Datasets:

webis

/

conclugen

like 1

Follow

Webis Group 32

<|TOPIC|>Healthcare needs more transparency in the United States HIPAA is in the way<|ARGUMENT|>32 million patients' records were breached in the first half of 2019, 88% of which were caused by hackers.<|ASPECTS|>patients ' records, hackers, breached<|CONCLUSION|>

Patient data breaches are an increasingly serious issue in healthcare today.

009adc4a-1643-46cc-8f39-d6a42dba1fcc

<|TOPIC|>Should Dictatorships Receive Development Aid?<|ARGUMENT|>Democracy over time, can reduce corruption, thereby encouraging investment, increasing economic growth, and preventing misuse of government budgets IMF, p. 3/4<|ASPECTS|>misuse of government budgets, economic growth, encouraging investment<|CONCLUSION|>

There is a significantly higher amount of corruption in non-democratic states.

ff1c7325-e678-4927-8caa-fed0cd188b6d

<|TOPIC|>Brexit: Is The UK Going To Regret The Referendum?<|ARGUMENT|>The Leave vote was driven by emotional arguments about regaining sovereignty. Very few who voted to leave understood the complexities arising from this decision, e.g. how to preserve Good Friday Agreement.<|ASPECTS|>preserve, regaining sovereignty, good friday agreement, emotional arguments, complexities<|CONCLUSION|>

Since the terms were not clear, it is entirely unclear what the people voted for. Hence the frustration with single market and customs union which were not on the ballot.

616f4e1c-7966-4570-8c14-4e0fa37f4e96

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|> technical analysis in financial markets and trading is an important instrument and shouldn't be underestimated People every day are making millions on the financial markets basing decisions mainly on technical analysis. I understand that technical analysis is just not enough, but I think it’s a necessary thing. My point of view is in contrast with the efficient market hypothesis, in fact I do believe that the prices of an asset are not always at their fair value and can be in fact oversold or overbought. While I can’t disagree with the fact presented in Dow Theory that the market is basically unpredictable, I’m convinced that being capable of an in deep technical analysis is a requisite for any trader or investor. <|ASPECTS|>necessary thing, fair value, technical analysis, underestimated, oversold, unpredictable, prices, overbought, efficient market<|CONCLUSION|>

technical analysis in financial markets and trading is an important instrument and shouldn't be underestimated

824c887e-ba69-4dfa-a549-0effcefeccee

<|TOPIC|>Did the US have to use nuclear weapons to achieve Japan's unconditional surrender?<|ARGUMENT|>US president Harry Truman justified the dropping of the bomb on racial grounds that the Japanese have to be treated like a beast.<|ASPECTS|>beast<|CONCLUSION|>

The US showed clear signs of degrading treatment towards Japanese, indicating racial discrimination.

1a517a28-b796-4e28-bf96-f86306f01dd5

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I'm walking down the street and two African American gentlemen approach me with hoodies and pants sagging. I'm going to cross the street before walking past them. This isn't a racial issue, it's a statistical bias. Crime is statistically much higher in the black community as opposed to the Caucasian community and if I stereotype someone on the street it's due to these statistics, not solely because of the color of their skin. It simply boils down to this media movies, music, etc set a narrative in this country for what a thug looks like. Most thugs dress with pants sagging hoodies and whatever else. Why shouldn't I stereotype based on a narrative society constructs and well know statistics within the black community? Change my view And this is serious, please NO race baiting and name calling EDIT For people calling me out on not providing statistics check out not normally a fan of citing Wikipedia but their sources are cited as well<|ASPECTS|>hoodies, crime, racial, stereotype, thug, african american, narrative, race, color, statistics, statistical bias, higher<|CONCLUSION|>

It's perfectly fine to stereotype someone based on a statistical inference EVEN if that statistic is heavily correlated with skin color.

