niryuu/sni-each-converted huggingface dataset:
claim: We must enforce term limits on the legislative branch of government.
 perspective: There are many instances when having a powerful, unlimited executive branch of government is best.
Output: undermine
claim: We must enforce term limits on the legislative branch of government.
 perspective: It may at some point be desirable to keep around a certain executive longer than terms decide
Output: undermine
claim: We must enforce term limits on the legislative branch of government.
 perspective: In some instances it may be better to not have term limits if there is a good leader at the time
Output: undermine
claim: We must enforce term limits on the legislative branch of government.
 perspective: Freeing the executive from re-election concerns can help focus attention on the public interest
Output: undermine
claim: We must enforce term limits on the legislative branch of government.
 perspective: The executive branch of government, having no countervailing voices to the leader s’ within it, must be checked by limiting tenancy in office.
Output: support
claim: We must enforce term limits on the legislative branch of government.
 perspective: By imposing a term limit in office, we can limit the power of executive branch of government.
Output: support
claim: We must enforce term limits on the legislative branch of government.
 perspective: The power of executive branch of government must be checked by having a term limit for the leader in the office. 
Output: support
claim: We must enforce term limits on the legislative branch of government.
 perspective: there should be a tenancy for the executive branch of government as to keep in check the power of its leaders
Output: support
claim: We must enforce term limits on the legislative branch of government.
 perspective: the executives brances with no opposing voices to the leaders must be imposed term limits
Output: support
claim: The EU should significantly reduce the amount it spends on agricultural production subsidies.
 perspective: Farmers can’t survive
Output: undermine
claim: The EU should significantly reduce the amount it spends on agricultural production subsidies.
 perspective: It is impossible for farmers to survive.
Output: undermine
claim: The EU should significantly reduce the amount it spends on agricultural production subsidies.
 perspective: It becomes unreasonably difficult for farmers to survive.
Output: undermine
claim: The EU should significantly reduce the amount it spends on agricultural production subsidies.
 perspective: Market flexibility is stifled
Output: support
claim: The EU should significantly reduce the amount it spends on agricultural production subsidies.
 perspective: The money could be spent elsewhere
Output: support
claim: The EU should significantly reduce the amount it spends on agricultural production subsidies.
 perspective: The money could be used for other things.
Output: support
claim: The EU should significantly reduce the amount it spends on agricultural production subsidies.
 perspective: We could spend the money elsewhere.
Output: support
claim: We can trust Republicans with the economy.
 perspective: Deregulation contributed to the banking crises and, therefore the 2009 economic crash 
Output: undermine
claim: Less time outdoors is severely detrimental to the physical and emotional wellbeing of children.
 perspective: Children need to have fun
Output: support
claim: Less time outdoors is severely detrimental to the physical and emotional wellbeing of children.
 perspective: Children should have fun by going outdoors as its crucial for their wellbeing.
Output: support
claim: Less time outdoors is severely detrimental to the physical and emotional wellbeing of children.
 perspective: Nature encourages mental wellbeing
Output: support
claim: Less time outdoors is severely detrimental to the physical and emotional wellbeing of children.
 perspective: Being outdoors is great for someone's mental wellbeing.
Output: support
claim: Less time outdoors is severely detrimental to the physical and emotional wellbeing of children.
 perspective: Children should enjoy nature by being outdoors more.
Output: support
claim: Less time outdoors is severely detrimental to the physical and emotional wellbeing of children.
 perspective: Children need to socialise with other children
Output: support
claim: Less time outdoors is severely detrimental to the physical and emotional wellbeing of children.
 perspective: Children greatly benefit when they socialize with other kids.
Output: support
claim: Less time outdoors is severely detrimental to the physical and emotional wellbeing of children.
 perspective: Children need to be exposed to germs
Output: support
claim: Abolish the security council veto.
 perspective: The veto power was granted legally to the P5 by the other participating states, and therefore the P5 have a right to those powers.
Output: undermine
claim: Abolish the security council veto.
 perspective: It is appropriate for the veto power to remain in place.
Output: undermine
claim: All our actions are determined in some way.
 perspective: Our actions are determined by external factors or by choice
Output: support
claim: All our actions are determined in some way.
 perspective: This implies falsely that man operates on pure instinct from which he cannot vary, placing him on the level of animals.
