azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: YES

Smoking's funHuh? smoking;s fun?And it doesn't hurt anybody unless they are standing right next to you inhaling it.That's why we want to stop it I take it you walk everywhere with a gas mask on because car exhaust fumes are far more harmful.No they aren't. and do you think we always smell car fumes? More commonly we smell smoke from cigarette
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

You don't think smoking is fun? You must have never smoked the good stuff.And if it "harms" (slightly annoys) the people standing near the smoker, take a step back or ask him to, seriously, its not that hard, thats what I do when someone is smoking a cig, I take a step back.
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: YES

You don't think smoking is fun? You must have never smoked the good stuff.There's nothing good to smokeAnd if it "harms" (slightly annoys) the people standing near the smoker, take a step back or ask him to, seriously, its not that hard, thats what I do when someone is smoking a cig, I take a step back.What if a few of them are around you? What will you do?
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

There's nothing good to smokeHave you ever heard of this lovely little plant called cannabis?What if a few of them are around you? What will you do?What, you mean like a mob of smokers that surround you and try and stop you from getting away? Thats a little over the top, but, lets say that did happen, hold your breathe and charge through them.
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: YES

Have you ever heard of this lovely little plant called cannabis?When has it ever been lovely?Thats a little over the top, but, lets say that did happen, hold your breathe and charge through them.You are mad if you were to charge through them. What if you hit into them?
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

When has it ever been lovely?Since it started growingYou are mad if you were to charge through them. What if you hit into them?Your debating a non-existant situation
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: YES

Since it started growingNo it still isn;t lovely.Your debating a non-existant situationI know, but for that we should be against smoking
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

Huh? smoking;s fun?Yes. That's why we want to stop itThat's like trying to petition to shut down a factory because you insist on standing right next to their exhaust vents and breathing in all the fumes. If that's your position, you deserve all the second hand lung cancer you've got coming to you. No they aren't. and do you think we always smell car fumes? More commonly we smell smoke from cigaretteYou can smoke cigarettes for years and years and not necessarily even have any adverse health effects; anyone who puts their mouth around the tailpipe of any car for, say, 60 seconds, will die. This is why I think it's funny people spend so much time bitching about second-hand smoke from cigarettes when there are a multitude of other sources of air pollution in the world, some a good deal more dangerous than cigarette smoke, although they are admittedly less smelly to non-smokers, and I think that's the real issue, here. Well, I'm sorry you don't like how cigarettes smell. Personally I think curry smells like a seasoned butthole, but you won't see me suggesting we should "stop" Indian restaurants on that basis.
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: YES

Huh? smoking;s fun? Yes.When has smoking ever been fun?That's like trying to petition to shut down a factory because you insist on standing right next to their exhaust vents and breathing in all the fumes. If that's your position, you deserve all the second hand lung cancer you've got coming to you.I always avoid those. You think I would want to get second hand lung cancer? No wayanyone who puts their mouth around the tailpipe of any car for, say, 60 seconds, will die.Who will do that?This is why I think it's funny people spend so much time bitching about second-hand smoke from cigarettes when there are a multitude of other sources of air pollution in the world, some a good deal more dangerous than cigarette smoke, although they are admittedly less smelly to non-smokers, and I think that's the real issue, here.People smoke more then the car fumes emitted. Most of the time the car's engine off. People can sacrifice their sleep just to smokeWell, I'm sorry you don't like how cigarettes smell. I have smelled it before. IT STANK like peanut butter mixed with those garbage in those cans.
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

I always avoid those. You think I would want to get second hand lung cancer? No wayYou don't get lung cancer from second hand smoke, there is a huge difference between catching a wiff of the smoke every once in awhile then inahling all of it into your lungs and holding it several times a day. Its like refusing to drink a glass of water because there was beer in it before and you don't want get addicted.
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: YES

You don't get lung cancer from second hand smoke, there is a huge difference between catching a wiff of the smoke every once in awhile then inahling all of it into your lungs and holding it several times a day. What do you mean? Its like refusing to drink a glass of water because there was beer in it before and you don't want get addicted.That's what I mean. I don't want to get addicted to alcohol
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

