niryuu/sni-each-converted huggingface dataset:
claim: All nations have a right to nuclear weapons.
 perspective: The abolition of nuclear weapons would actually incentivize the development and use of even more dangerous weapons, such as chemical and biological weapons
Output: support
claim: All nations have a right to nuclear weapons.
 perspective: Proliferation of nuclear weapons increases the chances of nuclear accidents
Output: undermine
claim: All nations have a right to nuclear weapons.
 perspective: Nuclear weapons can fall into the wrong hands.
Output: undermine
claim: All nations have a right to nuclear weapons.
 perspective: Risk of nuclear weapons falling into the wrong hands
Output: undermine
claim: All nations have a right to nuclear weapons.
 perspective: States will give terrorists nuclear weapons
Output: undermine
claim: All nations have a right to nuclear weapons.
 perspective: It's conceivable that the wrong people will have the weapons.
Output: undermine
claim: All nations have a right to nuclear weapons.
 perspective: The nukes can end up being used against us.
Output: undermine
claim: All nations have a right to nuclear weapons.
 perspective: Terrorists will steal nuclear weapons from poorly guarded arsenals
Output: undermine
claim: All nations have a right to nuclear weapons.
 perspective: Irrational leaders make the possession of nuclear weapons dangerous
Output: undermine
claim: All nations have a right to nuclear weapons.
 perspective: It is immoral to use the threat of nuclear annihilation in order to achieve foreign policy aims
Output: undermine
claim: All nations have a right to nuclear weapons.
 perspective: All the people worldwide have the same rights and are equal to one another. 
Output: support
claim: All nations have a right to nuclear weapons.
 perspective: The pursuit of nuclear defence (respectively the possession of nuclear weapons) by more countries is a guarantee for peace. 
Output: support
claim: All nations have a right to nuclear weapons.
 perspective: any conflict will rapidly de-escalate
Output: support
claim: All nations have a right to nuclear weapons.
 perspective: Nuclear weapons will rapidly de-escalate conflicts.
Output: support
claim: All nations have a right to nuclear weapons.
 perspective: Conflicts can be circumvented with nuclear weapons
Output: support
claim: All nations have a right to nuclear weapons.
 perspective: both sides will avoid threatening vital interests
Output: support
claim: All nations have a right to nuclear weapons.
 perspective: Both the use and threat of nuclear weapons are illegal
Output: undermine
claim: All nations have a right to nuclear weapons.
 perspective: The development of tactical nuclear weapons by one state would lead to a new global arms race.
Output: undermine
claim: All nations have a right to nuclear weapons.
 perspective: Countries need to design nuclear devices to adapt with changing defensive technology.
Output: support
claim: All nations have a right to nuclear weapons.
 perspective: Tactical nuclear weapons are very expensive to design and build, yet will likely have no new strategic value.
Output: undermine
claim: All nations have a right to nuclear weapons.
 perspective: Tactical nuclear warheads are more serviceable for use in intimidation and retaliation toward enemies, as they are considerably less catastrophically destructive than those of current nuclear arsenals.
Output: support
claim: All nations have a right to nuclear weapons.
 perspective: The way tactical nuclear weapons need to be deployed control of their use is devolved to field commanders, vastly increasing the probability that in the event of conflict they would be used.
Output: undermine
claim: All nations have a right to nuclear weapons.
 perspective: [Iran specific] Others, particularly Israel, would act if the United States did not
Output: undermine
claim: All nations have a right to nuclear weapons.
 perspective: If the US does not act on Iran, Israel will
Output: undermine
claim: Boys should go to boys only schools.
 perspective: boys are more aggressive, violent, stereotypically masculine in boys schools
Output: undermine
claim: Boys should go to boys only schools.
 perspective: thbt boys and girls should be educated serparatley
Output: support
claim: Boys should go to boys only schools.
 perspective: Kids regardless of gender should be taught in school together.
Output: support
claim: Boys should go to boys only schools.
 perspective: Schools need to be gender neutral in order to ensure the kids safety.
Output: support
claim: Boys should go to boys only schools.
 perspective: some boys and girls should be educated seperately
Output: support
claim: Boys should go to boys only schools.
 perspective: seperate education for boys and girls have its own benefit
Output: support
claim: We believe in world government.
 perspective: A world government would add another, laborious level of bureaucracy
Output: undermine
claim: We believe in world government.
 perspective: A world government would take more power away from the people.
Output: undermine
claim: We believe in world government.
 perspective: A world government would be inefficient.
Output: undermine
claim: We believe in world government.
 perspective: The forces of nationalism are too strong to permit the loosening of state sovereignty any further
Output: undermine
claim: We believe in world government.
 perspective: It is unrealistic to expect less state sovereignty.
Output: undermine
claim: We believe in world government.
 perspective: The balance is too strong to expect it to change.
Output: undermine
claim: We believe in world government.
 perspective: There is no feasible transition path to a world government model
Output: undermine
claim: We believe in world government.
 perspective: A world government is too difficult to implement.
Output: undermine
claim: We believe in world government.
 perspective: The steps to a smooth transition to a world government are unclear.