555118cb-c20d-4959-8697-2a360c2d18b8

<|TOPIC|>Should all religions be banned on a global scale?<|ARGUMENT|>Lessons from religion are also used in marketing so that businesses can fair better on the battlefield of commerce. Storytelling is one of the core techniques when doing anything religious like bible lessons, wisdom sharing and ceremony alike, storytelling also happens to be one of the basic techniques in marketing business to business and in business to client communication.<|ASPECTS|>fair better, religion, lessons, battlefield<|CONCLUSION|>

Religion led people to do things correctly before science and technology caught up.

6ff61cd7-847c-4efe-bf60-fcd7da423625

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I have several feminist friends, who insist that the world give them special treatment because they are women. A specific example is in the car on the way to a show, my friend and bandmate got extremely worked up over how there aren't enough girls in music. I disagreed and said maybe there just aren't in the style she likes punk . She said that no parents she said Fathers specifically are going out and signing up their daughters for guitar lessons, or asking them to play guitar or things of the like. I then told her that no one asked me to play guitar, in fact my parents opposed it. She continued arguing about nonsensical things. I can't help but hate feminism ists and think that they are mostly just sexist white women who's lives are too good to complain about anything else. I understand that at one point there was a definite need for feminism, but I think besides proper wages, men and women are equal. I also understand that this could be offensive, which is why I am doing this.<|ASPECTS|>girls in music, women, proper wages, guitar lessons, hate, parents, feminist, equal, special treatment, offensive, punk, feminism, men, style, sexist white women, nonsensical things<|CONCLUSION|>

I think that modern Feminism is backwards, sexist, and counterproductive.

43245f16-dab4-4af0-87ac-6725f9b13a3f

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>After reading the court opinions in Obergefell v. Hodges, I find myself having a hard time arguing with the arguments presented in Justice Scalia's dissenting opinion. I do not see what circumstances allow the SCOTUS to include marriage as a fundamental right under the 14th Amendment, and thus extend equal protection to gays and lesbians. I am concerned that such a decision leaves open the possibility for future courts to circumvent the legislature simply by calling something a fundamental right, allowing 9 unelected individuals to create what is effectively legislation on a whim. It is my opinion that the SCOTUS overreached in their decision, and that such a decision should've been left to the legislative branch. I want to be clear that I support the outcome of the ruling, just not the legal justification behind it.<|ASPECTS|>overreached, legal justification, effectively legislation, decision, branch, outcome, circumvent the legislature, fundamental right, equal protection, support<|CONCLUSION|>

Justice Scalia is right. Obergefell v. Hodges sets a dangerous precedent, and is based on shoddy legal arguments.

5d47e331-d169-41af-ad5b-7bc54258169d

<|TOPIC|>Should school be mandatory until 12th grade?<|ARGUMENT|>On average, a dropout earns less money, is more likely to be in jail, is less healthy, is less likely to be married, and is unhappier than a high-school graduate.<|ASPECTS|>less healthy<|CONCLUSION|>

High-school dropouts fare much worse than their peers on a wide variety of long-term outcomes.

69a5f8ef-1add-4fea-8847-d3d7c41ad4ab

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>OK I know everyone will tell me how this is never going to happen for all the obvious reasons lack of cultural connections, distance and EE SA being too fragmented . My reasons to belive such thing is possible though All of the mentioned are mono cultural unlike the West or Russia neither is pro Muslim They are all small, sturbborn cultures who think they're the best in the world trying to use the word stubborn here positively . Excluding Japan, each one of them has huge diaspora living abroad. Which means as the countries loose their pro multiculturaal folk the remaining citizens will be nationalists. Again, I'm talking about a world in which people will get tired of the whole China hype and new world leader will being to emerge, hence 2040 2050 or later.<|ASPECTS|>mono cultural, citizens, stubborn, cultural connections, world leader, new, diaspora living, nationalists, distance, huge, multiculturaal folk, china hype, fragmented<|CONCLUSION|>

