azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

You said fuck what the law says.Anarchists don't care about laws.Anarchists believe in individualism.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

A - Yes I didB - I do care about lawsC - I don't believe in individualismConclusionD - I'll specify fuck what THIS law says.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

What kind of a "sport" is it when a person takes a gun and goes about shooting an unarmed creature ? What kind of a pleasure does it give the so called "sportman" ? Like the games people play "let jim, james, harry and I go and lick tom ", killing animals is at best a cowardly and selfish act. I can understand the killing of animals for food, which, though is odd in a civilized society, is a hangover from the days of the cave man and we have to go still some distance in abandoning our natural instinct of killing for power.No, i strongly urge that there should be a ban on any killing of animals and especially for sport.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

Whatever happened to the law against cruelty to animals? Duh they should be banned it is a violation of the law.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

Yes. If it is for fun. If its a necessity then, you can kill animals. Animals feel as much pain as we do.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

It is a chemical response in their brains. they are not aware of it as we are. They are not sentient.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

It is murder; simply as that.................................................
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

No, it's not murder. Murder is when one human being kills another human being on purpose, and last time I checked animals are not human beings. I don't doubt that 99% of people on this site eat beef. In the Bible, After the flood, God gave the animals as food for humanity to eat (Genesis 9).
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

In the bible God gave humanity animals to eat before the flood. the question i would ask you is why did god kill all the other animals that were on the earth surely this was a complete and utter disregard for every living creature on the planet including all the children and mentally ill that perished along with them.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!IT SHOULD BE BANNED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! what if you were that animal, then you just got shot or sliced or whatever? isn't that just cruel? killing animals for sport!?!? THAT IS JUST RUDE! RIDICULING MOTHER NATURE!!!!!!!!!!!!HOW DARE YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

Killing for fun is not only wasteful of life it is morally wrong. Killing for a reason is a different matter all together. Hunting for food and clothing is a natural thing it has been done since the dawn of life or soon enough thereafter. Killing animals for medicinal reasons I belive is an extension of that, and killing for pest control is another.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

Lets look at this topic from thee animal's perspective. Say you, a deer, are on your way home to feed your two children, when, suddenly, a gray ball hits you in the head. Cheers ring out in praise of Jim Henson's "nice shot". He yells "that hit's worth four points." How disguisting. Death, Desolation, murder, slaughter, mixed in with a bit of blood and gore, all for a few points and a day's entertainment. Those who belive in this mos vile "sport" disguist me. Those who cheer death and praise the unneccessary shedding of blood are a most loathsome lot.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

I think sports including cruelty to animals should be banned cuz animals do have feeling too, though they are not much intelligent
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: YES

50 points if you slaughter bambi!! now you think differently about it right?
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

fishing really is the only "sport" that i would accept. Hunting, bullfighting, and stuff like that, seem a bit too violent to me.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

Really? And why exactly would you accept fishing? People need to calm down! Its just hunting! Its a sport and its all in good fun.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

Really? All in good fun? I'm not too sure the one being hunted would agree.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

This world is survival of the fittest. Hunting helps control the animal population which otherwise, is taking up land that we need anyway. Even if they were not hunted, our actions as humans will kill them off slowly anyway. The only animals that are truly thriving, are the ones that we are farming. We are the superior beings and thats the circle of life(and death lol).
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

Humans are definitely overpopulated. What should be done about that? And why do humans need land more than non-humans?
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

Its not about NEED. Its the circle of life. Even in nature, the superior species will take more land. We are the superior beings. Survival of the fittest my friend.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

You can't honestly believe that we kill animals to eliminate competition and survive (a.k.a. survival of the fittest).And about taking more land... just because we can do something, we should? Humans are different from other animals because we can make the choice not to harm.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

We can make that choice you are right. However, it is a CHOICE. Your choices(ie not killing animals) should not be forced on others.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

I'm choosing not to harm/kill sentient creatures. So are you, when you choose not to go on killing sprees. But since that's your choice, should murder not be illegal? We wouldn't want to force your choice on others.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: YES

Animals should not have to suffer. I am against animal cruelty.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

No, killing animals can often be fun. And we've done it for thousands of years as a means of survival. Now we do it for entertainment, but the act is the same.Torturing animals, though, is different. It never helped us survive (unless you're a Pagan) so there's no reason to see it as part of normal, human instinct.But killing lesser species is part of our very nature. and, as I said, it's a fun thing to do.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

Besides, we're all a part of the circle of life. It's a natural human instinct to hunt for food. We're predators, and some people think that's too mortifying to think about, but there was a time when it was eat or be eaten. We're animals at heart. So why shouldn't we have the freedom to act like them?
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

Animals don't kill for fun. Animals kill for survival. We, on the other hand, are special in the sense that we actually have a choice. We can decide not to cause pain, we can even decide not to eat meat.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

Sure, we can. But we also don't have to. You'll become a pariah if you condemn it. It's a choice, yes. But it's also something people like to do, and the animal in question is going to return to the earth at some point anyways. We're animals. It's not a sin to act like one.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