Output: undermine
claim: We believe in world government.
 perspective: A world government would foster a constructive cosmopolitanism
Output: support
claim: We believe in world government.
 perspective: There are benefits to a world government. 
Output: support
claim: We believe in world government.
 perspective: A world government would help us move forward as a whole.
Output: support
claim: We believe in world government.
 perspective: A world government would be ineffective in practice
Output: undermine
claim: We believe in world government.
 perspective: A world government is not realistic.
Output: undermine
claim: We believe in world government.
 perspective: World government would create more problems than it would fix.
Output: undermine
claim: The United Nations has failed.
 perspective: :  Main purpose of UN, to prevent war, has clearly not been achieved. 
Output: support
claim: The United Nations has failed.
 perspective: The UN has performed a valuable service in preventing wars and in peacekeeping. 
Output: undermine
claim: The United Nations has failed.
 perspective: UN is keeping its mission for peace
Output: undermine
claim: The United Nations has failed.
 perspective: The UN has done a great job with preventing wars 
Output: undermine
claim: The United Nations has failed.
 perspective: The UN does good at maintaining peace
Output: undermine
claim: Adolf Hitler Does Not Deserve His Reputation as Evil.
 perspective: He was not in his right mind
Output: undermine
claim: Animals have rights.
 perspective: Even if we did think that animals were less intelligent than humans beings they should be protected by rights
Output: support
claim: Animals have rights.
 perspective: animals are entitled to rights
Output: support
claim: Animals have rights.
 perspective: living beings have basic rights
Output: support
claim: Animals have rights.
 perspective: Animals should be left in the wild
Output: support
claim: Subsidize poor communities.
 perspective: Subsidies are the most efficient way for a state to redistribute wealth within its borders.
Output: support
claim: Subsidize poor communities.
 perspective: Redistribution of wealth internal to a country is done most efficently through the use of subsidies.
Output: support
claim: Subsidize poor communities.
 perspective: Wealth redistribution is best done through the use of subsidies.
Output: support
claim: Subsidize poor communities.
 perspective: Government supervised redistribution of wealth is inefficient
Output: undermine
claim: Subsidize poor communities.
 perspective: Government supervision of wealth redistribution is inefficient.
Output: undermine
claim: Subsidize poor communities.
 perspective: Government supervised redistribution of wealth is ineffective
Output: undermine
claim: Subsidize poor communities.
 perspective: Subsidies create a sense of social equality
Output: support
claim: Subsidize poor communities.
 perspective: Substandard living conditions have a broad environmental impact
Output: support
claim: Subsidize poor communities.
 perspective: There are environmental impacts to people living in substandard conditions.
Output: support
claim: Subsidize poor communities.
 perspective: Poor living conditions have many impacts on the environment.
Output: support
claim: Subsidize poor communities.
 perspective: The risk of creating dependence
Output: undermine
claim: Subsidize poor communities.
 perspective: Social change
Output: support
claim: The best way to protect Scottish interests in the EU is to vote for independence.
 perspective: Scottish independence might be a faster route out of the EU than a referendum. 
Output: support
claim: The best way to protect Scottish interests in the EU is to vote for independence.
 perspective: Scottish independence should be considered in lieu of a referendum.
Output: support
claim: The best way to protect Scottish interests in the EU is to vote for independence.
 perspective: Instead of a referendum, it might be quicker to enable Scottish independence.
Output: support
claim: The best way to protect Scottish interests in the EU is to vote for independence.
 perspective: Scotland has different interests to rUK
Output: support
claim: The best way to protect Scottish interests in the EU is to vote for independence.
 perspective: The many hidden subsidies to SE England would end.
Output: undermine
claim: The best way to protect Scottish interests in the EU is to vote for independence.
 perspective: Independence would give Scotland clout where it matters
Output: support
claim: The best way to protect Scottish interests in the EU is to vote for independence.
 perspective: If Scotland were independent then it would have more power in important areas.
Output: support
claim: The best way to protect Scottish interests in the EU is to vote for independence.
 perspective: An independent Scotland nation-state would give it more influence.
Output: support
claim: The best way to protect Scottish interests in the EU is to vote for independence.
 perspective: Scotland will be unable to survive economically without England
Output: undermine
claim: The best way to protect Scottish interests in the EU is to vote for independence.
 perspective: Scotland's economy cannot survive if it doesn't have England to lean on.
Output: undermine
claim: The best way to protect Scottish interests in the EU is to vote for independence.
 perspective: Scotland would not be able to survive independently without England.
Output: undermine
claim: The best way to protect Scottish interests in the EU is to vote for independence.
 perspective: Relations between Scots and English are deteriorating
Output: support
claim: The best way to protect Scottish interests in the EU is to vote for independence.
 perspective: Other small nation-states like Norway and the Republic of Ireland are successful
Output: support
claim: The best way to protect Scottish interests in the EU is to vote for independence.
 perspective: Norway and the Republic of Ireland are examples of successful nation-states.
Output: support
claim: The best way to protect Scottish interests in the EU is to vote for independence.
 perspective: You can look at Norway and the Republic of Ireland to see successful nation-states.