Output: undermine
claim: A celebrity would make a good minister.
 perspective: Celebrities are generally selfish
Output: undermine
claim: A celebrity would make a good minister.
 perspective: Celebrities only think about themselves
Output: undermine
claim: A celebrity would make a good minister.
 perspective: It will inspire children into politics
Output: support
claim: A celebrity would make a good minister.
 perspective: A celebrity minister can interest children with politics
Output: support
claim: A celebrity would make a good minister.
 perspective: Politics will be more interesting to children if inspired by a celebrity minister
Output: support
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Homework puts students off learning
Output: support
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Homework has little educational worth, and therefore is a waste of students' time
Output: support
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Homework is an essential part of education, allowing students to learn information beyond that which they are taught at school.
Output: undermine
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Homework is crucial to a well rounded education as it is the means by which students are encouraged to learn beyond the school curriculum.
Output: undermine
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Homework allows students to explore and learn beyond the instruction they are given in the classroom.
Output: undermine
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Homework ensures that students practise what they are taught at school
Output: undermine
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Homework provides a link between child, school and the home
Output: undermine
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Yes, kids need to balance out mental and physical exercise.
Output: support
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Kids need time to do many different kinds of activities. 
Output: support
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: There needs to be a balance for kids between mental and physical stimulation.
Output: support
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Mental stimulation and physical exercise need to have the proper balance in children.
Output: support
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: There is no evidence that homework makes a difference for young children.
Output: support
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: There is a lack of evidence that homework helps younger children
Output: support
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Small children are not helped by having homework.
Output: support
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Yes Homework Should Have A Limit
Output: support
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Yes, it should.
Output: support
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Assigning large amounts of homework isn't good for students.
Output: support
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Too much homework is detrimental.
Output: support
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Homework disadvantages low-income students
Output: support
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Low-income students are at a disadvantage when it comes to homework.
Output: support
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Homework doesn't help low-income students succeed.
Output: support
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Homework allows parents to be involved with their child's learning
Output: undermine
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Homework is beneficial because of parent/child involvement
Output: undermine
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Homework helps parents understand what their children are learning.
Output: undermine
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Homework can get parents involved
Output: undermine
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Homework helps involve parents 
Output: undermine
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Homework improves student achievement
Output: undermine
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Assigning homework to students improves their level of achievement
Output: undermine
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: homework is good for students
Output: undermine
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Homework helps to reinforce learning and develop good study habits and life skills
Output: undermine
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Homework teaches good habits and responsibility
Output: undermine
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Homework is good for learning
Output: undermine
claim: Homework is a waste of time.
 perspective: Homework is good to create study habits
Output: undermine
claim: Beauty contests should be banned.
 perspective: Beauty contests are culturally insensitive
Output: support
claim: Beauty contests should be banned.
 perspective: Beauty contests are patriarchal
Output: support
claim: Beauty contests should be banned.
 perspective: Beauty contests objectify women
Output: support
claim: Beauty contests should be banned.
 perspective: Beauty contests can be harmful to women and their self esteem.
Output: support
claim: Beauty contests should be banned.
 perspective: Due to the degrading nature of beauty pageants towards women, they should be banned.
Output: support
claim: Government must be Big and Beefy.
 perspective: Government was required to drive through major changes such as drives for equality within society, universal education, and preservation of the environment. Mostly in the teeth of big business 
Output: support
claim: Terrorism can be justified.
 perspective: Terrorism can bring attention
Output: support
claim: Terrorism can be justified.
 perspective: Terrorism is relative
Output: support
claim: Terrorism can be justified.
 perspective: Terrorism can lead to discussion
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Junk Food Can Increase The Risk Of Diabetes
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Unhealthy foods lead to a higher risk of diabetes.
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Eating junk food can make it more likely to receive a diagnosis of diabetes.
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Junk Food Can Cause Obesity
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Eating junk food leads to obesity.
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Obesity is caused by junk food.
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Unhealthy Food May Be Bad For Brain Function
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Junk food can hinder the brain's performance.
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Brain function is inhibited by unhealthy foods.
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Banning Junk Food In Schools Could Decrease The Frequency Of Heart Disease
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Heart disease can be caused by junk food.
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: The frequency of heart disease in schools could be lowered by banning junk food.
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Junk Food Can Have Negative Affects On Bone Health
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Eating junk food can be detrimental to bone health. 
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Junk food has been associated with poor bone health. 
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: A healthy diet starts from home and starts early. 
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Schools are the best place to create lasting lifestyle changes.
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Schools are the best at changing lifestyles
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Schools set the foundation for life
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Schools are the best place to create lasting positive habits. 
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Schools are the best place to implement long lasting lifestyle changes. 