In the future ~2050 there will be strong alliance/world power between Eastern Europe, South America, Israel, Japan

0534b8d5-5d13-4bb9-8159-3766e5205381

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>To avoid turning this into another useless gender wars thread, I will illustrate my point in the context of a hypothetical gay couple we'll call Mike and Dave. Mike is a highly ambitious architect. He put himself through a ton of schooling and worked his way up. At the age of just 29, he managed to impress a major architecture firm and is commanding a salary of 120,000 year. He works long hours, but everyone loves him, and it's likely that his already high salary will rise significantly every year until he retires. Dave is also 29, and a bartender. He's a casual, easy going guy who never got more than a high school diploma. He's exceptionally good looking though, and makes a decent salary of around 45,000, mostly from tips. This will, however, likely decrease as he starts to show his age. Now lets assume Mike and Dave have been dating for quite some time, and it's time for one of them to propose. Mike has to think VERY carefully about this. If things go sideways and they divorce, Dave will walk away with a substantial portion of his hard earned money, and will continue to take his money for several years in the future. Mike must therefore TRULY love Dave and be entirely committed to him before deciding to legally marry him. However, the inverse is not at all true. No matter how many doubts Dave has about the relationship or its future, he doesn't have to think twice about marriage and has no reason not to pounce on a proposal, or pressure Mike into marrying him. There are only benefits for him to marry Mike, no drawbacks. If things work out, great If they don't, he gets a ton of free money which is pretty great too. There is no sacrifice, risk, or commitment in Dave deciding to marry Mike. At least nothing even approaching that which Mike faces.<|ASPECTS|>walk, long hours, money, divorce, highly, commitment, pressure, benefits, love dave, age, sacrifice, couple, decent, committed, easy going, future, pounce, impress, hard earned money, gender wars, drawbacks, risk, high school diploma, tips, looking, casual, salary, worked, free money, inverse, schooling, carefully, loves, ambitious architect<|CONCLUSION|>

Legal marriage is a one-sided commitment, not a mutual one

2944133d-328d-4e92-baa8-13ea4d711d3c

<|TOPIC|>Should the US Recognize Palestine as a State?<|ARGUMENT|>Much of public opinion is based on anti-Semitic media or the opinions of national or international organizations that pick on the Jewish state because it is a jewish state.<|ASPECTS|>public opinion, state, anti-semitic media, jewish state<|CONCLUSION|>

Public opinion is not a good guide as to what will progress or hinder an eventual peace deal between Israel and the Palestinians.

3d4707e6-f17d-40e7-9681-c8ee77db4682

<|TOPIC|>Right to bear arms in the US<|ARGUMENT|>The language of the Second Amendment creates a situation in which the right to bear arms applies only to the militia. The second amendment reads, "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to bear Arms, shall not be infringed." The first clause clearly qualifies any right to bear arms as solely for the purpose of maintaining "a well regulated militia" for "the security of a free state".<|ASPECTS|>security of a free state, state, well, regulated militia, infringed, well regulated militia, right, militia, security, right to bear arms<|CONCLUSION|>

2nd Amendment applies only to the collective right of the militia to bear arms

dc3474ff-5a15-44f6-a7a9-ff10d896b4f4

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I am strongly against tipping people for simply doing their job and it bothers me that tipping has become expected. I will tip only if I feel like that person deserved it, whether they are working really hard or are just being really friendly and genuine. I understand that some workers dont make much, but I am not their employer therefore how much they earn is not my responsibility and they should not rely on customers tips to support their income. TLDR I feel like tipping should be optional, and not something that you should be guilted into doing. EDIT Just to clarify, I am not trying to ban tipping at all. But, I would like to see people earning their tip instead of automatically receiving a tip. The whole point of tipping is to voluntarily pay more for exceptional service.<|ASPECTS|>voluntarily, pay, optional, ban tipping, exceptional service, guilted, income, earning their tip, automatically, tip, tipping people, deserved, customers tips, tipping, responsibility, support, friendly and genuine, make much, job, expected<|CONCLUSION|>