Output: support
claim: The best way to protect Scottish interests in the EU is to vote for independence.
 perspective: The Scots themselves would vote against independence if there was a referendum.
Output: undermine
claim: The best way to protect Scottish interests in the EU is to vote for independence.
 perspective: If it should come to it, the Scottish people would not vote for independence.
Output: undermine
claim: The best way to protect Scottish interests in the EU is to vote for independence.
 perspective: Scots would not be in favor of voting for independence. 
Output: undermine
claim: Disclose previous convictions in court.
 perspective: Occasional disclosure of convictions leads to an inconsistent justice system.
Output: undermine
claim: Disclose previous convictions in court.
 perspective: The justice system becomes inconsistent when convictions records are disclosed on an occasional basis
Output: undermine
claim: Disclose previous convictions in court.
 perspective: Juries need to have all the information possible in order to reach a fair verdict.
Output: support
claim: Disclose previous convictions in court.
 perspective: Juries should have complete information to come to a verdict
Output: support
claim: Disclose previous convictions in court.
 perspective: To reach their verdict, juries should be give the most information possible
Output: support
claim: Disclose previous convictions in court.
 perspective: Justice will be denied with this motion.
Output: undermine
claim: Disclose previous convictions in court.
 perspective: This motion will result in a bias in trial. 
Output: undermine
claim: Disclose previous convictions in court.
 perspective: Allowing the motion would be wrong for justice.
Output: undermine
claim: Disclose previous convictions in court.
 perspective: The disclosure of previous convictions could falsely characterize the defendant.  
Output: undermine
claim: Disclose previous convictions in court.
 perspective: Discussing past convictions would hurt the defendant.
Output: undermine
claim: Disclose previous convictions in court.
 perspective: Talking about the defendants past would wrongly accuse his character.
Output: undermine
claim: Disclose previous convictions in court.
 perspective: The motion completely undermines the assumption of innocence which accompanies a fair trial.
Output: undermine
claim: Disclose previous convictions in court.
 perspective: Having this motion goes against the presumption of innocence. 
Output: undermine
claim: Disclose previous convictions in court.
 perspective: The current system is unfairly weighted in favour of criminals.
Output: support
claim: Disclose previous convictions in court.
 perspective: We already recognise that we cannot place complete trust in juries.
Output: undermine
claim: ID cards and the National Identity Register should be scrapped.
 perspective: ID cards will help protect cardholders against identity theft and fraud
Output: undermine
claim: ID cards and the National Identity Register should be scrapped.
 perspective: ID cards will allow the police more quickly to identify suspects and people they arrest.
Output: undermine
claim: ID cards and the National Identity Register should be scrapped.
 perspective: ID cards will lead to increased discrimination
Output: support
claim: ID cards and the National Identity Register should be scrapped.
 perspective: ID cards will provide a reliable way of checking the identity of people in positions of trust
Output: undermine
claim: ID cards and the National Identity Register should be scrapped.
 perspective: ID cards will help combat illegal working and reduce illegal immigration to the UK
Output: undermine
claim: ID cards and the National Identity Register should be scrapped.
 perspective: They will provide a secure way of applying for financial products and making financial transactions, including those made over the internet
Output: undermine
claim: ID cards and the National Identity Register should be scrapped.
 perspective: The UK is a liberal society and unused to ID cards
Output: support
claim: ID cards and the National Identity Register should be scrapped.
 perspective: It will make it easier to travel in Europe
Output: undermine
claim: ID cards and the National Identity Register should be scrapped.
 perspective: The UK is not that liberal a society and will adapt to ID cards
Output: undermine
claim: ID cards and the National Identity Register should be scrapped.
 perspective: ID cards will help to confirm your eligibility for public services and benefits – and reduce fraud relating to these services and benefits
Output: undermine
claim: ID cards and the National Identity Register should be scrapped.
 perspective: ID Cards will not protect us from terrorism and crime!
Output: support
claim: Turkey should be let join the European Union.
 perspective: Turkey would be an unstable Muslim state in a traditionally Christian union
Output: undermine
claim: Turkey should be let join the European Union.
 perspective: Turkey does not fit well because it is an unstable Muslim country while the EU has a Christian history.
Output: undermine
claim: Turkey should be let join the European Union.
 perspective: The religious backgrounds of the EU being Christian and Turkey being Muslim and also not being stable are problems.
Output: undermine
claim: Turkey should be let join the European Union.
 perspective: Turkey has a poor human rights record
Output: undermine
claim: Turkey should be let join the European Union.
 perspective: Turkey joining the EU would help the international fight against terrorism
Output: support
claim: Turkey should be let join the European Union.
 perspective: Turkey is a highly unstable democracy in an unstable part of the world
Output: undermine
claim: Turkey should be let join the European Union.
 perspective: The lack of stability in Turkey's democracy and in the area around Turkey are factors that argue against admission to the EU.
Output: undermine
claim: Turkey should be let join the European Union.
 perspective: The EU will not benefit by adding a country with an unstable democracy in an unstable part of the world.
