consent, and so pedophilia and beastiality are reprehensible."I am all for gay rights" that's a funny thing for someome who just compared gay rights to pedophilia to say
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: No

Waste of time and money what could there to teach really that one doesn't already learn in sex ed about safe sex anyway, and all the relationship material you learn can be applied to all relationships.
Debate: Should Schools Hold Optional Classes On LGBT Things (gay relationships etc.)?
Side: No

Like I said on the left side. The school just needs a GSA.
Debate: Should School Prayer Be Allowed In Schools?
Side: yes

Give me one good reason why it shouldn't be an option. _____________________
Debate: Should School Prayer Be Allowed In Schools?
Side: No

They did that at my school. It was bullshit. Just a blatant attempt to make school an extension of the church. I never said anything because over 95% of the school was Christian and I didn't want to stand in the middle of a shitstorm.They said the other 5%, "doesn't need to participate". Right, we have the option to become a social pariah.They also didn't teach human evolution in Biology.Keep your faith out of my government funded institutions.
Debate: Should School Prayer Be Allowed In Schools?
Side: No

That's a very good point. My experience here in Irving was different because it's so diverse. I figured that if it was optional there could be other religious prayers for people of other religions. But in the setting of a 5% vs 95% ratio it's not exactly fair. That would suck. So you're right. The more I think about it, the more I see how complicated it could be. The less 'shitstormes' the better.
Debate: Should School Prayer Be Allowed In Schools?
Side: No

The less 'shitstorms' the better.lol. I want that to be the motto of our next President.
Debate: Should School Prayer Be Allowed In Schools?
Side: No

That brought back so many memories.In my school it was probably 98-99%! So big was the pressure that the 1-2 Muslim kids would cross themselves and pray "Our Father who art in heaven", just to avoid the isolation and the shitstorm! But they would never tell their parents. The more I think of it the more sad I feel for them. Sad and angry at the school for creating this segregation. School prayer, at least the one I experienced, where the entire school stands in rows outside and says a Christian pray in unison, is a practice that is designed for the purpose of subtly yet forcefully integrating all pupils into the one religion. It wasn't real prayer. It was a facade. We all did it because we had to, not because we wanted to. When I really wanted to pray, I would do it at home, before I set off for school.I completely agree with lawnman on the other side. And it's not just Christians. I don't know of any religion that condones public prayer of this kind. These kids didn't choose to get together to pray. As a matter of fact it does more harm to the religion than it does good. Because quite a few of my friends stopped praying and going to church altogether as soon as school was finished. I guess it was their way of "avenging" the system for making them do it instead of allowing them to seek it themselves.
Debate: Should School Prayer Be Allowed In Schools?
Side: No

Dude. This is like the most amazing thing anyone's ever said on this site.
Debate: Should School Prayer Be Allowed In Schools?
Side: yes

Yes you do have the option to become a so cial pariah.
Debate: Should School Prayer Be Allowed In Schools?
Side: NO

Hooray for group-think!
Debate: Should School Prayer Be Allowed In Schools?
Side: yes

There isn't one..........................................................
Debate: Should School Prayer Be Allowed In Schools?
Side: yes

i believe the option should be allowed but you did not really make much of a reason that suppoted your ideas.
Debate: Should School Prayer Be Allowed In Schools?
Side: No

Sorry Jake, you might want to read my post on this question before you request one good reason.
Debate: Should School Prayer Be Allowed In Schools?
Side: yes

Prayer should never be a requirement in schools.However, you should never remove someone's right to worship. That goes against every principle America stands for. Should we also remove the American pledge...Then any discussion of those silly holidays like "Halloween" or "Christmas"...Why stop with prayer...If you want a school to be completely removed from culture, isolate it. Alienate it. Allow no presence or influence of the outside world. Religious freedom also means religious tolerance. If a child wishes to pray, let them pray. If a teacher, a principal, any faculty member wishes to pray, let him do so. As a Christian, I would allow a Muslim or any other religion to practice that religion without a word of protest. I have the right to practice my religion, regardless of the location. No one is given the freedom from being offended. It simply isn't possible. Live and let live.
Debate: Should School Prayer Be Allowed In Schools?
Side: yes

it should because this country was founded on freedom of religion. prayer shouldnt be forced but it should be allowed. :)
Debate: Should School Prayer Be Allowed In Schools?
Side: yes

it depends on what you mean. school praying as in every one hums a chant to gather? or a silent time devoted to where every one can pray in their heads? i have to know if your talking about forced or allowed. but i assume allowed. i see no problem, and as the con writer wrote, your supposed to pray quietly and peacefully to God, the Pharisees in Jerusalem would chant and scream and buckle on their knees and yell "O God!" to purposely get attention so people would fell bad about their weak devotion. that is of course wrong and the Pharisees were indeed hypocrites, but don't get them confused with the regular Christan who likes to pray in school for some one or something because you are incorrect to say they are hypocritical. for Jesus meant those who acted self righteous, not those who came to God honestly for communion or help.
Debate: Should School Prayer Be Allowed In Schools?
Side: yes

What is school prayer?If it is a teacher led prayer session involving the entire, or part of the class and only one religion? Hells NO! For many of the same reasons listed above.If it is a single child praying as a result of his own faith. Heck yeah.However, I believe that knowledge of other peoples, faiths, and cultures is the key to defeating hate and discrimination.So if a teacher would like to conduct a lesson wherein every (within reason) religion and their preferred method of prayer is discussed, and even demonstrated, then I would advocate for that.For many reasons, this would be beneficial to children and society. Prayer, of all kinds, is a beautiful thing to watch and listen to. And by breeding a level of respect in children for other religions, we can cut down on hate crimes substantially.
Debate: Should School Prayer Be Allowed In Schools?
Side: YES

Well said. I agree. I prayed in public school all the time. My school distric didn't do much group praying. But I never felt comfortable at soccar games doing one big prayer with people I didn't know that where other religions than me.
Debate: Should School Prayer Be Allowed In Schools?
Side: yes

That is your own closemindedness.I'm not religious. So I can't know exactly how you feel, but I am asked too pray from time to time. My aunt is a born again Christian, and she often feels left out during family events like Thanksgiving dinner. Praying used to make me feel uncomfortable. But now I understand that I participate in prayers for the benefit of the others.Why does it matter if you pray with people of other religions, if you all pray to the same god?
Debate: Should School Prayer Be Allowed In Schools?
Side: NO

Wow I agree with you and you call me closed minded. Thanks. Anyways, all I'm saying is that I don't really like those kind of prayers. That's just me. I'm not against praying with people of other religions.
Debate: Should School Prayer Be Allowed In Schools?
Side: yes

You said, "But I never felt comfortable at soccar games doing one big prayer with people I didn't know that where other religions than me."That sounds to me like you're against praying with people of other religions. Or am I crazy?