azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: Yeah, screw them

"So..., why don't you take out your check book and write as much compasion as you can afford and show me a little compansion (not by giving me money but) by not taking my money away from me and giving it to a cause I don't believe in."Because, simply put, that's NOT how our system of govt. works, period. One does NOT get to pick exactly how their tax dollars are used. We live in a representative democracy, NOT a direct one!
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: Yeah, screw them

funny but i cant help but notice how joe keeps telling people to pull out their check books ,not just in this debate but throughout, you sure your not fishing for a handout joe. just saying.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: Yeah, screw them

OK, so let me put it to you simply. Right now, this very moment, as I type, in this country, there exists a law that states that GOVERNMENT MONEY CANNOT BE USED TO PAY FOR ABORTIONS!!!But you are welcome to try and change the law if you are so inclined ;)
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: No, let them be

What are you talking about?The Hyde Amendment, implemented in 1977, restricts the use of federal funds for abortion. These public funds can only be used when an abortion is needed to save the life of the mother, or when the pregnancy results from assault rape or incest.The government does not place any restrictions on how you spend your money. The government is not allowed (by law, see the Hyde Amendment above) to fund abortions that are not needed to save the life of the mother, or when the pregnancy results from assault rape or incest. Therefore (being the good semaritan that you are) you should take out your check book and write as much compasion as you can afford for those poor women who aren't getting a government subsidized abortion. Put your money where you mouth is. Or are you a hypocrite? It's real easy to be generous with someone else's money ;)
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: Yeah, screw them

Well, what happens when people start to have the option of opting out for paying for national "defense", the endless War on Drugs, prisons, etc., etc.??Let's face it, abortions are totally legal medical procedures which women have a Constitutional right to, period!This whole abortion issue is just a distraction from the main issue of health care reform. It doesn't amount to a roll of beans...
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: misunderstanding of democracy

Actually, there is no constitutional right to Abortion. Roe v Wade was an issue pertaining to a right to privacy. Abortion as a practice can be accepted however not funded as there are enough people in this country who are against the procedure weather it be moral, religious, or socioeconomic. And just because something is protected by the constitution does not automatically make it an entitlement.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: Yeah, screw them

Exactly............................................................................................................... !
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: No, let them be

I which the federal government did only those things spelled out in the constitution. One of them being to protect the borders.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: No, let them be

"I which [sic] the federal government did only those things spelled out in the constitution."Article 1, Section 8: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;"You mean like imposing a tax to provide for the general welfare of the United States by ensuring that all citizens are provided with healthcare?
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: No, let them be

Nationalized health care is not for the benefit of the U.S.Nationalized health care is for a small percentage of the population. Talk about the tail wagging the dog.And paying for abortions is definitely not for the benefit of the U.S. We need more natural born citizens than illegals.Stop trying to subvert this country with your socialist views. We didn't like the way the Brits ran their government before during and after the revolutionary war and we still haven't changed our minds. ;)
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: Yeah, screw them

"Nationalized health care is not for the benefit of the U.S."That's opinion, and seeing as America is only 36th in the developed world for healthcare (behind a load of countries with nationalised healthcare, including the UK and Canada), it's clearly an uneducated opinion at that. Please explain how countries with nationalised healthcare are ahead of the US in the WHO rankings if nationalised healthcare can not be of benefit to a country?"Stop trying to subvert this country with your socialist views. We didn't like the way the Brits ran their government before during and after the revolutionary war and we still haven't changed our minds. ;)"Falling back on "blah blah communism/socialism" is admitting that you actually have no real arguments to make. Like Godwin's law, but less informed of political theory. Such a shame. And I don't like the way our government is run either, because it's run far too much like yours.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: No, let them be

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.I don't believe in any socialist idea. They all start out sounding like a great idea and then reality sets in. Just like welfare. "Lets be compassionate and help the poor." And now we have generational welfare recipients. If your parents were on welfare, then chances are you will too. Somehow I don't think that is what was intended but that is the reality of the results.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: No, let them be

hmmm im suprised you havent used this excuse to defend abortions ,joe, seeing you think people should "pay for their own mistake"
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: Yeah, screw them

"Nationalized health care is not for the benefit of the U.S."Well, that's NOT what's on the table here in the USA at all right now, but I would disagree with your premise none-the-less."And paying for abortions is definitely not for the benefit of the U.S. We need more natural born citizens than illegals."You do know that one the main reasons that this country's population continues to grow is through immigration, don't you?? BTW, paying for abortions helps those low income women that can't afford to take advantage of their Constitutional rights.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: No, let them be