Output: undermine
claim: Turkey should be let join the European Union.
 perspective: Any country that fulfils the accession criteria should be allowed to join
Output: support
claim: Turkey should be let join the European Union.
 perspective: The geographical definition of Europe must be limited and does not include Turkey
Output: undermine
claim: Turkey should be let join the European Union.
 perspective: Other similarly situated countries including Romania and Bulgaria have be accepted into the EU.
Output: support
claim: Turkey should be let join the European Union.
 perspective: There are precedents including the admission of Romania and Bulgaria into the EU.
Output: support
claim: Turkey should be let join the European Union.
 perspective: As a matter of precedent, Turkey should be allowed into the EU.
Output: support
claim: Turkey should be let join the European Union.
 perspective: Both Romania and Bulgaria have joined the EU, so it is appropriate for Turkey to be allowed in as well.
Output: support
claim: Turkey should be let join the European Union.
 perspective: Turkey has precedents, such as Romania and Bulgaria, both of whom were accepted into the EU
Output: support
claim: Turkey should be let join the European Union.
 perspective: Precedent (Romania and Bulgaria)
Output: support
claim: Turkey should be let join the European Union.
 perspective: Animosity Between Turkey and Existing Member States, i.e. Greece
Output: undermine
claim: Turkey should be let join the European Union.
 perspective: There is significant animosity between Turkey and some existing member states.
Output: undermine
claim: Turkey should be let join the European Union.
 perspective: Some members of the EU have poor relationships with Turkey.
Output: undermine
claim: Turkey should be let join the European Union.
 perspective: Fear of a Backlash Due to Turkey's Political and Religious Influences
Output: undermine
claim: Turkey should be let join the European Union.
 perspective: Turkey's political and religious influences could result in backlash.
Output: undermine
claim: Turkey should be let join the European Union.
 perspective: Turkey has different political and religious influences than other member states, which could cause issues.
Output: undermine
claim: The ICC is biased against Africa.
 perspective: ICC treats Africa differently
Output: support
claim: The ICC is biased against Africa.
 perspective: ICC is biased against Africans 
Output: support
claim: The ICC is biased against Africa.
 perspective: The ICC is against African ideals.
Output: support
claim: The ICC is biased against Africa.
 perspective: The ICC is in direct opposition of African beliefs. 
Output: support
claim: The ICC is biased against Africa.
 perspective: The ICC has an anti-African bias
Output: support
claim: The ICC is biased against Africa.
 perspective: Africa is overtly prosecuted
Output: support
claim: The ICC is biased against Africa.
 perspective: The ICC's Africa prosecutions are overtly biased.
Output: support
claim: The ICC is biased against Africa.
 perspective: The ICC's bias against Africa is overt.
Output: support
claim: The ICC is biased against Africa.
 perspective: Africa has invited ICC intervention   
Output: undermine
claim: The ICC is biased against Africa.
 perspective: Africa has a strong voice in the ICC 
Output: undermine
claim: The EU, USA and other western donors should not fund any Palestinian government in which terrorist organisations participate.
 perspective: The outcome of the Palestinian elections should not be rewarded with aid. 
Output: support
claim: The EU, USA and other western donors should not fund any Palestinian government in which terrorist organisations participate.
 perspective: Palestinian elections, although a significant step toward democracy, do not qualify their government for aid.
Output: support
claim: The EU, USA and other western donors should not fund any Palestinian government in which terrorist organisations participate.
 perspective: Aid shouldn't be given to aid the outcome of the Palestinian elections.
Output: support
claim: The EU, USA and other western donors should not fund any Palestinian government in which terrorist organisations participate.
 perspective: Western donors shouldn't fund the outcome of the Palestinian elections.
Output: support
claim: The EU, USA and other western donors should not fund any Palestinian government in which terrorist organisations participate.
 perspective: Withholding funds will prevent PNA terrorism and anti-Semitism. 
Output: support
claim: The EU, USA and other western donors should not fund any Palestinian government in which terrorist organisations participate.
 perspective: Withholding funds will increase security and stability in Palestine.
Output: support
claim: The EU, USA and other western donors should not fund any Palestinian government in which terrorist organisations participate.
 perspective: With no funding, PNA terrorism and anti-Semitism will be prevented.
Output: support
claim: The EU, USA and other western donors should not fund any Palestinian government in which terrorist organisations participate.
 perspective: Withholding funds will cause Palestine to rely on anti-Israeli regimes. 
Output: undermine
claim: The EU, USA and other western donors should not fund any Palestinian government in which terrorist organisations participate.
 perspective: Withholding funds will further alienate Palestine and strengthen their reliance on anti-Israeli regimes.
Output: undermine
claim: The EU, USA and other western donors should not fund any Palestinian government in which terrorist organisations participate.
 perspective: The best way to reduce Palestine's allegiance to anti-Israeli organizations is the fund the Palestinian governments.
Output: undermine
claim: The EU, USA and other western donors should not fund any Palestinian government in which terrorist organisations participate.
 perspective: Without aid, Palestine will be forced to rely on anti-Israeli regimes. 
Output: undermine
claim: The EU, USA and other western donors should not fund any Palestinian government in which terrorist organisations participate.
 perspective: Palestine will have no other choice but to  rely on anti-Israeli regimes if funds are withheld.
