niryuu/sni-each-converted huggingface dataset:
claim: Same sex relationships should have the same legal status as heterosexual relationships under EU law.
 perspective: Prominent religious bodies believe that non-heterosexuals seeking to be wed devalue the crucible of the marriage relationship.
Output: undermine
claim: Same sex relationships should have the same legal status as heterosexual relationships under EU law.
 perspective: The institution of marriage has traditionally been defined as being between a man and a woman. 
Output: undermine
claim: Same sex relationships should have the same legal status as heterosexual relationships under EU law.
 perspective: Religion does not embraces marriage bonds between same-sex couples.
Output: undermine
claim: Same sex relationships should have the same legal status as heterosexual relationships under EU law.
 perspective: God condemns gay marriage in the Bible and it is not supported by a lot of churches. 
Output: undermine
claim: Same sex relationships should have the same legal status as heterosexual relationships under EU law.
 perspective: Marriage should be between a man and a woman
Output: undermine
claim: Same sex relationships should have the same legal status as heterosexual relationships under EU law.
 perspective: Marriage is a religious institution, and the major world religions frown upon homosexuality
Output: undermine
claim: Same sex relationships should have the same legal status as heterosexual relationships under EU law.
 perspective: It Would Cause controversy in religious countries such as Ireland and Italy
Output: undermine
claim: Same sex relationships should have the same legal status as heterosexual relationships under EU law.
 perspective: The institution of marriage cannot be harmed by giving more people the freedom to marry and it may become the case that heterosexual marriage is less stable than same-sex marriage. 
Output: support
claim: Same sex relationships should have the same legal status as heterosexual relationships under EU law.
 perspective: Same-sex marriage may have a lower divorce rate than heterosexual marriage proving once and for all that gay marriage is good for the institution of marriage. 
Output: support
claim: Same sex relationships should have the same legal status as heterosexual relationships under EU law.
 perspective: Same-sex couples should have access to the same benefits enjoyed by heterosexual married couples. 
Output: support
claim: Same sex relationships should have the same legal status as heterosexual relationships under EU law.
 perspective: Same-Sex marriages should have the same legal protections as regular marriages.
Output: support
claim: Same sex relationships should have the same legal status as heterosexual relationships under EU law.
 perspective: gays should be able to use thier rights
Output: support
claim: Same sex relationships should have the same legal status as heterosexual relationships under EU law.
 perspective: Gay couples should be able to take advantage of the fiscal and legal benefits of marriage
Output: support
claim: Same sex relationships should have the same legal status as heterosexual relationships under EU law.
 perspective: Gay marriages can bring financial gain to federal, state, and local governments and can help boost the economy. 
Output: support
claim: Same sex relationships should have the same legal status as heterosexual relationships under EU law.
 perspective: The economy of states can be boosted by allowing same-sex marriages. 
Output: support
claim: Same sex relationships should have the same legal status as heterosexual relationships under EU law.
 perspective: Gay marriage is good for society
Output: support
claim: Same sex relationships should have the same legal status as heterosexual relationships under EU law.
 perspective: Marriage is about more than procreation, therefore gay couples should not be denied the right to marry due to their biology.
Output: support
claim: Same sex relationships should have the same legal status as heterosexual relationships under EU law.
 perspective: gay people should be able to marry
Output: support
claim: Same sex relationships should have the same legal status as heterosexual relationships under EU law.
 perspective: no matter what sexuality all should be able to marry
Output: support
claim: Keep the Sabbath as a Day of Rest.
 perspective: People should be allowed to take their leisure at their own convenience and not on the basis of religious decree 
Output: undermine
claim: Keep the Sabbath as a Day of Rest.
 perspective: Recreation should be when people want, not when told to by religion
Output: undermine
claim: Keep the Sabbath as a Day of Rest.
 perspective: Religious decrees infringe on people's freedom of choice
Output: undermine
claim: Keep the Sabbath as a Day of Rest.
 perspective: A shared day when there is no commercial activity encourages family life and recreation 
Output: support
claim: Keep the Sabbath as a Day of Rest.
 perspective: Family life will be strengthened during a shared day of Sabbath
Output: support
claim: Keep the Sabbath as a Day of Rest.
 perspective: Sabbath day puts the emphasis on family and away from commercial activity
Output: support
claim: Civil society should be granted a wider participation in Africa’s political life.
 perspective: Civil society is good for economic development 
Output: support
claim: Civil society should be granted a wider participation in Africa’s political life.
 perspective: economic developement can be benefited by civil society
Output: support
claim: Civil society should be granted a wider participation in Africa’s political life.
 perspective: Western European experiences do not demonstrate that civil society’s involvement in politics would be positive in the African context
Output: undermine
claim: Civil society should be granted a wider participation in Africa’s political life.
 perspective: There is no proof that western European involvement in politics would be beneficial to Africa.