What do you mean?What do I mean? There is a huge difference between second hand smoke and smoking. Lung cancer is developed from smoking cigs (inhaling all the smoke and holding it in your lungs) several times day for years and year and years, catching a wiff of it will not give you lung cancer.That's what I mean. I don't want to get addicted to alcoholThere was a glass with beer in it, someone drank all the beer or it was poured out. Then someone fills it up with water, if you won't drink that because you don't want to "get addicted to alcohol" then you really don't understand drugs that well. Consuming a few small drops of beer (least potent alcohol beverage) that are to small to even be seen is not going to get you addicted, its not a "well, its different for everyone" kind of thing, its a fact, it is IMPOSSIBLE for you to even get an effect from that amount.
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: YES

There is a huge difference between second hand smoke and smoking. Lung cancer is developed from smoking cigs (inhaling all the smoke and holding it in your lungs) several times day for years and year and years, catching a wiff of it will not give you lung cancer.I know there is a huge difference.what you said is true, but the smoke still smellsConsuming a few small drops of beer (least potent alcohol beverage) that are to small to even be seen is not going to get you addictedHow do you know?
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

I know there is a huge difference.what you said is true, but the smoke still smellsOh no, you don't like the smell, guess no one is allowed to smoke anymore.How do you know?A more important question, how do you not know this? You really think that a few drops that are to small to even be seen can get you intoxicated and make you a alcoholic? Do you live under a rock?
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

When has smoking ever been fun?Well presumably there is a reason people do it in the first place, no? It's enjoyable. I always avoid those. You think I would want to get second hand lung cancer?Then avoid smokers the way you avoid exhaust vents; don't conspire to have them banned. People smoke more then the car fumes emitted. How could you possibly know that? Source? Most of the time the car's engine off. People can sacrifice their sleep just to smokeAnd most of the time a smoker isn't smoking cigarettes? You'd need to be smoking like 4 packs a day or more to be smoking for the majority of the day. I have smelled it before. IT STANK like peanut butter mixed with those garbage in those cans.But you see why petitioning to have something banned on the basis that is smells bad to you is silly and infantile? It's a completely subjective opinion.
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: YES

Well presumably there is a reason people do it in the first place, no? It's enjoyable.People may have forced them to do that and get addicted. Its hard to control themThen avoid smokers the way you avoid exhaust vents; don't conspire to have them banned.Exhaust vents don't come towards me. Smokers come towards meHow could you possibly know that? Source?too lazy to find source. also can't find. most likely lahAnd most of the time a smoker isn't smoking cigarettes? You'd need to be smoking like 4 packs a day or more to be smoking for the majority of the day.Yes most smokers do that
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

People may have forced them to do that and get addicted. Its hard to control themI don't buy peer pressure or chemical dependence as justifications for doing something. Regardless of who is pressuring you to smoke, it is your decision if you choose to or not, and you (and everyone else) needs to accept responsibility for their actions. As for addiction, speaking from years of experience, you only stay addicted as long as your desire to continue using is greater than your will and motivation to stop. In other words, once again, it's entirely a personal issue, one that individuals need to take responsibility for. Exhaust vents don't come towards me. Smokers come towards meThere are a number of things about exhaust vents that make them on par with smokers (i.e. they are going 24/7, smokers are not smoking 24/7, they are stationary making it so the area around them is a permanently distasteful area to be, whereas smokers move, meaning one might move by you but then quickly move away, etc.) but I get your point. Cars, then? Cars come towards you without your consent. too lazy to find source. also can't find. most likely lahIf "lah" means "I just made up a fact to support my argument but it turns out that fact doesn't exist," then yes, "lah" indeed.Yes most smokers do thatSlow learner, eh? I thought we just went over that you can't just bullshit statistics to support your argument. Especially if they're absurd assertions, as yours are, you should know I'm going to ask (as I have) where you got them. And then you're either going to decline to find them or be unable to find them (you were unclear before; you implied both) and then not only did you fail to make your point but you also make an ass of yourself. So why do you do this to yourself?More to the point, what is your source for being able to say that smokers on average smoke four packs a day?
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: YES

it is your decision if you choose to or notYou still have to take that into considerationthey are going 24/7, smokers are not smoking 24/7If smokers do not, then why are exhaust fumes exhausted 24/7Slow learner, eh?Are you the one?More to the point, what is your source for being able to say that smokers on average smoke four packs a dayAfter not being online for so long (4 days due to my exams) how can you expect me to remember?
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