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Habits Are Often Formed During Childhood And It's Important To Ensure That Kids Eat A Healthy Diet In School
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Bans On Junk Food Have Been Successful
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Start your children early on the habit of  good healthy food and it will stay with them throughout their lives.  
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Schools should educate about healthy choices, not make them on the students’ behalf.
Output: undermine
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Students should be educated to make healthy dietary choices.
Output: undermine
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: schools should educate on health
Output: undermine
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Students should not be forbidden from eating certain foods, they should be educated about them.
Output: undermine
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: schools should educate the masses on healthy choices
Output: undermine
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Better nutrition leads to better students.
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Good food is better for students
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Good food helps create better students
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Better nutrition leads to more productive students.
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Better nutrition leads to a better student body. 
Output: support
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Pupils will bring unhealthy food with them to schools. 
Output: undermine
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: If "junk food" is banned, students will simply bring their own food to school.
Output: undermine
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: Banning "junk food" is not the answer because then students will simply bring their own "junk food" from home.
Output: undermine
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: “Junk food” sales are an important source of funding for schools. 
Output: undermine
claim: Junk Food Should Be Banned.
 perspective: "Junk food" revenues provide schools with much needed financial assistance.
Output: undermine
claim: The African Union should create a standing army.
 perspective: Showing Africa can solve its own problems
Output: support
claim: The African Union should create a standing army.
 perspective: There is no need for an AU force
Output: undermine
claim: The African Union should create a standing army.
 perspective: An African Army will be a drain on the economy and ineffective.
Output: undermine
claim: The African Union should create a standing army.
 perspective: An AU force will be inexperienced
Output: undermine
claim: The African Union should create a standing army.
 perspective: African forces will be trusted by Africans
Output: support
claim: We should make new years resolutions.
 perspective: There is pressure on you to fail New Year's Resolutions.
Output: undermine
claim: We should make new years resolutions.
 perspective: We shouldn't just do something because it is New Year.
Output: undermine
claim: We should make new years resolutions.
 perspective: It is the best time to start planning your year.
Output: support
claim: We should make new years resolutions.
 perspective: A goal for a whole year is unrealistic.
Output: undermine
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: Private schools encourage elitism
Output: undermine
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: Private schools lack diversity
Output: undermine
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: Private schools aren't diverse
Output: undermine
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: Private schools don't have unique demographics
Output: undermine
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: One problem with private schools is that they lack diversity
Output: undermine
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: A lack of diversity is one issue with private schools
Output: undermine
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: Private schools are financially beneficial for state schools
Output: support
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: State schools receive financial benefits because the private schools
Output: support
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: One benefit of private schools is that they financially help state schools
Output: support
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: Private schools can also be good for state schools
Output: support
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: It creates stereotypes and tensions within society
Output: undermine
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: Removing 'choice' will improve the overall standard of our schools.
Output: undermine
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: too many choices lead to substandard outcomes
Output: undermine
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: Private schools aren't necessarily good for the child.
Output: undermine
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: what is the best for the child is not always the private education
Output: undermine
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: Private Schools inhibit reform of the public system
Output: undermine
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: Abolishing a good service on the basis that some cannot afford it is absurd
Output: support
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: Abolishing a good service that is unaffordable is a disservice to humanity.
Output: support
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: It's ridiculous to abolish a good service based on inability to afford.
Output: support
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: Private schools create competition 
Output: support
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: better schools lead to better schools
Output: support
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: In a civilised society, there should be plenty of choice
Output: support
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: choices are integral to modern civilized society
Output: support
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: The goverment can't afford to take on more school children
Output: support
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: More school children would be a hardship on the government.
Output: support
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: The government needs financial help to take on more school children.
Output: support
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: Private schools one on one time with individual teacher and student enables better results in the long run.
Output: support
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: Private schools provide individual time for students and teachers for best results.
Output: support
claim: People should have a right to private education.
 perspective: Teachers can benefit students better with one on one time in private schools.
Output: support
claim: Build the Grand Inga Dam.
 perspective: Such a big project is beyond DRC’s capacity
Output: undermine
claim: Build the Grand Inga Dam.
 perspective: THe dam project is too complex
Output: undermine
claim: Build the Grand Inga Dam.
 perspective: The area isn't developed enough to take on the dam project
Output: undermine
claim: Build the Grand Inga Dam.
 perspective: A dam would damage the environment
Output: undermine
claim: Build the Grand Inga Dam.
 perspective: the dam could harm the area around it.