Tipping should not be excpected

be3c02a1-0f9f-432d-aeba-ba27cfdc3006

<|TOPIC|>Is Gender a Social Construct?<|ARGUMENT|>Worth noting that the vast majority of men are born and brought up by women. The vast majority of primary teaching is also by women. Both men and women have played roles in creating the human societies we observe and must accept responsibility accordingly.<|ASPECTS|>, primary teaching, women, men, responsibility, accept<|CONCLUSION|>

Patriarchy is a social construct that has been used to create an overarching argument for inequality. In reality there are dominance hierarchies in both biological genders that date back millions of years.

dccbeabb-e61c-4dc3-9319-1bbb7dcc2cd7

<|TOPIC|>Is it acceptable for vegans to give their pets a vegan diet?<|ARGUMENT|>Some people may be vegans out of a utilitarian concern for animal suffering, without a concern for animals' "rights" per se.<|ASPECTS|>animal suffering, rights<|CONCLUSION|>

A perspective on animal rights that regards pet ownership as imprisonment is not necessary for veganism.

d250a404-2c1d-4ea8-aa64-342de80d2ec2

<|TOPIC|>Banning cell phones in cars<|ARGUMENT|>"Editorial: Cellphone ban long overdue". The Dominion Post. June 12th, 2008 - "Previous attempts to stop motorists using hand-held cellphones foundered in the face of arguments that cellphones are just one form of driver distraction. Eating, loading cassettes or CDs into car stereos, dropped cigarettes and even buzzing insects can be equally hazardous. But cellphone use, which contributed to 26 fatal crashes and 411 injury crashes between 2002 and 2007, is something the Government can do something about now."<|ASPECTS|>injury crashes, cellphone ban long overdue, buzzing insects, fatal crashes, hazardous, driver distraction<|CONCLUSION|>

Cell phones in cars can be regulated, unlike other distractions

8de9d382-30c2-488e-bbcd-6100a0dae173

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Liberals say that they want as much personal freedom as possible but it seems like they just hate rules. They talk about how drugs, abortion, gay marriage etc. should all be acceptable in society, not caring about the ramifications of these actions. They never seem to know when to stop, either. Sometimes i read things like how they want women to be able to go topless in public and i think to myself What's wrong with these people? . The mentality of a liberal is the same as what everyone goes through as a teenager, but you would think that you grow out of that mindset. Some day you have to realize that law and order is important and it's foolish to say that everyone should just do what they want . What really pisses me off is how liberals react to law enforcement. If a police officer as much as lets out a fart, the liberals are over him like wild dogs. It's like the police can't even do their job anymore. You always hear complaints about police brutality and about how much of an asshole they all are. Because fuck them, how dare they uphold the law? How dare they keep our streets safe? Who do they think they are? Problem is that you can't compromise with a liberal either, there's no middle ground for them. You see some of them say that marijuana should be legalized as long as we tax it but then after a while, what happens? Now in Colorado, people are protesting against the taxation of weed by passing free joints around. They can't be reasoned with, if they can't get their way in the first place, they'll agree to a compromise, then wait a bit, and then push for further reform. Maybe i'm wrong, maybe the libs do have some kind of sincere cause. But i really don't see it. <|ASPECTS|>, asshole, reform, go, safe, public, uphold the law, drugs, tax, job, liberals, gay marriage, hate rules, taxation of weed, compromise, middle ground, personal freedom, wild dogs, mindset, topless, sincere cause, important, law and order, police brutality, compromise with a liberal, to stop, police, complaints, free joints, acceptable in society, react to law enforcement, streets<|CONCLUSION|>

I believe that liberals are spoiled pricks.

fbe69d97-d881-4f9b-b634-b956d6da7ead

<|TOPIC|>Is political correctness detrimental to society?<|ARGUMENT|>Speech does not have to emotionally harm someone for it to be damaging. Propaganda does not damage someone emotionally, yet most would agree that propaganda which tries to influence people into thinking something contradictory to reality is still damaging to society.<|ASPECTS|>damage someone emotionally, damaging to society, damaging, emotionally harm, propaganda<|CONCLUSION|>

Thoughts and opinions, when expressed verbally or in writing, have the power to harm.