Hahahahah, I believe that you just called me a pariah.The minimum length for an argument is 50 characters. The purpose of this restriction is to cut down on the amount of dumb jokes, so we can keep the quality of debate and discourse as high as possible.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

Once again, cute, but it's not very valid. Don't start with the sarcastic hate-laced comments. It won't get you anywhere. It won't.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

That wasn't sarcasm. I'm completely serious. Well, actually, I was amused, but I was serious about being amused. If you understand that.You'll become a pariah if you condemn it.As a vegan, I condemn purposefully and needlessly causing any sentient being to suffer. Hence my condemnation of hunting, fishing, omnivorous diets, fur mills, et cetera. So I suppose I'm a pariah?
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: NO

no because some people hunt to feed their families plus hunting is a fun sport
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: YES

What do you mean, unless you're pagan???And killing anything for such an unjustified reason is wrong.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: YES

He probably meant that pagans believe that if they don't sacrifice animals bad things will happen.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

You know what's also fun? Killing hobos. I mean, they're lesser.(Now is when the sarcasm font would come in handy....)
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

Hobos are also human, so they are not lesser.duh._ - -_ - -_ -_
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

So what separates a human from a non-human?The minimum length for an argument is 50 characters. The purpose of this restriction is to cut down on the amount of dumb jokes, so we can keep the quality of debate and discourse as high as possible.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

The homogeneous. Part of basic biology. - __ - - --_- - _ - --_ __ __ -
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

So things that are different are lesser?The minimum length for an argument is 50 characters. The purpose of this restriction is to cut down on the amount of dumb jokes, so we can keep the quality of debate and discourse as high as possible.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

No, things with a genus that is of a lesser evolution are lesser.We're all different, duh.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

By "lesser," I assume you just mean "less developed." Which still doesn't explain to me why non-humans are lesser.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

Because are not as evolved or adapted. Natural Selection put us on the top. They're lesser because we're higher.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

What is it about our evolution/adaptation that makes us higher?
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

evolved brain structure (ability to critically think, mostly).Through this, we were ABLE to conquer the world. The abilities that evolution has given us is grounds enough to show that are higher.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

So what about the severely retarded? (I've made this point in another debate, but here I go again.) Is a severely retarded human without the ability to think critically lesser than a "normal," functioning human?
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

if they lack the human brain structure, than yes. But even the severely retarded have a human brain structure.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

Incorrect word choice. you used "than", instead of "then".
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

But it's not being used.The minimum length for an argument is 50 characters. The purpose of this restriction is to cut down on the amount of dumb jokes, so we can keep the quality of debate and discourse as high as possible.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

nooo. hunting is a way to get food and survive. as well as fishing. If you abuse it and dont eat the fish you kill then i dont think its right but other than that there is no problem with it
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

I don't have a problem with hunting or fishing, as long as the animal isn't being beat with a club or bled to death or something cruel, and as long as we're not causing the extinction of that species.I do have a problem calling them a sport though. That's bs and I think hunters and fishers know it.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

I agree with the first part, but I know that when I fish with my grandparents we do it just to eat- fishing is BORING, but fresh fish is delicious! So, just saying...
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

I'm with you on this. Hunting and fishing are okay as long as there is no torture involved or wiping out a species, which basically is just not braking the law while hunting. And it's not really a sport. 20 points if you kill a deer! rofl.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: YES

you need to decide what side your on. you assume hunting and fishing involve torture or wiping out species, when there is no reason to make that leap. and hunting is a sport. it requires skill and mental and physical prowess. try it.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

IMO, animals do NOT have the same rights as humans. If a person is hunting, kills an animal, skins it and eats it, I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. Animal torture is wrong, though.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

Fishing doesn't have to cause harm to animals, and hunting can be a way of survival. What we can do is try to understand why some people find fun, entertainment and satisfaction in killing animals. And lock 'em up until we find a cure...
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

(a) How does fishing not cause harm to animals?(b) Yes, hunting can be a means of survival, but the question asked about killing for sport.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

a) In a great majority of cases you can catch a fish and release it without serious or long lasting harm. I slipped some adjectives in there to avoid wasting time in defining 'harm'. I just don't think you'll find many antisocial, potentially criminal, probably mentally ill people doing sport fishing.b) Yeah... But the description says 'activities'. Anyway, both questions are bogus. Killing animals in itself is not the problem. They taste good, they carry diseases, they destroy crops... You can think of a lot of reasons where exercising our species supremacy would be ok. The real problem is that some people find pleasure, satisfaction and fun in taking a life. You can't solve that problem by banning a sport. If anything you'll just make test subjects for finding a cure harder to find...
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

As a vegan, I can't agree that killing animals isn't the problem, but that's a whole different debate, so I'll avoid that topic.As for catch and release fishing, I certainly can't imagine that being dragged through water with a hook through your cheek is a pleasant experience.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