You still have to take that into considerationThat it's an entirely subjective choice independent of addiction and peer pressure? Yes. That was my point. What's your point? My point doesn't belong in your dispute unless you are disputing it. I know we should take that into consideration; that's why I said it.If smokers do not, then why are exhaust fumes exhausted 24/7I'll give you an example. I used to work at a pool. The pool stayed headed and the water continued to circulate through the pumps all day when the pool was open and continued when the pool was closed. So we had vents outside the pump room dumping fumes into the air all day, every day. Are you the one?Wow. Ignore my argument and reply with the intellectual equivalent of, "No, YOU!!"To answer your question, no, I'm not, because I wasn't the one who made the same mistake I just got done covering my ass for literally directly after covering my ass for it. You did something along the lines of bullshitting/lying and I called you out on it, and right under your acknowledgement of the fact that you bullshitted/lied, you bullshitted/lied some more, and in a manner just as easy to recognize and refute as you did last time. So I'm not the slow learner, you are. After not being online for so long (4 days due to my exams) how can you expect me to remember?If you had a statistic and source memorized prior to our debate I would think you would be able to call upon it a mere four days later. If you didn't have it memorized I think it would be a simple matter to just look it up again. I don't have all the statistics I have ever used memorized but I think it's very reasonable for people to ask me to source them, and I do the work required to support my intellectual assertions when that happens. Do you, or do you just make irreverent excuses?Or you could just save yourself further embarrassment and admit that you just pulled that fact out of your ass, instead of going on defending that stinking, fecal-crusted piece of non-truth.
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: YES

I am not going to debate with you anymore. I give up.
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: YES

Although I know that giving up is not good
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

Smoke what?Tobacco and nicotine and tar, now that stuff's disgusting, and it'll kill you eventually. Smoke weed everyday, and you'll live a good, happy life.
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

I am not against smoking, but what I don't like very much is, that when people get lungcancer from smoking, I have to pay their hospital bill.
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: YES

I am not against smoking, but what I don't like very much is, that when people get lungcancer from smoking, I have to pay their hospital bill.That's why we are against smoking
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

Okay, but don't you think you should be against taxes instead of smoking?Because it isn't really the smokers fault that they get free lung cancer transplants, it's the government that decided this.And actually a lot of smokers are libertarian, because they want the age limit of and the prices down - so the typical smoker acutally votes for a liberal society. Which means they aren't voting for free lung operations and hospital visits.Do you understand, I know this is easy to misunderstand, so just tell me if you don't ;)
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: YES

Okay, but don't you think you should be against taxes instead of smoking?Why? the government won't get any money tooBecause it isn't really the smokers fault that they get free lung cancer transplants, it's the government that decided this.Do you mean they don't get free lung transplants? and its their own fault they smokeDo you understand, I know this is easy to misunderstand, so just tell me if you don't ;)I think I don't
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

Okat whatever.What I meant was, that when the smoker get's sick, I am forced to pay for his hospital bill through taxes.That is why I am against TAXES, not smokers. You should have free will to smoke, you shouldn't get free lung transplants.
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: YES

And the debate is whether you are against smoking, not taxesAnd why do you have to pay for his hospital bill?
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

And the debate is whether you are against smoking, not taxesI am aware of that. I was asked if I was against smoking, I said no. Then I wanted to give my reason for not being against smoking - because I didn't come here to just answer no or yes. I want to explain why my opinion is how it is.And why do you have to pay for his hospital bill?Because I live where the taxes are really high. One of the things the government use my money for is paying people's hospital bills.I have no problem with people smoking - but I don't feel sorry for them when they get cancer either.
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: YES

I was asked if I was against smoking, I said no. Then I wanted to give my reason for not being against smoking - because I didn't come here to just answer no or yes. I want to explain why my opinion is how it is.Then you should be against smoking because then you have to pay taxesI have no problem with people smoking - but I don't feel sorry for them when they get cancer either.They make you pay taxes. Why do you have no problem? Not feeling sorry for them is a good thing. They deserve it for smoking.
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

Then you should be against smoking because then you have to pay taxesNo I am not. You can smoke if you want, just don't take my money when you're dying from cancer.They make you pay taxes. Why do you have no problem? Not feeling sorry for them is a good thing. They deserve it for smoking.No one deserves cancer. It's a horrible thing to say that.
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: YES

No I am not. You can smoke if you want, just don't take my money when you're dying from cancer.Its the government who decidesNo one deserves cancer. It's a horrible thing to say that.Then ask them to stop smoking
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