Output: undermine
claim: Civil society should be granted a wider participation in Africa’s political life.
 perspective: History has shown that western European involvement would not be beneficial to Africa.
Output: undermine
claim: Sikh school pupils should be allowed to carry ceremonial daggers.
 perspective: Fuelling an atmosphere of religious and cultural tension in Britain.
Output: undermine
claim: Sikh school pupils should be allowed to carry ceremonial daggers.
 perspective: Respecting the 'rituals' of the school.
Output: undermine
claim: Sikh school pupils should be allowed to carry ceremonial daggers.
 perspective: fuels discontent between religions 
Output: undermine
claim: Sikh school pupils should be allowed to carry ceremonial daggers.
 perspective: Daggers can be used as weapons. 
Output: undermine
claim: Sikh school pupils should be allowed to carry ceremonial daggers.
 perspective: Potentially, daggers carried by Sikh school pupils can be used to harm others. 
Output: undermine
claim: Sikh school pupils should be allowed to carry ceremonial daggers.
 perspective: Religious symbols harm no one
Output: support
claim: Sikh school pupils should be allowed to carry ceremonial daggers.
 perspective: symbols for religious benefit bothers no one
Output: support
claim: Sikh school pupils should be allowed to carry ceremonial daggers.
 perspective: religious expression should be freely decided
Output: support
claim: Sikh school pupils should be allowed to carry ceremonial daggers.
 perspective: It is a fundamental part of OUR Human Rights
Output: support
claim: Sikh school pupils should be allowed to carry ceremonial daggers.
 perspective: It is a fundamental right  to practice the religion you wish.
Output: support
claim: Sikh school pupils should be allowed to carry ceremonial daggers.
 perspective: Practicing your religion is a right, not a priveledge. 
Output: support
claim: Sikh school pupils should be allowed to carry ceremonial daggers.
 perspective: Human rights demand that we are free to express our religion.
Output: support
claim: Sikh school pupils should be allowed to carry ceremonial daggers.
 perspective: Religious expression needs to be guaranteed for all of us as part of our most fundamental rights!
Output: support
claim: Israel's 2008-2009 military operations against Gaza were justified.
 perspective: Israel's military operations were disproportionate and harmed too many civilians: 
Output: undermine
claim: Israel's 2008-2009 military operations against Gaza were justified.
 perspective: A lot of civilians are harmed during the military operations.
Output: undermine
claim: Israel's 2008-2009 military operations against Gaza were justified.
 perspective: Civilians are hurt during the Israeli military operations. 
Output: undermine
claim: Israel's 2008-2009 military operations against Gaza were justified.
 perspective: The military operations were legitimate as Israeli self-defense: 
Output: support
claim: Israel's 2008-2009 military operations against Gaza were justified.
 perspective: Israel was just self-defending.
Output: support
claim: Israel's 2008-2009 military operations against Gaza were justified.
 perspective: The operations are self-defenses, and thus can be justified.  
Output: support
claim: Israel's 2008-2009 military operations against Gaza were justified.
 perspective: The military operations were necessary for long term peace: 
Output: support
claim: Israel's 2008-2009 military operations against Gaza were justified.
 perspective: Future-wise speaking, the military operations are promoting peace. 
Output: support
claim: Israel's 2008-2009 military operations against Gaza were justified.
 perspective: The military operations ensures peace in the region in future. 
Output: support
claim: Israel's 2008-2009 military operations against Gaza were justified.
 perspective: Israel's military operations harmed the chances of peace in the long term: 
Output: undermine
claim: Israel's 2008-2009 military operations against Gaza were justified.
 perspective: Israeli military operations breaks the peace in the region. 
Output: undermine
claim: Israel's 2008-2009 military operations against Gaza were justified.
 perspective: The operations eliminate the hope for peace in the future.
Output: undermine
claim: Israel's 2008-2009 military operations against Gaza were justified.
 perspective: The military operations were proportionate to the threat: 
Output: support
claim: Israel's 2008-2009 military operations against Gaza were justified.
 perspective: The operations are just reacting to the tremendous amount of threats. 
Output: support
claim: Send Yanukovych to The Hague.
 perspective: Yanukovych committed crimes against humanity
Output: support
claim: Send Yanukovych to The Hague.
 perspective: Immoral crimes were committed by Yanukovych. 
Output: support
claim: Send Yanukovych to The Hague.
 perspective: Yanukovych needs to go on trial for crimes against humanity.
Output: support
claim: Send Yanukovych to The Hague.
 perspective: Yanukovych crimes are against humanity.
Output: support
claim: Send Yanukovych to The Hague.
 perspective: Would prevent division
Output: support
claim: Send Yanukovych to The Hague.
 perspective: Does Yanukovych really qualify for the ICC?
Output: undermine
claim: Send Yanukovych to The Hague.
 perspective: Do you think Yanukovych qualifies for the ICC?
Output: undermine
claim: Send Yanukovych to The Hague.
 perspective: Should Yanukovych be tried at the ICC?