Output: undermine
claim: Build the Grand Inga Dam.
 perspective: A dam could make the Congo more usable
Output: support
claim: Build the Grand Inga Dam.
 perspective: The dam would power Africa
Output: support
claim: Build the Grand Inga Dam.
 perspective: the dam would improve the lives of people
Output: support
claim: The right to trial can be limited by jury in some criminal cases.
 perspective: Having trial by jury for people accused of very small offences is a waste of resources.
Output: support
claim: The right to trial can be limited by jury in some criminal cases.
 perspective: It may be necessary to limit trial by jury in cases where it is impossible to recruit an impartial jury.
Output: support
claim: The right to trial can be limited by jury in some criminal cases.
 perspective: trials need be limited
Output: support
claim: The right to trial can be limited by jury in some criminal cases.
 perspective: Judges are better at delivering justice than juries are.
Output: support
claim: The right to trial can be limited by jury in some criminal cases.
 perspective: Judges are good at justice
Output: support
claim: The right to trial can be limited by jury in some criminal cases.
 perspective: Trial by jury is a fundamental right and should never be abridged.
Output: undermine
claim: The right to trial can be limited by jury in some criminal cases.
 perspective: Limiting trial by jury in some cases sets the stage for limiting it in other, unjustified, cases.
Output: undermine
claim: The right to trial can be limited by jury in some criminal cases.
 perspective: It may be necessary to limit trial by jury in terrorism cases, or other cases surrounding large national security issues.
Output: support
claim: The right to trial can be limited by jury in some criminal cases.
 perspective: In cases involving national security, limiting the jury can be a necessity.
Output: support
claim: The right to trial can be limited by jury in some criminal cases.
 perspective: Cases involving terrorism or national security issues may need to be limited.
Output: support
claim: The right to trial can be limited by jury in some criminal cases.
 perspective: It may be necessary to limit trial by jury in cases where there is a real danger of jury tampering or intimidation.
Output: support
claim: The right to trial can be limited by jury in some criminal cases.
 perspective: When there is evidence of jury tampering or intimidation, limiting the choice of trial be jury is necessary.
Output: support
claim: The right to trial can be limited by jury in some criminal cases.
 perspective: Limiting trial by jury is necessitated by times of jury tampering or intimidation.
Output: support
claim: Fund education using a voucher scheme.
 perspective: Equality of opportunity between richer and poorer children
Output: support
claim: Fund education using a voucher scheme.
 perspective: The most vulnerable children would be left behind by the scheme
Output: undermine
claim: Fund education using a voucher scheme.
 perspective: The scheme leaves behind the most vulnerable children.
Output: undermine
claim: Fund education using a voucher scheme.
 perspective: The children left behind by the scheme are the most vulnerable.
Output: undermine
claim: Fund education using a voucher scheme.
 perspective: If the scheme leaves out any children it is not worth it.
Output: undermine
claim: Fund education using a voucher scheme.
 perspective: The scheme should be for all children.
Output: undermine
claim: Fund education using a voucher scheme.
 perspective: Increasing parents' freedom of choice
Output: support
claim: Fund education using a voucher scheme.
 perspective: A voucher system increase parents' freedom of choice.
Output: support
claim: Fund education using a voucher scheme.
 perspective: The use of a voucher system increases parents' freedom of choice.
Output: support
claim: Fund education using a voucher scheme.
 perspective: Parents must not give up their voice.
Output: support
claim: Fund education using a voucher scheme.
 perspective: Parents are their child's voice.
Output: support
claim: Fund education using a voucher scheme.
 perspective: Only well-off families will benefit from increased freedom of choice
Output: undermine
claim: Fund education using a voucher scheme.
 perspective: Wealthy families are the people that will gain more from being able to determine their own actions.
Output: undermine
claim: Fund education using a voucher scheme.
 perspective: Being able to choose freely will help rich households even more.
Output: undermine
claim: Using Rewards to Motivate Students.
 perspective: Rewards are relatively ineffective for motivating students
Output: undermine
claim: Using Rewards to Motivate Students.
 perspective: Inner motivation is key to a students success; not rewards. 
Output: undermine
claim: Using Rewards to Motivate Students.
 perspective: Rewards do not always work in motivating students. 
Output: undermine
claim: Children should do part time and summer work.
 perspective: Children can use the money.
Output: support
claim: Children should do part time and summer work.
 perspective: Children should work because they need the money.
Output: support
claim: Children should do part time and summer work.
 perspective: Children have many expenses and a job would help pay for them.