I really don't know if it's pleasant or not. As I said, I don't find it harmful enough to be indicative of a problem with the human engaged is such activities. It's very simple, and I'll try it one more time. If I see a man kill an animal for no good reason and derive some pleasure from it my first thought is not "Oh that poor animal!" It's "Oh that poor man is sick, can he be helped?" A few years back it would be "What a sick fuck I hope he dies a slow and painful death!", but I've grown. And that too is a whole different debate...I’ll say it again – the goal should not be to stopping animals getting killed because they're bound to be. Unless you firmly believe thay should and can all be made not to pose a threat to us in any way. It should be having less sick people around.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

What I've gleaned from that is that animals should be killed if/when they pose a threat to us. I have a few questions about that.Firstly, does that hold true for humans?Secondly, how in the world does a fish pose a threat?
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

I said that about threats because I don't think even a vegan can be opposed to self defense. I'm not saying you are, just wanted to save time. That right holds for humans too, of course. I personally extend every possible chance of a peaceful resolution to both humans and animals, but I can understand if someone is not skilled enough to deal with a venomous snake or insect or a carnivorous mammal in a way that doesn't get the animal killed. Humans>animals. That's the way things are and no amount of hysterics is going to change that.Secondly, how in the world does a fish pose a threat?Sharks?Again, in an effort to save time: Killing animals - OK in some cases, killing humans - NOT OK in most cases, the point - why are some people sick and how to help them, not the point - burying the sickness so we don't have to watch it on TV.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

I suppose the problem that we have is that we differ in the most basic of points that this debate offers. I believe that killing any animal is absolutely and undeniably wrong. You don't. I don't think we can get past that.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

Nowhere have I said that there is some arbitrary classification of which animals are to be killed and which ones are not. You’ve just made that up. This debate is not even about animals, and that’s the point you can’t seem to get past. It’s about humans and trying to identify what makes us human and how to preserve it. I believe those things to be, among others, compassion, empathy, sense of fairness, reason, etc. And none of those involve killing anything for fun. And all of those hold up if you kill in a life threatening situation, i.e. strong possibility of an attack, hunger etc.Just go about it from the other side, human side, your side. It will be much clearer…
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

So. Wait. Let me get this straight.You're saying that a debate discussing the legality of killing animals for sport doesn't involve killing anything for fun. And also that it's about identifying what makes us human and how to preserve it. So, let me extrapolate, killing animals for sport makes us human? And we should preserve that? And it doesn't involve killing anything for fun? Or, no, I'm sorry, it involves killing animals for humanity....
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

You are, once again, ignoring the fact that the debate starter doesn't seem to be a very intelligent person, and that he posed two fundamentally different questions. So you'd be best off not to extrapolate anything. My arguments are perfectly clear, whereas you have yet to produce one. I can only suppose that being a vegan prevents you to make any kind of a reasonable argument about this matter.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

Hahahahah. Clearly, we're getting nowhere. I'll just pretend like your perfectly clear arguments never wasted my time. :)
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

An argument with some snide italics in front of it is still better than no argument. You're just hammering in my point that no reasonable argument about this issue can be made by a vegan. ;)
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

I personally believe population control is very important.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

I agree. Controlling the human population is also very important. Let's break out the shotguns and go on a human hunting spree!
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

Cute.But I actually agree with that statement to some extent. The human population should be controlled. I think people should have to obtain licenses to have children. That is a very valid point. You're just heading it in the wrong direction.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

That is interesting. A license to have children? I'm creating a debate all over that one.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

i don't get it! either you kill or not, it is going to die some or the other day! then why fear?
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

Hunting has been a sport and a way to survive for thousands of years. We use hunting as a way to maintain a propor food chain, like if there is too many of one kind of animal in a small area we lower its population by hunting. Some people like eating fresh meat from the animals they hunted instead of meat thats been sitting in the freezer for who knows how long. Hunting is a part of life for people why stop now just becuase you think its wrong.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

Hunting and fishing are often for food. They should be banned for sport if the species are threatened, but otherwise most large game doesn't have any natural predators left- they need people as population control. Fisheries should be more controlled either way, for sport or not. However, killing animals humanely isn't inherently wrong, especially if it's better than the alternative.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: No

Fishing and hunting=good. I don't know anything about fishing. Hunting is fun and profitable.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: yes

You could be helpful and actually offer a rebuttal instead of just down voting my argument because you don't agree with it. I'm down voting your argument, if you want to call it such, because there isn't any. Also i have noticed that you down vote many arguments that are pro-animal rights or pro-vegetarian without any decent rebuttal, with the only apparent reason being that you don't agree with the opinion.
Debate: SHOULD ANY SPORT THAT INVOVES THE KILLING OF ANIMALS BE BANNED?
Side: NO

with the loss of natural predators hunting is the only realistic way to keep animal populations in check. look at deer in the united states. if hunting didn't help keep their numbers down they would overpopulate and die from starvation, auto accidents and possibly even poisoning when they invade gardens and farms looking for that diminished food supply.