Output: undermine
claim: Send Yanukovych to The Hague.
 perspective: Could not be tried for all his crimes
Output: undermine
claim: Send Yanukovych to The Hague.
 perspective: Should be tried at home
Output: undermine
claim: Send Yanukovych to The Hague.
 perspective: Yanukovych should be tried at home.
Output: undermine
claim: Send Yanukovych to The Hague.
 perspective: Home is where Yanukovych should be tried.
Output: undermine
claim: Cultural property residing in museums must be returned to its place of origin.
 perspective: The historical significance of artefacts extends beyond their culture of origin
Output: undermine
claim: Cultural property residing in museums must be returned to its place of origin.
 perspective: Scholars will have better access to artefacts, and more opportunities for study and collaboration, if they are stored in the west
Output: undermine
claim: Cultural property residing in museums must be returned to its place of origin.
 perspective: Artifacts should be kept where they are safest so that everyone has access to them. 
Output: undermine
claim: Cultural property residing in museums must be returned to its place of origin.
 perspective: Many countries do not have the means to protect precious artifacts so they should remain in the West where they are safe. 
Output: undermine
claim: Cultural property residing in museums must be returned to its place of origin.
 perspective: Artefacts should be made accessible to the largest possible number of visitors
Output: undermine
claim: Cultural property residing in museums must be returned to its place of origin.
 perspective: In many cases, returning an artefact may prove to be unreasonably expensive
Output: undermine
claim: Cultural property residing in museums must be returned to its place of origin.
 perspective: The West should not have to spend enormous sums of money to return artifacts to their original locations.
Output: undermine
claim: Cultural property residing in museums must be returned to its place of origin.
 perspective: Artefacts are enriched by being viewed in their place of origin
Output: support
claim: Cultural property residing in museums must be returned to its place of origin.
 perspective: Artifacts are best viewed where they came from.
Output: support
claim: Cultural property residing in museums must be returned to its place of origin.
 perspective: Viewing an artifact in its native area is beneficial to its perception.
Output: support
claim: Cultural property residing in museums must be returned to its place of origin.
 perspective: Having artefacts in different locations encourages us to think of our common origins
Output: undermine
claim: Cultural property residing in museums must be returned to its place of origin.
 perspective: Artefacts should be repatriated....including the people which were stolen and scattered world wide!
Output: support
claim: Cultural property residing in museums must be returned to its place of origin.
 perspective: These artefacts should bring revenue to the counties of origin
Output: support
claim: Hosting the Olympic Games is beneficial.
 perspective: The Olympics displace and burden residents of the host country and city. 
Output: undermine
claim: Hosting the Olympic Games is beneficial.
 perspective: The Olympics place a strain on the residents of the host city and country.
Output: undermine
claim: Hosting the Olympic Games is beneficial.
 perspective: Hosting the Olympics can be more trouble than it's worth for those who live there.
Output: undermine
claim: Hosting the Olympic Games is beneficial.
 perspective: It  sanctions and encourages 'Islamophobic' panics and promotes the excessive 'securitisation' of the globe
Output: undermine
claim: Hosting the Olympic Games is beneficial.
 perspective: This would result in Islamophobic panics and knee jerk reactions across the world.
Output: undermine
claim: Hosting the Olympic Games is beneficial.
 perspective: Islamophobic panic and excessive security would be sanctioned by this action.
Output: undermine
claim: Stop sending development aid to India.
 perspective: Development aid still makes a difference
Output: undermine
claim: Stop sending development aid to India.
 perspective: A difference is made with development aid.
Output: undermine
claim: Quebec should secede from Canada.
 perspective: This is not the will of the people of Quebec. 
Output: undermine
claim: The United States was correct in going to war against North Korea in support of their territory of South Korea.
 perspective: To invade could trigger an Arms Race: the very thing everyone wants to avoid!
Output: undermine
claim: The United States was correct in going to war against North Korea in support of their territory of South Korea.
 perspective: Everyone wants to avoid an Arms Race, and an invasion could trigger just that outcome. 
Output: undermine
claim: The United States was correct in going to war against North Korea in support of their territory of South Korea.
 perspective: An Arms race is the one outcome everyone wants to avoid, and an invasion could lead to that. 
Output: undermine
claim: It should be allowed to have military recruitment in schools.
 perspective: Military recruitment in schools is less education than propaganda
Output: undermine
claim: It should be allowed to have military recruitment in schools.
 perspective: Military recruitment in schools is more propaganda than education. 
Output: undermine
claim: It should be allowed to have military recruitment in schools.
 perspective: Military recruitment in schools provides more propaganda than it does education.
Output: undermine
claim: It should be allowed to have military recruitment in schools.
 perspective: Military recruiters downplay the risks of a military career, tempting schoolchildren into a career they would not have chosen with honest information.