Output: support
claim: Children should do part time and summer work.
 perspective: children will be exploited
Output: undermine
claim: Children should do part time and summer work.
 perspective: They will have the satisfaction of a job well done.
Output: support
claim: Children should do part time and summer work.
 perspective: Children should work because a job provides satisfaction.
Output: support
claim: Children should do part time and summer work.
 perspective: Doing a good job provides satisfaction to workers, including children.
Output: support
claim: Children should do part time and summer work.
 perspective: a good option for an un-academic child
Output: support
claim: Children should do part time and summer work.
 perspective: Teaches them valuable life skills
Output: support
claim: Children should do part time and summer work.
 perspective: Working part time prepares children for the real world.
Output: support
claim: Children should do part time and summer work.
 perspective: Children should work because a job teaches valuable life skills.
Output: support
claim: Children should do part time and summer work.
 perspective: they don't have time
Output: undermine
claim: Children should do part time and summer work.
 perspective: Children are busy with school and activities and don't have time for work.
Output: undermine
claim: Children should do part time and summer work.
 perspective: School is demanding and doesn't allow children time to work.
Output: undermine
claim: Abolish the Superdelegate System for Democratic Party Conventions.
 perspective: One person, one vote is a basic principal of democracy when the vote of one person is worth 10,000 time as much as that of another is simply undemocratic
Output: support
claim: Abolish the Superdelegate System for Democratic Party Conventions.
 perspective: All votes should be equal.
Output: support
claim: Abolish the Superdelegate System for Democratic Party Conventions.
 perspective: It is not democratic for some votes to be worth more than others.
Output: support
claim: Abolish the Superdelegate System for Democratic Party Conventions.
 perspective: The disproportionate influence of former politicians inevitably benefits old, powerful, white men 
Output: support
claim: Abolish the Superdelegate System for Democratic Party Conventions.
 perspective: Candidates solicitation of superdelegates damages the political system and requires candidates to go through contortions to secure their support
Output: support
claim: The republican party has lost its way.
 perspective: The Republican Party has been hijacked by the Tea Partiers who simply don’t have a coherent message or ideology
Output: support
claim: The republican party has lost its way.
 perspective: The Tea party has totally hijacked the Republican Party with their incoherent ideas.
Output: support
claim: The republican party has lost its way.
 perspective: The incompetent ideologies and messages from the Tea Party have taken over the Republican Party.
Output: support
claim: The republican party has lost its way.
 perspective: Having won the economic argument during the Reagan years – both with Russia and the Democratic Party – the Republicans now address social concerns and do so with a consistent message.
Output: undermine
claim: The republican party has lost its way.
 perspective: The leadership of the Republican Party simply has nothing to do with its membership as a result no candidate has, or can, capture the imagination.
Output: support
claim: The republican party has lost its way.
 perspective: Just as with other parties around the world, once the dominant argument of a political party proves to be a busted flush it takes about a decade to recover
Output: support
claim: Wire-tapped and ‘intercepted’ evidence must be allowed as admissible in court.
 perspective: Intercept evidence is simply not reliable enough to be effective evidence in court.
Output: undermine
claim: Wire-tapped and ‘intercepted’ evidence must be allowed as admissible in court.
 perspective: Evidence needs to be more reliable than intercept evidence if it is to used in court.
Output: undermine
claim: Wire-tapped and ‘intercepted’ evidence must be allowed as admissible in court.
 perspective: Common authorisation for wiretapping would result in misallocation of resources.
Output: undermine
claim: Wire-tapped and ‘intercepted’ evidence must be allowed as admissible in court.
 perspective: Intercept evidence deals particularly well with cases of conspiracy and criminal gangs which have a widespread network.
Output: support
claim: Wire-tapped and ‘intercepted’ evidence must be allowed as admissible in court.
 perspective: Widespread criminal networks can be dealt with using intercepted evidence. 
Output: support
claim: Wire-tapped and ‘intercepted’ evidence must be allowed as admissible in court.
 perspective: Wiretapping can actually threaten the success of intelligence services in preventing crime and helping to prove criminals guilty.
Output: undermine
claim: Wire-tapped and ‘intercepted’ evidence must be allowed as admissible in court.
 perspective: Wiretapping can jeopardize investigations.
Output: undermine
claim: Wire-tapped and ‘intercepted’ evidence must be allowed as admissible in court.
 perspective: Wiretapping can be couterproductive.
Output: undermine
claim: Wire-tapped and ‘intercepted’ evidence must be allowed as admissible in court.
 perspective: Intercepted evidence could be incredibly useful for both prosecution and defence cases in many trials.