Output: undermine
claim: The EU, USA and other western donors should not fund any Palestinian government in which terrorist organisations participate.
 perspective: The loss of funding would destabilise and radicalise Palestine. 
Output: undermine
claim: The EU, USA and other western donors should not fund any Palestinian government in which terrorist organisations participate.
 perspective: Engaging with Hamas is the best way to secure a peace deal between Israel and Palestine.
Output: undermine
claim: The EU, USA and other western donors should not fund any Palestinian government in which terrorist organisations participate.
 perspective: The law prevents US and EU governments from funding terrorist groups. 
Output: support
claim: The EU, USA and other western donors should not fund any Palestinian government in which terrorist organisations participate.
 perspective: Laws preventing US and EU governments from funding terrorist groups are sufficient.
Output: support
claim: The EU, USA and other western donors should not fund any Palestinian government in which terrorist organisations participate.
 perspective: US  and EU governments cannot and will not fund any terrorist groups.
Output: support
claim: The EU, USA and other western donors should not fund any Palestinian government in which terrorist organisations participate.
 perspective: It's against the law for US and EU governments to fund terrorist groups originating from Palestine.
Output: support
claim: The EU, USA and other western donors should not fund any Palestinian government in which terrorist organisations participate.
 perspective: Palestinian government related terrorist groups cannot be funded by US and EU governments by law.
Output: support
claim: Christians should be allowed to wear the Cross at work.
 perspective: Employers impose rules relating to conduct in the workplace, it’s one of the things that everyone accepts when they take and continue in a job.
Output: undermine
claim: Christians should be allowed to wear the Cross at work.
 perspective: It is the employer's rule so all employees should follow them
Output: undermine
claim: Christians should be allowed to wear the Cross at work.
 perspective: It is a workplace rule that has already been enforced and should have been expected
Output: undermine
claim: Christians should be allowed to wear the Cross at work.
 perspective: Other religions have the right to wear prescribed clothing enshrined in British law, it is hypocritical not to offer Christianity the same protection. 
Output: support
claim: Christians should be allowed to wear the Cross at work.
 perspective: It would be hypocritical to ban Christian items when those of other religions are protected
Output: support
claim: Christians should be allowed to wear the Cross at work.
 perspective: Allowing other religious clothing but no a cross would not be fair
Output: support
claim: Christians should be allowed to wear the Cross at work.
 perspective: If this were about wearing a badge with a political slogan or something similar, everyone would agree that it was inappropriate. The same principle should apply to iconography.
Output: undermine
claim: Christians should be allowed to wear the Cross at work.
 perspective: The way it is applied to political icons is how it should be applied to religious icons
Output: undermine
claim: Christians should be allowed to wear the Cross at work.
 perspective: People agree that political slogans aren't allowed and that same stance should apply here.
Output: undermine
claim: Christians should be allowed to wear the Cross at work.
 perspective: The confession of religious faith is far more important than the rather petty rules that banned the wearing of the cross.
Output: support
claim: Christians should be allowed to wear the Cross at work.
 perspective: It is a fundamental right  to practice the religion you wish.
Output: support
claim: Christians should be allowed to wear the Cross at work.
 perspective: Practicing your religion is a right, not a priveledge. 
Output: support
claim: Christians should be allowed to wear the Cross at work.
 perspective: Human rights demand that we are free to express our religion.
Output: support
claim: Christians should be allowed to wear the Cross at work.
 perspective: Religious expression needs to be guaranteed for all of us as part of our most fundamental rights!
Output: support
claim: Christians should be allowed to wear the Cross at work.
 perspective: Freedom of expression, like any right is fairly meaningless if it’s only respected when it’s convenient.
Output: support
claim: Christians should be allowed to wear the Cross at work.
 perspective: It is a fundamental part of OUR Human Rights
Output: support
claim: Christians should be allowed to wear the Cross at work.
 perspective: Declaration of the faith is a key part of Christianity and that should be respected.
Output: support
claim: Christians should be allowed to wear the Cross at work.
 perspective: Declaring one's faith is something that should be allowed and respected by others
Output: support
claim: Christians should be allowed to wear the Cross at work.
 perspective: Showing one's Christian faith is important to the religion and should be approved
Output: support
claim: Christians should be allowed to wear the Cross at work.
 perspective: Religious symbols harm no one
Output: support
claim: Christians should be allowed to wear the Cross at work.
 perspective: symbols for religious benefit bothers no one
Output: support
claim: Christians should be allowed to wear the Cross at work.
 perspective: religious expression should be freely decided
Output: support
claim: The Internet must be censored.
 perspective: Censorship is fundamentally incompatible with the notion of free speech.
Output: undermine
claim: The Internet must be censored.
 perspective: Internet Content must not be Censored because we are a country of free speech!
Output: undermine
claim: The Internet must be censored.
 perspective: Internet censorship a violation of freedom of speech
Output: undermine
claim: The Internet must be censored.
 perspective: People often react poorly to being censored by their governments.
Output: undermine
claim: The Internet must be censored.
 perspective: Governments have a moral duty to protect its citizens from harmful sites.