Output: undermine
claim: It should be allowed to have military recruitment in schools.
 perspective: Military recruiters decieve children about the risks of a military career, tempting them into a career they would not choose with honest information.
Output: undermine
claim: It should be allowed to have military recruitment in schools.
 perspective: Since schoolchildren would not chose a military career with honest information, military recruiters downplay the risks of a military career to tempt them.
Output: undermine
claim: It should be allowed to have military recruitment in schools.
 perspective: School children are too young to target for military service
Output: undermine
claim: It should be allowed to have military recruitment in schools.
 perspective: School children are too young to be targeted for military service.
Output: undermine
claim: It should be allowed to have military recruitment in schools.
 perspective: The military should not target children for service as they are too young.
Output: undermine
claim: Corporations are a threat to Democracy and society.
 perspective: Corporations support our living standards and ensure democracy and human rights are STRONGER, not WEAKER!
Output: undermine
claim: Corporations are a threat to Democracy and society.
 perspective: Corporations give citizens a better way of life.
Output: undermine
claim: Corporations are a threat to Democracy and society.
 perspective: Corporations makes the country stronger by providing a better way of life.
Output: undermine
claim: Smokers should be denied access to state healthcare.
 perspective: Denying access to healthcare for smokers will hurt the economy
Output: undermine
claim: Smokers should be denied access to state healthcare.
 perspective: Denying access to healthcare for smokers will lead to thousands of people being turned away and potentially dying from preventable illnesses
Output: undermine
claim: Smokers should be denied access to state healthcare.
 perspective: Denying healthcare to smokers is a restriction on people's liberties
Output: undermine
claim: Smokers should be denied access to state healthcare.
 perspective: Denying healthcare to smokers alone is victimization
Output: undermine
claim: Smokers should be denied access to state healthcare.
 perspective: Denying healthcare to smokers is impractical
Output: undermine
claim: You should join Facebook.
 perspective: Facebook has some dangerous consequences
Output: undermine
claim: You should join Facebook.
 perspective: The internet can be a dangerous place and Facebook is no different.
Output: undermine
claim: You should join Facebook.
 perspective: We must always be careful what we post on Facebook or there could be negative consequences.
Output: undermine
claim: You should join Facebook.
 perspective: Facebook has a negative impact on learning
Output: undermine
claim: You should join Facebook.
 perspective: People would learn more without a connection to Facebook.
Output: undermine
claim: You should join Facebook.
 perspective: Facebook hurts people's ability to learn and retain new information.
Output: undermine
claim: Deregulation and tax cuts should be embraced to lead the world out of economic crisis.
 perspective: Deregulation Fuels Corporations to Behave Unethically, Devastating Human Rights and the Environment
Output: undermine
claim: Deregulation and tax cuts should be embraced to lead the world out of economic crisis.
 perspective: Corporations have only one goal, profit, human rights and environmental concerns be damned.
Output: undermine
claim: Deregulation and tax cuts should be embraced to lead the world out of economic crisis.
 perspective: Tax Cuts Harm Social Programs for Citizens
Output: undermine
claim: Deregulation and tax cuts should be embraced to lead the world out of economic crisis.
 perspective: Regulation is Necessary for the Stabilization of Markets and Employment
Output: undermine
claim: Parents should be allowed to genetically screen foetuses for heritable diseases.
 perspective: Genetic screening may lead the marginalisation of those living with genetic disorders
Output: undermine
claim: Parents should be allowed to genetically screen foetuses for heritable diseases.
 perspective: People with genetic disorders will be marginalized by genetic screening.
Output: undermine
claim: Parents should be allowed to genetically screen foetuses for heritable diseases.
 perspective: A screening culture may lead to the value of human life becoming distorted
Output: undermine
claim: Taking food thrown out by supermarkets should not be illegal.
 perspective: Scavengers cause problems for the shop and make the atmosphere unpleasant.
Output: undermine
claim: Taking food thrown out by supermarkets should not be illegal.
 perspective: The supermarket could get into legal trouble.
Output: undermine
claim: Taking food thrown out by supermarkets should not be illegal.
 perspective: Supermarkets can be held legally responsible if someone gets sick from food they have thrown out.
Output: undermine
claim: Taking food thrown out by supermarkets should not be illegal.
 perspective: Even though someone took food thrown out by a supermarket, they could sue the supermarket if they get sick.
Output: undermine
claim: Teachers should be armed.
 perspective: Children would be caught in the crossfire
Output: undermine
claim: Teachers should be armed.
 perspective: It would be difficult to prevent the unintentional shooting of children in the crossfire.
Output: undermine
claim: Teachers should be armed.
 perspective: If teachers shoot a gun children will be killed
Output: undermine
claim: Teachers should be armed.
 perspective: Guns in schools might be used in circumstances other than defense.
Output: undermine
claim: Teachers should be armed.
 perspective: There are risks involved with allowing guns in schools.
Output: undermine
claim: Teachers should be armed.
 perspective: Allowing guns in schools might contribute to school violence if they are not used only for defense.