Output: support
claim: Wire-tapped and ‘intercepted’ evidence must be allowed as admissible in court.
 perspective: Intercepted evidence is very useful to both sides of a trial.
Output: support
claim: Wire-tapped and ‘intercepted’ evidence must be allowed as admissible in court.
 perspective: Interception of evidence aids both prosecution and defense.
Output: support
claim: Wire-tapped and ‘intercepted’ evidence must be allowed as admissible in court.
 perspective: Both sides of a criminal case would benefit from intercepted evidence.
Output: support
claim: Wire-tapped and ‘intercepted’ evidence must be allowed as admissible in court.
 perspective: In many trials the use of intercepted evidence would be beneficial to both the prosecution and the defense teams.
Output: support
claim: Wire-tapped and ‘intercepted’ evidence must be allowed as admissible in court.
 perspective: Wiretapping is a highly effective method which helps to prevent serious crime and secure convictions for criminals.
Output: support
claim: Wire-tapped and ‘intercepted’ evidence must be allowed as admissible in court.
 perspective: Wiretapping is effective in preventing crime and catching criminals.
Output: support
claim: Wire-tapped and ‘intercepted’ evidence must be allowed as admissible in court.
 perspective: Wiretapping makes it easier to stop crimes and catch the bad guys.
Output: support
claim: Wire-tapped and ‘intercepted’ evidence must be allowed as admissible in court.
 perspective: The use of wiretapping is highly successful and helps to both prevent crime and provide justice. 
Output: support
claim: Wire-tapped and ‘intercepted’ evidence must be allowed as admissible in court.
 perspective: Wiretapping has a high level of benefit to both reduce serious crime and prosecute criminals.
Output: support
claim: Most people are a little bit gay.
 perspective: Gay people are going to hell.
Output: undermine
claim: Most people are a little bit gay.
 perspective: Gay - Nature or Nurture?
Output: undermine
claim: Most people are a little bit gay.
 perspective: The simple continuation of mankind proves the heterosexuality is predominant
Output: undermine
claim: Anti-Social Behaviour Orders (UK) must be scraped.
 perspective: ASBOS encourage antisocial behavour
Output: support
claim: Anti-Social Behaviour Orders (UK) must be scraped.
 perspective: There is no respect among the population for ASBOS
Output: support
claim: Anti-Social Behaviour Orders (UK) must be scraped.
 perspective: The classicification of some behavior as anti-social (Anti-Social Behavior Orders or ASBOS) is not respected by the people.
Output: support
claim: Anti-Social Behaviour Orders (UK) must be scraped.
 perspective: Most people no longer  agree with the Anti-Social Behavior Orders (ASBOS) classifications.
Output: support
claim: Anti-Social Behaviour Orders (UK) must be scraped.
 perspective: ASBOs do not address the real problem
Output: support
claim: Anti-Social Behaviour Orders (UK) must be scraped.
 perspective: ASBOS breach basic principles of justice
Output: support
claim: Governments should spend their way out of the recession.
 perspective: Government spending is the only way to increase much needed consumption
Output: support
claim: We must grant those diagnosed with terminal illnesses the right to access treatments that have not completed clinical testing.
 perspective: This gives people false hope
Output: undermine
claim: We must grant those diagnosed with terminal illnesses the right to access treatments that have not completed clinical testing.
 perspective: Terminally ill patients would be getting false hope
Output: undermine
claim: We must grant those diagnosed with terminal illnesses the right to access treatments that have not completed clinical testing.
 perspective: This would give terminally ill patients and their families false hopes.
Output: undermine
claim: We must grant those diagnosed with terminal illnesses the right to access treatments that have not completed clinical testing.
 perspective: This policy enhances the role of drug reps and advertising, at the cost of evidence-based medicine
Output: undermine
claim: We must grant those diagnosed with terminal illnesses the right to access treatments that have not completed clinical testing.
 perspective: It is cruel to deny people the last hope
Output: support
claim: We must grant those diagnosed with terminal illnesses the right to access treatments that have not completed clinical testing.
 perspective: It is amoral to deny terminal patients last hope treatments
Output: support
claim: We must grant those diagnosed with terminal illnesses the right to access treatments that have not completed clinical testing.
 perspective: Denying terminally-ill people last hope treatments is cruel
Output: support
claim: We must grant those diagnosed with terminal illnesses the right to access treatments that have not completed clinical testing.
 perspective: Freedom of Choice
Output: support
claim: We must grant those diagnosed with terminal illnesses the right to access treatments that have not completed clinical testing.