No, we the people decide and the government regulates. So we could vote against taxes that go towards paying for people who suffer from poor health due to smoking cigarettes, thus eliminating, as you said, your reason for being against smoking: that you have to pay for it. This would still allow the civil liberty of being allowed to have a cigarette while also taking you out of the process of having to take care of them for it. Like: should be ban fast food or should we ban the taxes that go towards paying for the triple-bypasses the morbidly obese people who eat fast food inevitably need. Which would allow for greater personal freedom for all?
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: YES

we the people decide and the government regulates Depends on the type of government the country has.should be ban fast food or should we ban the taxes that go towards paying for the triple-bypasses the morbidly obese people who eat fast food inevitably need. Which would allow for greater personal freedom for all?You dun pay taxes for this situation. Fast food hardly makes anybody obese
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

It does depend on the type of government you have. A dictatorship or theocracy might decide for itself, and in a democracy the people decide. Theoretically. Which countries are we talking about, here?And yes, I do pay taxes for that situation. If some dumbass eats 4500 calorie fast food 3 meals a day, seven days a week until they are morbidly obese and need medical attention they are unable to pay for, I contribute towards paying it, just like everyone else.
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: YES

Theoretically. Which countries are we talking about, here?so what is it? Democratic?And yes, I do pay taxes for that situation. If some dumbass eats 4500 calorie fast food 3 meals a day, seven days a week until they are morbidly obese and need medical attention they are unable to pay for, I contribute towards paying it, just like everyone else.But for me I don't. Banning smoking can reduce your taxes
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

Loung cancer is not only deseace which can damage your health. There are variety of illnesses caused by smoking.
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: YES

Loung cancer is not only deseace which can damage your health. There are variety of illnesses caused by smoking.That's why we should be against smoking
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

I know but first your argumant was that it is bad only becouse of loung cancer , and I'm examining you that problems of smoking are deeper.
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

if people want to harm their own bodies by smoking, who am i to make them stop, it's not our problem, if you have tried once but they don't listen then you cannot really change their habits.
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

No, I smoke my self but I always smoke out door's away from people and always ask someone if its ok if they are with me. I also dislike people who want to ban smoking for good. This is my body and my life and I will put what ever I want into it. I know the risk's and the danger I'm not stupid but I live in a free country and will not be told what I can and can not put into my own body.
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

Am I against something people do on their own free will and have the right to do? No, I am not.
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

No, of course not. I have no right to deny someone else a personal choice that doesn't affect me. As other posters have said, it's incredibly easy to avoid second-hand inhilation of cigarette smoke, if you're even that worried about it. As for a government ban on the stuff...it appears too many people have forgotten (or just haven't learned) about the failure of Prohibition on alcohol in the 20's and how it created a booming bootlegging industry. There is always going to be a high demand for drugs and in general anything with intoxicating effects. Treating these matters of personal choice as criminal issues rather than medical issues is downright preposturous. Furthermore, if someone is addicted to cigarettes..why does it make sense to jail them rather than give them the means to break their addiction? Seems to me they're worth more to society if they're put on a path towards....working, and stuff.
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

I'm not against smoking. I'm against cigarettes. Prevention is better than cure.
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

Ok. I started smoking when I was 17. I would like to think I have control as I smoke only once a week. I disagree with people that think it is morally wrong because whilst it does damage your body it is still yours. If people are smart about it smoking might be considered socially acceptable again
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

I hate cigarette so freaking much but that doesn't mean that everyone else should stop smoking. It's their right to smoke. I mean it can literally kill you but it's not up to me to decide it's up to the smoker.
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

Weed is fine, and so is tobacco. It is that chemical shit that they add that gets ya. Both weed and tobacco have been smoked for centuries with minimal effects but then some idiot started adding bad stuff. There is more to this story than meets the eyes is all I am saying.
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

Since smoking is not illegal, people do have the right to smoke.
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

i am not against smoking i am a smoker myself and i dont see nothing wrong with it and for those of you who do no one cares so why argue!!!!!!!!!!
Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: YES

Well, smoking causes cancer. And, Nothing wrong? there are many things wrong with smoking! It's not fair on the people with asthma!
Debate: Are You As Sick of the Sexism on The Internet as I am?
Side: Yes! Yes I am!

That particular debate is a farce but yes, I am sick of sexism everywhere. When I first joined this site I participated in several debates about sexism and came up against astoundingly ignorant and hateful counterarguments. I do believe things are slowly changing though so the best we can do is perpetuate the trend by educating where we can and chipping away at misinformation and ignorance.