Output: undermine
claim: Abolish the monarchy.
 perspective: The head of state should be a position that is separate and distinct from politics
Output: undermine
claim: Abolish the monarchy.
 perspective: Politics should not include the head of the state as in a monarchy.
Output: undermine
claim: Abolish the monarchy.
 perspective: There should be a separation from the head of state and politics.
Output: undermine
claim: Cut aid to African states that criminalise homosexuality.
 perspective: The reduction of aid will cause innocent people to suffer
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: Pack labelling or taxation a better alternative
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: Ban would harm the wider economy
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: A smoking ban in public places is harmful to the economy
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: Economic hardship would follow a public place smoking ban
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: Unenforceable
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: people have the right to smoke 
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: You should be able to smoke in public.
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: Smoking is a personal choice, and should not be restricted.
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: The decision to smoke is a human right.
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: Smoking is a human right.
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: WHAT HAPPEN TO A FREE CANADA.  WE ARE GOING BACK TO THE TIME WERE SLAVES HAD NO RIGHT, NOW IT IS SMOKERS HAVE NO RIGHT
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: Taking away a smoker's rights to smoke in public is akin to the time of slavery!
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: How can this be a free Canada, if our right to smoke in public is taken away?
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: Canada is a free country, so we should be free to be able to smoke.
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: Being free to smoke is a basic right that someone in a free country should have.
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: No - it should not be banned in places people CHOOSE to go  
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: A smoker should be allowed to smoke in any place that they have a choice to go to.
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: If I choose to go somewhere, I should be allowed to smoke there.
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: Since people are choosing whether to go to places, smoking shouldn't be banned there,
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: Smoking shouldn't be banned in places where people choose to be.
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: Banning smoking isn't necessary.
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: smoking don't necessarily have to be banned
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: It's not necessary to ban smoking.
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: Banning smoking is not something that's necessary.
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: Banning smoking in public places is not right.
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: It is not right to ban smoking.
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: Banning smoking is a bad idea.
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: It's a bad idea to ban smoking.
Output: undermine
claim: Ghana’s ban on smoking in public places is a model for Africa.
 perspective: Smoking shouldnt be banned
Output: undermine
claim: Deny Organs to Non-Donors.
 perspective: What if your loved-one was a recipient?
Output: undermine
claim: Space Exploration Is a Waste of Money.
 perspective: The cost isn't actually very high
Output: undermine
claim: Space Exploration Is a Waste of Money.
 perspective: The resources and efforts focused on space exploration could better humanity.
Output: undermine
claim: Space Exploration Is a Waste of Money.
 perspective: It is in man's nature to explore his environment.
Output: undermine
claim: The UK would be better off economically outside the European Union.
 perspective: Economic growth comes with closer integration with your neighbours
Output: undermine
claim: The UK would be better off economically outside the European Union.
 perspective: Leaving will cause a shock to the British economy
Output: undermine
claim: The UK would be better off economically outside the European Union.
 perspective: british economy will take a hit
Output: undermine
claim: The UK would be better off economically outside the European Union.
 perspective: Leaving will give a shock to the British economy 
Output: undermine
claim: The UK would be better off economically outside the European Union.
 perspective: Leaving may increase British unemployment
Output: undermine
claim: The UK would be better off economically outside the European Union.
 perspective: Students will have to pay British tuition fees
Output: undermine
claim: Domestic intelligence agencies have a legitimate role to play in democracy.
 perspective: Intelligence agencies inflate threats.
Output: undermine
claim: Domestic intelligence agencies have a legitimate role to play in democracy.
 perspective: Intelligence agencies exaggerate the nature of threats.
Output: undermine
claim: Domestic intelligence agencies have a legitimate role to play in democracy.
 perspective: Intelligence agencies use hyperbole when describing threats.
Output: undermine
claim: Domestic intelligence agencies have a legitimate role to play in democracy.
 perspective: Threats are exaggerrated by intelligence agencies.
Output: undermine
claim: Domestic intelligence agencies have a legitimate role to play in democracy.
 perspective: It can be self-serving for intelligence agencies to over exaggerate threats.
Output: undermine
claim: Domestic intelligence agencies have a legitimate role to play in democracy.
 perspective: Domestic intelligence agencies cannot be controlled
Output: undermine
claim: Domestic intelligence agencies have a legitimate role to play in democracy.
 perspective: It is too difficult to control domestic intelligence services.
Output: undermine
claim: Domestic intelligence agencies have a legitimate role to play in democracy.
 perspective: Domestic intelligence services lack the oversight to be controlled.
Output: undermine
claim: Domestic intelligence agencies have a legitimate role to play in democracy.
 perspective: There is an inability to control domestic intelligence agencies.
Output: undermine
claim: Domestic intelligence agencies have a legitimate role to play in democracy.
 perspective: Intelligence agencies operating domestically are unable to be controlled.