 perspective: This reduces the incentive for pharmaceutical companies to complete the testing process
Output: undermine
claim: We must grant those diagnosed with terminal illnesses the right to access treatments that have not completed clinical testing.
 perspective: Disastrous impact on medical trials
Output: undermine
claim: We must grant those diagnosed with terminal illnesses the right to access treatments that have not completed clinical testing.
 perspective: Medical trials of experimental treatments would be greatly jeopardized
Output: undermine
claim: We must grant those diagnosed with terminal illnesses the right to access treatments that have not completed clinical testing.
 perspective: The consequences on clinical testing of experimental treatments would be disastrous
Output: undermine
claim: permit the use of performance enhancing drugs in professional sports.
 perspective: There is no distinction between "natural" and synthetic methods of performance enhancement
Output: support
claim: permit the use of performance enhancing drugs in professional sports.
 perspective: Controlling, rather than ignoring, performance enhancing substances will improve competitive standards in sport
Output: support
claim: permit the use of performance enhancing drugs in professional sports.
 perspective: Allowing performance enhancing drugs in sports will lead to better competition and improved athletics.
Output: support
claim: permit the use of performance enhancing drugs in professional sports.
 perspective: Athletes should be free to take risks when training and competing
Output: support
claim: permit the use of performance enhancing drugs in professional sports.
 perspective: Taking more risks in training and competition would allow athletes the freedom to become the best competitors they can be.
Output: support
claim: permit the use of performance enhancing drugs in professional sports.
 perspective: Protecting young and vulnerable athletes
Output: undermine
claim: permit the use of performance enhancing drugs in professional sports.
 perspective: we must sanction the use of performance enhancing drugs in pro sports to protect young and vulnerable athletes.
Output: undermine
claim: permit the use of performance enhancing drugs in professional sports.
 perspective: Performance enhancing drugs are particularly dangerous to young and vulnerable athletes and should therefore be sanctioned.
Output: undermine
claim: permit the use of performance enhancing drugs in professional sports.
 perspective: Drugs will undermine the central philosophy of sport
Output: undermine
claim: permit the use of performance enhancing drugs in professional sports.
 perspective: Sports is about competing on a level playing field and allowing drugs will ruin that.
Output: undermine
claim: Allow women to compete in the same leagues as men.
 perspective: This could simply swap inequalities around
Output: undermine
claim: Allow women to compete in the same leagues as men.
 perspective: Destroying the pleasure of watching certain sports
Output: undermine
claim: Allow women to compete in the same leagues as men.
 perspective: Encouraging future female athletes
Output: support
claim: Allow women to compete in the same leagues as men.
 perspective: promote sport for future female athlese
Output: support
claim: Allow women to compete in the same leagues as men.
 perspective: Athletes should decide for themselves.
Output: support
claim: Allow women to compete in the same leagues as men.
 perspective: Athletes should be able to make their own decisions.
Output: support
claim: Allow women to compete in the same leagues as men.
 perspective: stop discrimination in sport
Output: support
claim: Allow women to compete in the same leagues as men.
 perspective: discrimination in sport should be removed
Output: support
claim: Allow women to compete in the same leagues as men.
 perspective: Preventing discrimination in sport
Output: support
claim: Allow women to compete in the same leagues as men.
 perspective: The sports world is unfairly dominated by a male-orientated world-view. 
Output: support
claim: Allow women to compete in the same leagues as men.
 perspective: There should be equality between men and women. 
Output: support
claim: Allow women to compete in the same leagues as men.
 perspective: Equality Between the Sexes
Output: support
claim: Allow women to compete in the same leagues as men.
 perspective: Equality in the sexes is of vital importance.
Output: support
claim: Allow women to compete in the same leagues as men.
 perspective: Male and female equality is vital to society.
Output: support
claim: Allow women to compete in the same leagues as men.
 perspective: Women must accept the same risks as men if they want to be judged on an equal scale.
Output: support
claim: Allow women to compete in the same leagues as men.
 perspective: If women want the equal benefits with men they must be willing to do the same things.
Output: support
claim: The Guantanamo Bay detention centre should be closed.
 perspective: Conditions at Guantanamo are unjust and unacceptable: 
Output: support
claim: The Guantanamo Bay detention centre should be closed.
 perspective: Prisoners at Guantanamo experience unconscionable treatment.  
Output: support
claim: The Guantanamo Bay detention centre should be closed.
 perspective: The conditions at Guantanamo violate prisoners' basic rights.