We don't want our population to grow due to illegal immigration. We should not pay for abortions and try to increase our own numbers. ;)
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: Yeah, screw them

"We don't want our population to grow due to illegal immigration."Ah ha! Who said anything about "illegal" immigration?? That's NOT what I was talking about at all.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: No, let them be

Ah ha! So what were you blabbering about then, huh? Because your nonsensical argument is hard to follow.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: Yeah, screw them

"So what were you blabbering about then, huh?"I was simply stating a FACT, which you tried to twist out of context through lies, that one of the only reasons that America's population continues to grow is through immigration. Abortions have nothing to do with that issue, period. That's just you, again, trying to change the issue that is at hand...unsuccessfully I might add...BTW, you are the KING of the "nonsensical argument" on here Joe...don't project your faults onto me tyvm!
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: No, let them be

OK, fair enough. So getting back on track.The Hyde Amendment, implemented in 1977, restricts the use of federal funds for abortion. These public funds can only be used when an abortion is needed to save the life of the mother, or when the pregnancy results from assault rape or incest.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: Yeah, screw them

"I which the federal government did only those things spelled out in the constitution"Too vague an answer."One of them being to protect the borders."I agree, and I even agree that we should build a fence down along our southern border...just to prove how stupid an idea that really is. Instead, what we should do is hire more well-trained Border Patrol guards, and try to help those south of our border have better lives through improved environmental & labor regulations in their own countries.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: No, let them be

Or we can just shoot them. After a while I think they'll get the message ;)
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: Yeah, screw them

"I which the federal government did only those things spelled out in the constitution"...like abortions, which have U.S. Supreme Court affirmed Constitutional protection!
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: No, let them be

OK, I see the problem here. You seem to think that "Supreme Court affirmed Constitutional protection" means that the government has to pay people to exercise their constitutional rights. The fact is that "Supreme Court affirmed Constitutional protection" means that the government will not place any obstacles that will prevent you from exercising your constitutional rights. There's a big difference.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: yes

Taxes are like the zoo. You don't get a discount because you don't like giraffes.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: No, let them be

Agreed. However, since when are taxes designed to pay for peoples personal choices? Taxes are to help provide necessities of society. Not personal choice.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: Yeah, screw them

"Taxes are to help provide necessities of society."No, taxes are a monetary source for our govt., period.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: No, let them be

And our government is to spend it on what society needs. Not some random abortion for someone who does not want the consequences for their actions. If they want an abortion, PAY FOR IT!
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: No, let them be

Oh dear, MisterGuy! Yet another person who doesn't agree with your view of the world ;)
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: Yeah, screw them

So true! BTW........... Ive noticed that no-one gives a toss about how much money they are lining the G.O.D.s'(see profile for explanation) personal pockets with,Evident the lack of attendance to my debate "FEEDING THE POLITICIANS"
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: No, let them be

Agreed 100%. Abortion is a choice (not a necesity) that arose from the choice (not the necesity) to have sexual intercourse instead of other forms of sex. That's why they call it pro-choice ;)There isn't a growing need for society to sponsor free abortions.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: Yeah, screw them

"Abortion is a choice (not a necesity) that arose from the choice (not the necesity) to have sexual intercourse instead of other forms of sex"Wrong again, abortions are protected under the Constitution, period."There isn't a growing need for society to sponsor free abortions"...in your own, heavily-biased opinion that is.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: No, let them be

Just because something is protected under the constitution does not mean it should be funded. It simply means, we should not restrict it. ...in your own, heavily-biased opinion that is.Really? And what proof do you have that abortions have some growing need??
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: No, let them be

You seem to think that "Supreme Court affirmed Constitutional protection" means that the government has to pay people to exercise their constitutional rights. The fact is that "Supreme Court affirmed Constitutional protection" means that the government will not place any obstacles that will prevent you from exercising your constitutional rights. There's a big difference.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: Yeah, screw them

Here they go again. The churches excersizing their right to representation without taxation.I would be glad to pay for abortions and would in no way feel forced (which is very strong and obviously biased wording which leads to an unfair and untrue debate, btw).If anyone does feel forced, then they dont understand democracy.For as long as I have been paying taxes, they have been going to support a war I have never believed in. I have, just as effectivly, paid for this war as anyone would have to pay for abortions.It's not fair, it's taxes.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: No, let them be

Here are two quotes:"If anyone does feel forced, then they dont [sic] understand democracy."Pineapple"To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical."Thomas JeffersonNow I ask the reader, who do you think is right? ;)Not to sway the vote or anything but here's one more quote:"It has been said the greatest volume of sheer brainpower in one place occurred when Jefferson dined alone..." John Kennedy;)
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: Yeah, screw them