Output: undermine
claim: Domestic intelligence agencies have a legitimate role to play in democracy.
 perspective: The government has no right to spy on citizens.
Output: undermine
claim: Domestic intelligence agencies have a legitimate role to play in democracy.
 perspective: Citizens have a right to privacy against the government.
Output: undermine
claim: Domestic intelligence agencies have a legitimate role to play in democracy.
 perspective: Government sponsored domestic intelligence cannot be allowed to spy on citizens.
Output: undermine
claim: Domestic intelligence agencies have a legitimate role to play in democracy.
 perspective: Citizens have the right to expect privacy and not be spied on by domestic intelligence agencies.
Output: undermine
claim: Affirmative Action in South Africa does more harm than good.
 perspective: AA does more good than harm
Output: undermine
claim: Affirmative Action in South Africa does more harm than good.
 perspective: Affirmative Action is necessary to combat racism.
Output: undermine
claim: Affirmative Action in South Africa does more harm than good.
 perspective: There is a moral obligation to provide affirmative action programs
Output: undermine
claim: Affirmative Action in South Africa does more harm than good.
 perspective: We are obligated to promote racial equality and provide affirmative action programs.
Output: undermine
claim: Affirmative Action in South Africa does more harm than good.
 perspective: We have a moral obligation to stop discrimination with affirmative action.
Output: undermine
claim: Affirmative Action in South Africa does more harm than good.
 perspective: Affirmative action removes the cyclical disadvantages of discrimination
Output: undermine
claim: Affirmative Action in South Africa does more harm than good.
 perspective: Discrimination can be helped by affirmative action.
Output: undermine
claim: Affirmative Action in South Africa does more harm than good.
 perspective: The cycle of racial discrimination can be broken through affirmative action programs.
Output: undermine
claim: Affirmative Action in South Africa does more harm than good.
 perspective: Affirmative action reduces social prejudice
Output: undermine
claim: Affirmative Action in South Africa does more harm than good.
 perspective: Affirmative action is needed to combat racial and gender prejudice.
Output: undermine
claim: Affirmative Action in South Africa does more harm than good.
 perspective: We can help decrease social prejudice with affirmative action programs.
Output: undermine
claim: Prosecutions help the healing process.
 perspective: Peace more important than Justice 
Output: undermine
claim: Prosecutions help the healing process.
 perspective: Fear of prosecutions cause leaders to do more damage
Output: undermine
claim: Prosecutions help the healing process.
 perspective: Prosecutions don't get to the real truth
Output: undermine
claim: New prisons need to be built to ease overcrowding.
 perspective: The new prisons will just fill up as well.
Output: undermine
claim: New prisons need to be built to ease overcrowding.
 perspective: Too many prisons.
Output: undermine
claim: New prisons need to be built to ease overcrowding.
 perspective: Rehabilitation is the answer not extra prison spaces.
Output: undermine
claim: New prisons need to be built to ease overcrowding.
 perspective: Prisoners should be rehabilitated, not imprisoned.
Output: undermine
claim: New prisons need to be built to ease overcrowding.
 perspective: Rather than create more spaces in prison, we should rehabilitate and release prisoners.
Output: undermine
claim: New prisons need to be built to ease overcrowding.
 perspective: It is better to rehabiliate people instead of buidling prisons.
Output: undermine
claim: New prisons need to be built to ease overcrowding.
 perspective: If rehabilitation were an option, there would be less need for prisons.
Output: undermine
claim: New prisons need to be built to ease overcrowding.
 perspective: Communities nearby the prisons will suffer.
Output: undermine
claim: New prisons need to be built to ease overcrowding.
 perspective: Building more prisons will just negatively affect the surrounding communities.
Output: undermine
claim: New prisons need to be built to ease overcrowding.
 perspective: More prisons means more negative impacts on surrounding communities.
Output: undermine
claim: New prisons need to be built to ease overcrowding.
 perspective: Community value will plummet with the building of new prisons.
Output: undermine
claim: New prisons need to be built to ease overcrowding.
 perspective: New prisons will harm nearby communities.
Output: undermine
claim: Parents or other adults should be able to ban books from schools and libraries.
 perspective: Many frequently challenged books help people get a better idea of the world and their place in it
Output: undermine
claim: Parents or other adults should be able to ban books from schools and libraries.
 perspective: Keeping books with inappropriate content out of libraries protects kids, but doesn't stop people from reading those books or prevent authors from writing them.
Output: undermine
claim: Parents or other adults should be able to ban books from schools and libraries.
 perspective: Parents may control what their own children read, but don't have a right to restrict what books are available to other people.
Output: undermine
claim: Parents or other adults should be able to ban books from schools and libraries.
 perspective: Parents can restrict the reading of their children, but don't have a right to control what books other people read.
Output: undermine
claim: Parents or other adults should be able to ban books from schools and libraries.
 perspective: Parents have a say about what their children read, but don't have a right to control what books are available to others. 