Output: support
claim: The Guantanamo Bay detention centre should be closed.
 perspective: Guantanamo Bay’s Lack of Transparency Counters American Interests.
Output: support
claim: The Guantanamo Bay detention centre should be closed.
 perspective: American interests are counted by Guantanamo Bay's lack of transparency.
Output: support
claim: The Guantanamo Bay detention centre should be closed.
 perspective: The interests of America are undone by the lack of transparency of Guantanamo Bay.
Output: support
claim: The Guantanamo Bay detention centre should be closed.
 perspective: Release is not the Solution
Output: undermine
claim: The Guantanamo Bay detention centre should be closed.
 perspective: Gauntanamo Bay is detrimental to foreign relations for United States.
Output: support
claim: The Guantanamo Bay detention centre should be closed.
 perspective: Guantanamo Bay Violates Fundamental Human Rights.
Output: support
claim: The Guantanamo Bay detention centre should be closed.
 perspective: Human Rights are violated by the continued use of Guantanamo Bay.
Output: support
claim: The Guantanamo Bay detention centre should be closed.
 perspective: The Guantanamo Bay facility is detrimental to Human Rights.
Output: support
claim: The Guantanamo Bay detention centre should be closed.
 perspective: Guantanamo Bay is a Symbol of Muslim Discrimination that Fuels Terrorist Sentiments
Output: support
claim: The Guantanamo Bay detention centre should be closed.
 perspective: Terrorist sentiments are fueled by the symbol of Muslim discrimination that is Guantanamo Bay.
Output: support
claim: The Guantanamo Bay detention centre should be closed.
 perspective: Guantanamo Bay creates an image of Muslim discrimination that continues to increase terrorist sentiments.
Output: support
claim: social networking sites should be banned at the workplaces.
 perspective: of course they should
Output: support
claim: social networking sites should be banned at the workplaces.
 perspective: Much time can be wasted on social networking sites.
Output: support
claim: social networking sites should be banned at the workplaces.
 perspective: Social networking sites are a massive time drain.
Output: support
claim: social networking sites should be banned at the workplaces.
 perspective: Social media can entice people to waste time.
Output: support
claim: social networking sites should be banned at the workplaces.
 perspective: Social media tends to have people getting too immersed in it.
Output: support
claim: social networking sites should be banned at the workplaces.
 perspective: Employees should not waste time on social networking sites. 
Output: support
claim: social networking sites should be banned at the workplaces.
 perspective: Using social networking sites at workplaces wastes valuable amount of work-time. 
Output: support
claim: social networking sites should be banned at the workplaces.
 perspective: Soicial Networking Sites are a Time-Waster
Output: support
claim: social networking sites should be banned at the workplaces.
 perspective: Work is work.
Output: support
claim: social networking sites should be banned at the workplaces.
 perspective: Social media can lead to stress and offline relationship problems.
Output: support
claim: social networking sites should be banned at the workplaces.
 perspective: Social media sites often lead to relationship problems and other stress in real life.
Output: support
claim: social networking sites should be banned at the workplaces.
 perspective: Social media has been linked to stress and problems in personal relationships in the real world.
Output: support
claim: social networking sites should be banned at the workplaces.
 perspective: Social media sites empower individuals to make social change and do social good on a community level.
Output: undermine
claim: social networking sites should be banned at the workplaces.
 perspective: Social media sites have helped people raise money for medical procedures.  
Output: undermine
claim: social networking sites should be banned at the workplaces.
 perspective: "Crowdsourcing" and "crowdfunding" on social media allows people to collectively accomplish a goal.
Output: undermine
claim: social networking sites should be banned at the workplaces.
 perspective: People can come together to accomplish a goal through "crowdsourcing" and "crowdfunding" on social media websites.
Output: undermine
claim: social networking sites should be banned at the workplaces.
 perspective: "Crowdsourcing" and "crowdfunding" via social media, allows people to assist in a worthy cause.
Output: undermine
claim: social networking sites should be banned at the workplaces.
 perspective: Social media allows for quick, easy dissemination of public health and safety information from reputable sources.
Output: undermine
claim: social networking sites should be banned at the workplaces.
 perspective: Health and safety officers can quickly and easily provide important information to the public when needed.
Output: undermine
claim: social networking sites should be banned at the workplaces.
 perspective: Social media spreads information faster than any other media.
Output: undermine
claim: social networking sites should be banned at the workplaces.
 perspective: Social media allows people to improve their relationships and make new friends.
Output: undermine