Output: support
claim: The Internet must be censored.
 perspective: The internet must be censored to protect society
Output: support
claim: The Internet must be censored.
 perspective: Internet Nazis must be censored!
Output: support
claim: The Internet must be censored.
 perspective: Even sites that appeared innocent have had a devastating effect on society.
Output: support
claim: The Internet must be censored.
 perspective: It is difficult to ascertain at a glance which websites are harmful.
Output: support
claim: The Internet must be censored.
 perspective: The Internet is a free domain and cannot becontrolled by the government.
Output: undermine
claim: The Internet must be censored.
 perspective: The government has no control over free domain and therefore cannot censor the internet.
Output: undermine
claim: The Internet must be censored.
 perspective: As an extensive form of media, the Internet should be subject to regulation just as other forms of media are.
Output: support
claim: The Internet must be censored.
 perspective: Other forms of media are regulated and the internet is no different.
Output: support
claim: The Internet must be censored.
 perspective: We must apply the same standards to internet regulation that we apply to all media.
Output: support
claim: The Internet must be censored.
 perspective: The government here may legitimately limit ‘free speech’.
Output: support
claim: USA must sign the Ottawa Convention banning landmines.
 perspective: Landmines are a useful military tool
Output: undermine
claim: USA must sign the Ottawa Convention banning landmines.
 perspective: Landmines keep certain areas safe from wanderers.
Output: undermine
claim: USA must sign the Ottawa Convention banning landmines.
 perspective: Landmines are an effective deterrent against guerrilla attacks.
Output: undermine
claim: USA must sign the Ottawa Convention banning landmines.
 perspective: Banning Landmines is a step towards reducing the horror of war
Output: support
claim: USA must sign the Ottawa Convention banning landmines.
 perspective: Banning landmines would reduce how many innocent victims there are.
Output: support
claim: USA must sign the Ottawa Convention banning landmines.
 perspective: The ban fails to distinguish between different kinds of mines
Output: undermine
claim: We support the New START Treaty.
 perspective: The New START treaty helps Russia more than the US
Output: undermine
claim: We support the New START Treaty.
 perspective: The New START treaty favors Russia over the US.
Output: undermine
claim: We support the New START Treaty.
 perspective: The New START treaty is better for Russia than for the US. 
Output: undermine
claim: We support the New START Treaty.
 perspective: The New START treaty harms US nuclear capabilities   
Output: undermine
claim: We support the New START Treaty.
 perspective: The US Nuclear capabilities are hurt by the New START treaty.
Output: undermine
claim: We support the New START Treaty.
 perspective: There is harm to the nuclear capabilities of the US by New START treaty.
Output: undermine
claim: We support the New START Treaty.
 perspective: The New START treaty maintains US nuclear and missile defence.
Output: support
claim: Basic income tax should be abolished.
 perspective: Abolishing Income Tax will grow the economy
Output: support
claim: Basic income tax should be abolished.
 perspective: The economy will boom if we get rid of the income tax.
Output: support
claim: Basic income tax should be abolished.
 perspective: Income Tax is a cause of inequity in society
Output: support
claim: Basic income tax should be abolished.
 perspective: income tax is not good
Output: support
claim: Basic income tax should be abolished.
 perspective: Balancing governmental deficits for common good of society
Output: undermine
claim: Basic income tax should be abolished.
 perspective: With an increased standard of living for all the reason for crime would almost disappear.
Output: undermine
claim: Basic income tax should be abolished.
 perspective: People who enjoy a standard of living that allows them to be healthy and productive will decrease drug abuse.
Output: undermine
claim: Basic income tax should be abolished.
 perspective: balancing common deficits of the government for society 
Output: undermine
claim: Basic income tax should be abolished.
 perspective: Redistributing wealth to balance the inequality of income disparity
Output: undermine
claim: Basic income tax should be abolished.
 perspective: It is immoral that some have nothing and a few others are enormously wealthy.
Output: undermine
claim: Basic income tax should be abolished.
 perspective: Everyone should have the resources to live a healthy, productive life.
Output: undermine
claim: Basic income tax should be abolished.
 perspective: Changing the wealth around to help income disparity 
Output: undermine
claim: Basic income tax should be abolished.
 perspective: The best way to grow the economy is not by taxing the rich.
Output: support
claim: Basic income tax should be abolished.
 perspective: Increasing an income tax won't fix the economy.
Output: support
claim: Basic income tax should be abolished.
 perspective: There are many better ways to redistribute wealth and pay for public goods and services besides raising income tax.
Output: support
claim: Basic income tax should be abolished.
 perspective: When looking for ways to change the inequality of wealth and increase money available for public goods, income tax should not be the focus.
Output: support
claim: The US intervention in Libya, lacking congressional approval, was illegal.
 perspective: The United States engaged in "hostilities" under War Powers
Output: undermine
claim: The US intervention in Libya, lacking congressional approval, was illegal.
 perspective: The US were not completely innocent under War Powers.