Output: undermine
claim: Parents or other adults should be able to ban books from schools and libraries.
 perspective: Books are a portal to different life experiences and reading encourages empathy and social-emotional development
Output: undermine
claim: Parents or other adults should be able to ban books from schools and libraries.
 perspective: Reading encourages empathy and social-emotional development, and books are a portal to different life experiences.
Output: undermine
claim: Parents or other adults should be able to ban books from schools and libraries.
 perspective: Books are an open door to different life experiences and reading encourages social-emotional development and empathy.
Output: undermine
claim: That Zero Tolerance Policing is a Good Tactic for Fighting Crime.
 perspective: There is no concrete proof that a zero tolerance approach to crime exists0
Output: undermine
claim: That Zero Tolerance Policing is a Good Tactic for Fighting Crime.
 perspective: Zero tolerance policing is enormously expensive
Output: undermine
claim: That Zero Tolerance Policing is a Good Tactic for Fighting Crime.
 perspective: Tolerance has a negative correlation with costs
Output: undermine
claim: That Zero Tolerance Policing is a Good Tactic for Fighting Crime.
 perspective: It can be more difficult to afford a lesser tolerance policing setup
Output: undermine
claim: Prisoners Should Be Used For Medical Experiments Without Consent.
 perspective: Against morality and medical ethics
Output: undermine
claim: Prisoners Should Be Used For Medical Experiments Without Consent.
 perspective: Against the Principle of  Criminal Justice 
Output: undermine
claim: Prisoners Should Be Used For Medical Experiments Without Consent.
 perspective: No Cruel and Unusual Punishment
Output: undermine
claim: Prisoners Should Be Used For Medical Experiments Without Consent.
 perspective: Protection of prisoner's rights
Output: undermine
claim: Labels on food must be mandated to encourage people to eat better.
 perspective: Food labeling allows companies to deceive consumers
Output: undermine
claim: Labels on food must be mandated to encourage people to eat better.
 perspective: By labeling their foods, companies are able to convince consumers of falsehoods. 
Output: undermine
claim: Labels on food must be mandated to encourage people to eat better.
 perspective: Consumers can be fed lies by companies via food labels.
Output: undermine
claim: Labels on food must be mandated to encourage people to eat better.
 perspective: Food labeling does not change consumer behavior
Output: undermine
claim: Labels on food must be mandated to encourage people to eat better.
 perspective: Consumers do not change their buying habits based on the absence or presence of labels.
Output: undermine
claim: Labels on food must be mandated to encourage people to eat better.
 perspective: Food labeling introduces unfair prejudice against certain products
Output: undermine
claim: Labels on food must be mandated to encourage people to eat better.
 perspective: Food labels encourage bias against certain types of products.
Output: undermine
claim: Labels on food must be mandated to encourage people to eat better.
 perspective: Nutrition labeling on packages can encourage consumers to buy certain types of foods over others.
Output: undermine
claim: Force has to be used to protect human rights abroad.
 perspective: This is an illegitimate violation of national sovereignty.
Output: undermine
claim: Force has to be used to protect human rights abroad.
 perspective: The use of force violates our sovereignty, instead of protecting human rights.
Output: undermine
claim: Force has to be used to protect human rights abroad.
 perspective: Force does more harm than good.
Output: undermine
claim: Force has to be used to protect human rights abroad.
 perspective: Using force to protect human rights can be detrimental.
Output: undermine
claim: Long term cooperation between Russia and the United States is possible.
 perspective: Missile defence shows Russia is still suspicious of U.S. motives.
Output: undermine
claim: Long term cooperation between Russia and the United States is possible.
 perspective: Missile defense is an area where Russia is suspicious of the United States.
Output: undermine
claim: Long term cooperation between Russia and the United States is possible.
 perspective: The countries must account for the competing economic interests in addition to finding the ways to cooperate.
Output: undermine
claim: Long term cooperation between Russia and the United States is possible.
 perspective: Conflicts in the economic interests of the countries make the long term cooperation more difficult to accomplish.
Output: undermine
claim: Long term cooperation between Russia and the United States is possible.
 perspective: Russian and US economic interests conflict
Output: undermine
claim: Long term cooperation between Russia and the United States is possible.
 perspective: Russian and US strategic interests conflict
Output: undermine
claim: Long term cooperation between Russia and the United States is possible.
 perspective: The conflicts between US and Russian strategic interest make this difficult.
Output: undermine
claim: Long term cooperation between Russia and the United States is possible.
 perspective: This is more challenging because of the conflicts between Russian and US strategic interests.
Output: undermine
claim: Long term cooperation between Russia and the United States is possible.
 perspective: The conflicts between the economic interests of the two countries are an obstacle to long term cooperation between the two countries.