As I can never trust your statistics or facts to be truth, I double checked that quote and found that it is not the real wording of Thomas Jefferson.The real quote is: "To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical. "If you ask for the opinions of others, don't doom them to sound ignorant before they even speak.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: No, let them be

Yeah, whatever.Here's my definition of taxes:Taxes - To compel a man to furnish contributions of money ;)But either way. I do not want to be compled to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions (abortion) which I disbelieve and abhor because that would be sinful and tyrannical. ;)
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: Yeah, screw them

So it is sinful and tyrannical when it is a liberal opinion (abortion) but not when it is a conservative one (the death petaly, the war on Iraq).I'm not saying "force" anyone. Again, your wording is horrific. I'm saying if it happens democratically, good.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: No, let them be

No, I am not hypocritical. The conservative agenda should not be forced down a liberal's throat.BTW, I may be wrong but I'm pretty sure that we do not have a death "petaly."BTW, I find it quite interesting how liberals think that it is OK to kill an innocent fetus but it is not OK to kill a convicted murderer.In a democracy people decide what is legal. For example, should we make abortion legal? In a democracy people don't decide what they are going to force on the other people. For example, subsidizing abortions.Once abortion is made legal, those against abortion do not have to participate. They are not forced into anything.Once you subsidize abortions you are forcing people to contribute monetarily, even if they don't agree with it.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: Yeah, screw them

Oh, look at you! You spotted a spelling error, wow you got me! Zing!It seems to me that we agree. You seem to believe that if abortion should not be paid for by tax dollars, then neither should the death penalty or the war.Other than that, the matter is only a difference of opionion regarding the morality of abortion.I have participated in other debates regarding abortion. If you wish to know more about my personal opinion on abortion, and its relation to my opinion on the death penalty, that information is available to you.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: No, let them be

I don't deal in morality. My objections to abortion has nothing to do with morals.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: Yeah, screw them

Your objection is not the topic of this debate. Within this debate, I don't care why you object or even that you object.If you have nothing more to say on the subject, I think I have proved my point.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: No, let them be

What point? What are you talking about? What proof? Where's this proof?People who are against abortions should not be forced to pay for it.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: No, let them be

I think that point is; should people against the death penalty and against the war in Iraq and Afghanistan be forced to pay for that? Should people who don't have kids be forced to pay for the schools that are giving your kids an education? Should people without cars be forced to pay for roads? Should people with cars be forced to pay for mass transport like trains and buses? Should people completely against the idea of war fund the military at all? Should people who believe in open borders fund border control policies? Should people opposed to the whole idea of the penal system be forced to put a single cent into funding it? A simple yes or no will suffice.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: No, let them be

Well..., since you're looking for a simple yes or no...., I chose...., no. ;)
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: Yeah, screw them

That's a ridiculous answer, and I'll bet that you know it too. In a representative democracy, we do not get to decide specifically how our collective tax monies are spent!
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: No, let them be

Thats true. We do have the right to stand up and object to things we do not agree with. The debate is, should the government pay for abortions. Not some technicality about how we can't choose where all the money goes. Paying for an optional procedure from tax dollars is a waste and unnecessary. End of story.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: No, let them be

You are right. Which is why our tax dollar should go towards national defense instead of abortions. ;)
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: Yeah, screw them

"Which is why our tax dollar should go towards national defense instead of abortions"...in your opinion. BTW, how much would paying for low-income women's abortions cost in relation to "national defense"?? Can you say drop in the bucket??
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: No, let them be

The cost is irrelevant.The government is not responsible for paying anyone to exercise their Constitutional rights.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: Yeah, screw them

And thus you prove the absurdity of your argument. I bet there are lots of things that you support that lots of other people don't, and thus things you feel important, such as border control and national defence, could end up not having enough funding to be able to operate. This is why you don't get a choice in exactly which specific initiatives that your taxes go towards.If we all chose to only fund those initiatives which we ourselves support, it would spell the end of democracy.
Debate: Should people who are morally agaisnt abortions be forced to pay for those who w
Side: Yeah, screw them

That's right. We shouldn't be spending our tax money frivolously. We should spend it on useful things like national defense instead of abortions for women to stupid to realize that if they can't afford an abortion they should abstain from sexual intercourse and opt for a facial instead. I can't believe that you are actually abdicating telling women to go out and have sex and if they get pregnant that we will pay for her to have an abortion. What bone headed way of thinking is that?