Output: undermine
claim: The US intervention in Libya, lacking congressional approval, was illegal.
 perspective: The US intervention was acceptable as it was done under War Powers
Output: undermine
claim: The US intervention in Libya, lacking congressional approval, was illegal.
 perspective: The US had to take action in the circumstances under War Powers.
Output: undermine
claim: The US intervention in Libya, lacking congressional approval, was illegal.
 perspective: Congress was appropriately and openly consulted
Output: undermine
claim: The US intervention in Libya, lacking congressional approval, was illegal.
 perspective: Despite claims, congress was consulted.
Output: undermine
claim: The US intervention in Libya, lacking congressional approval, was illegal.
 perspective: Congress was aware of the action as they were consulted
Output: undermine
claim: The US intervention in Libya, lacking congressional approval, was illegal.
 perspective: The intervention was necessary in order to protect US interests in the region
Output: undermine
claim: The US intervention in Libya, lacking congressional approval, was illegal.
 perspective: The US had to interfere to protect their interests.
Output: undermine
claim: The US intervention in Libya, lacking congressional approval, was illegal.
 perspective: In order to maintain their interests, the US had to intervene.
Output: undermine
claim: The US intervention in Libya, lacking congressional approval, was illegal.
 perspective: US intervention is not consistent with other aspects of US law
Output: support
claim: The US intervention in Libya, lacking congressional approval, was illegal.
 perspective: An intervention contradicts US policy.
Output: support
claim: The US intervention in Libya, lacking congressional approval, was illegal.
 perspective: A long ruling and ruthless dictator was toppled.
Output: undermine
claim: The US intervention in Libya, lacking congressional approval, was illegal.
 perspective: The tyrannical dictator was removed of his long reign.
Output: undermine
claim: The US intervention in Libya, lacking congressional approval, was illegal.
 perspective: The regime has been overturned after its long and terrible reign.
Output: undermine
claim: The US intervention in Libya, lacking congressional approval, was illegal.
 perspective: The intervention backfired.
Output: support
claim: The US intervention in Libya, lacking congressional approval, was illegal.
 perspective: The intervention in Libya is a complete disaster.
Output: support
claim: The US intervention in Libya, lacking congressional approval, was illegal.
 perspective: What intervention in Libya, are you sure?
Output: support
claim: Introduce year round schooling.
 perspective: Damaging to extra-curricular activities. 
Output: undermine
claim: Introduce year round schooling.
 perspective: Year-round learning can help reduce the burden on parents.
Output: support
claim: Introduce year round schooling.
 perspective: Reduce “summer learning loss”. 
Output: support
claim: Introduce year round schooling.
 perspective: Places unfair burden on students. 
Output: undermine
claim: Introduce year round schooling.
 perspective: Imposes extra costs on education system.
Output: undermine
claim: Introduce year round schooling.
 perspective: Reduce social problems from disaffected, bored youth. 
Output: support
claim: HIV/AIDS: There Should Be Compulsory Testing and Labeling of People with HIV.
 perspective: Labelling is against human rights
Output: undermine
claim: HIV/AIDS: There Should Be Compulsory Testing and Labeling of People with HIV.
 perspective: Labeling of people with HIV is against Human Rights
Output: undermine
claim: HIV/AIDS: There Should Be Compulsory Testing and Labeling of People with HIV.
 perspective: Human Rights would be violated if people with HIV were labeled
Output: undermine
claim: HIV/AIDS: There Should Be Compulsory Testing and Labeling of People with HIV.
 perspective: labeling damage human rights
Output: undermine
claim: HIV/AIDS: There Should Be Compulsory Testing and Labeling of People with HIV.
 perspective: labeling of hiv demean a person's right
Output: undermine
claim: HIV/AIDS: There Should Be Compulsory Testing and Labeling of People with HIV.
 perspective: Tackling HIV requires a responsible and active position by everyone
Output: support
claim: Global Warming is not an issue.
 perspective: People are losing their lives because of climate change.
Output: undermine
claim: Global Warming is not an issue.
 perspective: The climate is changing and people are dying.
Output: undermine
claim: Global Warming is not an issue.
 perspective: Global temperatures have always been changing despite Co2 increases
Output: support
claim: Global Warming is not an issue.
 perspective: The 'Global warming' phenomenon could be caused by other things
Output: support
claim: Global Warming is not an issue.
 perspective: This situation we are in with global warming may have other causes.
Output: support
claim: Global Warming is not an issue.
 perspective: 7 Global warming is based on computer modelling and has had no empirical confirmation
Output: support
claim: Global Warming is not an issue.
 perspective: There is no evidence that 7 Global warming is accurate as it is based on computer modelling.
Output: support
claim: Global Warming is not an issue.
 perspective: Computer modelling showing 7 Global warming may not be accurate as there is no proof supporting it.
Output: support
claim: Global Warming is not an issue.
 perspective: There is no scientifically valid mechanism for CO2 causing global warming.
Output: support
claim: The use of mobile phones has lowered active social life and has become an addiction.
 perspective: The use of  a mobile phone requires a social life.
Output: undermine
claim: The use of mobile phones has lowered active social life and has become an addiction.
 perspective: Mobile phones make it easier to stay in contact with others.