Output: undermine
claim: Macs are better than PCs.
 perspective: Macs are plagued with hardware issues
Output: undermine
claim: Macs are better than PCs.
 perspective: Despite sometimes numerous hardware issues, Macs continue are better than PCs for many reasons
Output: undermine
claim: Competition in the long run is healthy rather than harmful for the community: GRE issue.
 perspective: for having a fair competition many bright students have to suffer: reservation
Output: undermine
claim: Competition in the long run is healthy rather than harmful for the community: GRE issue.
 perspective: Reservation is having a fair competition that man students have to suffer.
Output: undermine
claim: Adding artificial happy endings to a story completely ruins it.
 perspective: Hopeful endings are important for morale
Output: undermine
claim: Adding artificial happy endings to a story completely ruins it.
 perspective: A good ending is good for morale.
Output: undermine
claim: Adding artificial happy endings to a story completely ruins it.
 perspective: If there is hope at the end, it boost morale.
Output: undermine
claim: Adding artificial happy endings to a story completely ruins it.
 perspective: Truly faithful versions of fairy tales would be unsuitable for young children.
Output: undermine
claim: Hosting the world cup is beneficial.
 perspective: Scarce public resources.
Output: undermine
claim: Hosting the world cup is beneficial.
 perspective: Financially costly for the hosts
Output: undermine
claim: Hosting the world cup is beneficial.
 perspective: too much money for the hosts
Output: undermine
claim: Hosting the world cup is beneficial.
 perspective: costly for the hosts in a financial sense
Output: undermine
claim: Men are the key to family planning in Uganda.
 perspective: Family planning is wrong: controlling sexuality
Output: undermine
claim: Men are the key to family planning in Uganda.
 perspective: Controlling sexuality in family planning is wrong
Output: undermine
claim: Men are the key to family planning in Uganda.
 perspective: Sexuality and family planning don't mix
Output: undermine
claim: German unification has been a success.
 perspective: People from East Germany feel disgruntled and this is reflected in who they vote for
Output: undermine
claim: German unification has been a success.
 perspective: East Germans don't necessarily believe unification to be a success no matter who they vote for.
Output: undermine
claim: Prostitution has to be legalised.
 perspective: Markets in sex would corrupt non-market sexual relations, turning women and girls into commodities 
Output: undermine
claim: Prostitution has to be legalised.
 perspective: Markets in sexual services undermine the values of commitment and loyalty 
Output: undermine
claim: Prostitution has to be legalised.
 perspective: Sex markets undermine the institution of marriage.
Output: undermine
claim: Prostitution has to be legalised.
 perspective: Sex markets are bad for society.
Output: undermine
claim: Prostitution has to be legalised.
 perspective: No, can you imagine the ADS on TV?
Output: undermine
claim: Prostitution has to be legalised.
 perspective: Legalizing prostitution will result pornographic advertisements. 
Output: undermine
claim: Prostitution has to be legalised.
 perspective: The advertising  for prostitution would be against public decency.
Output: undermine
claim: Prostitution has to be legalised.
 perspective: Legalised prostitution still victimises the vulnerable.
Output: undermine
claim: Prostitution has to be legalised.
 perspective: Prostitution hurts vulnerable women. 
Output: undermine
claim: Prostitution has to be legalised.
 perspective: Prostitution takes advantage of women, turning them into victims.
Output: undermine
claim: Prostitution has to be legalised.
 perspective: Would lead to similar policy towards drugs
Output: undermine
claim: Prostitution has to be legalised.
 perspective: We should declare the war on prostitution
Output: undermine
claim: Prostitution has to be legalised.
 perspective: The law should not condone illicit behaviour
Output: undermine
claim: Prostitution has to be legalised.
 perspective: It would not solve the violence of prostitution.
Output: undermine
claim: Prostitution has to be legalised.
 perspective: Proposal will exacerbate the HIV problem
Output: undermine
claim: Prostitution has to be legalised.
 perspective: Legalizing prostitution would exacerbate the HIV problem.
Output: undermine
claim: Prostitution has to be legalised.
 perspective: Detrimental to womens rights
Output: undermine
claim: Prostitution has to be legalised.
 perspective: Legalizing prostitution opposes women's rights.
Output: undermine
claim: Children should be banned from watching shows that contain violence and other adult contents.
 perspective: Any legislation would be impossible to enforce
Output: undermine
claim: Children should be banned from watching shows that contain violence and other adult contents.
 perspective: Laws on this matter can not be enforced.
Output: undermine
claim: Children should be banned from watching shows that contain violence and other adult contents.
 perspective: The government can not control these matters.
Output: undermine
claim: Children should be banned from watching shows that contain violence and other adult contents.
 perspective: People would not follow new laws about restricting kid's tv 
Output: undermine
claim: Children should be banned from watching shows that contain violence and other adult contents.
 perspective: There is no one to enforce the new tv rules
Output: undermine
claim: Children should be banned from watching shows that contain violence and other adult contents.
 perspective: banning wouldn't stop people viewing them
Output: undermine