Output: undermine
claim: The use of mobile phones has lowered active social life and has become an addiction.
 perspective: You have little reason to have a mobile phone if you do not have anyone to talk to on it.
Output: undermine
claim: The use of mobile phones has lowered active social life and has become an addiction.
 perspective: Mobile phones enable us to keep in touch
Output: undermine
claim: The use of mobile phones has lowered active social life and has become an addiction.
 perspective: Cellphones are used to avoid emotional confrontation and real human contact
Output: support
claim: The use of mobile phones has lowered active social life and has become an addiction.
 perspective: Cellphones are used as an escape from the real world.
Output: support
claim: The use of mobile phones has lowered active social life and has become an addiction.
 perspective: People are more comfortable using cellphones than they are interacting with each other.
Output: support
claim: The use of mobile phones has lowered active social life and has become an addiction.
 perspective: Mobile phones make sure that we are safe
Output: undermine
claim: The use of mobile phones has lowered active social life and has become an addiction.
 perspective: Mobile phones lead to increased independence
Output: undermine
claim: Military action to intervene during atrocities without United Nations Security Council approval can be legal.
 perspective: Military action is only legal with UN Security Council approval
Output: undermine
claim: Military action to intervene during atrocities without United Nations Security Council approval can be legal.
 perspective: Disarming illegal weapons
Output: support
claim: Rain Man is such a bad image of autism.
 perspective: A bad stereotype of an autistic person.
Output: support
claim: Rain Man is such a bad image of autism.
 perspective: Rain Man does not portray all autistic people fairly
Output: support
claim: Rain Man is such a bad image of autism.
 perspective: Rain Man is a poor stereotype of Autism.
Output: support
claim: Rain Man is such a bad image of autism.
 perspective: Rain Man provides a bad example of stereotypes.
Output: support
claim: Rain Man is such a bad image of autism.
 perspective: Stereotypes about autistic people are highlighted in Rain Man.
Output: support
claim: Rain Man is such a bad image of autism.
 perspective: At least people know what autism is now.
Output: undermine
claim: Rain Man is such a bad image of autism.
 perspective: Rain Man portrays a type of Autism, but it shouldn't   stereotype  all people who have Autism
Output: undermine
claim: Rain Man is such a bad image of autism.
 perspective: Rain man is an example of Autism, it doesn't cover the all the types of Autism.
Output: undermine
claim: Rain Man is such a bad image of autism.
 perspective: People are more aware about autism now.
Output: undermine
claim: Rain Man is such a bad image of autism.
 perspective: Because of this, people are now more aware about autism.
Output: undermine
claim: Rain Man is such a bad image of autism.
 perspective: People think(sometimes wrongly) that ALL Autistic persons are geniuses
Output: support
claim: Rain Man is such a bad image of autism.
 perspective: People may think all Autistic people are geniuses  after seeing Rain Man
Output: support
claim: Rain Man is such a bad image of autism.
 perspective: Some Autistic people are geniuses.
Output: support
claim: Rain Man is such a bad image of autism.
 perspective: The stereotype that "all autistic people are geniuses" is now a common misbelief.
Output: support
claim: Rain Man is such a bad image of autism.
 perspective: People now may be inclined to believe that all autistic people are geniuses.
Output: support
claim: Rain Man is such a bad image of autism.
 perspective:  Making autism 'popular' caused a rise in self-diagnosis
Output: support
claim: The European Union should lift its ban on member states selling arms to China.
 perspective: China is a threat to regional stability
Output: undermine
claim: The European Union should lift its ban on member states selling arms to China.
 perspective: China will simply get similar products elsewhere
Output: support
claim: The European Union should lift its ban on member states selling arms to China.
 perspective: There is no reason to strengthen China militarily
Output: undermine
claim: The European Union should lift its ban on member states selling arms to China.
 perspective: Lifting the ban will damage relations with the U.S.
Output: undermine
claim: The Palestinian Statehood should be recognised by the United Nations General Assembly.
 perspective: Palestine is a legal entity and deserves to have its voice heard on an equal footing with Israel 
Output: support
claim: The Palestinian Statehood should be recognised by the United Nations General Assembly.
 perspective: Palestine is a sovereign state and Israel should recognize that. 
Output: support
claim: The Palestinian Statehood should be recognised by the United Nations General Assembly.
 perspective: Israel and Palestine are two legal countries that should have their voice heard equally. 
Output: support
claim: The Palestinian Statehood should be recognised by the United Nations General Assembly.
 perspective: Palestine is a legal place and should be treated just like Israel
Output: support
claim: The Palestinian Statehood should be recognised by the United Nations General Assembly.
 perspective: Because Palestine is a legal entity, they should have the same rights as Israel
Output: support
claim: Store nuclear waste underground.
 perspective: Underground Nuclear Storage is Safe
Output: support
claim: Store nuclear waste underground.
 perspective: Underground Nuclear Storage is Expensive.
Output: undermine
claim: Store nuclear waste underground.
 perspective: Underground Nuclear Storage is Necessary
Output: support
claim: Store nuclear waste underground.
 perspective: There Are Better Alternatives to Underground Nuclear Waste Storage
Output: undermine