5e4845ed-26df-4c6d-b6c7-136271764e49

<|TOPIC|>Should the US have withdrawn from NAFTA?<|ARGUMENT|>The wealth created in increased trade should have been funnelled towards re-skilling workers in declining industries. A failure to support these workers cannot be blamed on NAFTA, and would not have justified leaving.<|ASPECTS|>re-skilling workers, declining industries, failure to support, justified leaving<|CONCLUSION|>

It is the government's role to redistribute wealth. It is not necessary for all industries to benefit in equal measure from every single trade deal.

50f6dc39-20fc-4cba-a312-61653f2d7640

<|TOPIC|>Is Lab-Grown Meat a suitable replacement for Factory Farming?<|ARGUMENT|>The opposite is true. The larger the scale of production the more thought can go into the development. For example, Tesla and Apple products would not be feasible at small scale.<|ASPECTS|>scale of production, development, small scale, feasible, thought can go<|CONCLUSION|>

When it will grow to a larger scale of production, it will be harder to ensure it is made in a sterile environment and with only healthy ingredients.

6414be8b-f938-4210-8049-cd725f91929c

<|TOPIC|>Should public nudity be legal?<|ARGUMENT|>Synthetic fibres such as nylon are often not biodegradable, and once discarded after wearing out will take up space in a landfill or the ocean like other plastics. Insofar as the nudity taboo pushes up the demand for synthetic clothing, removing it will reduce plastic waste.<|ASPECTS|>biodegradable, plastic waste, reduce, demand, synthetic clothing, space<|CONCLUSION|>

Public nudity would lead to a reduced need for clothing which would benefit the environment.

e2dc68cb-ee6b-4e43-863b-43fe3a7308d6

<|TOPIC|>Should we judge the quality of artwork based on the conduct of the artist?<|ARGUMENT|>If you find drug use a negative then for you it should be a consideration, but this is not a good example because some people realize that "illegal drugs" have been used in the US and elsewhere to lock up the poor and people of color. A similar less useful example would be is people used religion as a negative because the author was a different religion than them. It would be a valid example for that person but not as effective for making their point.<|ASPECTS|>lock, religion, effective, drug use, negative, illegal drugs, poor, color, valid example<|CONCLUSION|>

Any bar we try to set for non-detrimental conduct will be arbitrary. For example, if the artwork of all criminals is to be disregarded or substantially devalued, then a huge fraction of 20th Century art including Beatles, and most rock music besides must fall into this category due to the use of illegal drugs.

2996923b-22dc-440f-8995-42cf4d18db0b

<|TOPIC|>Would Humanity Be Better Off Under A Global Government?<|ARGUMENT|>Global government as a federation or confederation with enough administrative levels would ensure that the decision making remains close enough to general populace. The central government could take care of global issues.<|ASPECTS|>decision making remains, general populace, government, global issues<|CONCLUSION|>

The world would be ruled better under a one world government.

eba5839e-5853-4e13-89c1-de55d3174957

<|TOPIC|>ban alcohol<|ARGUMENT|>In comparison to any other drug, alcohol is very easy to produce hence the great amount of vineyards and very much engraved in the culture of especially European countries. Therefore a ban would be very ineffective, as the people would do it due to the ease of producing alcohol and the cultural acceptance. A ban would bring just more deregulation and loss of taxes through the black market. We might acknowledge that the legal implications will scare away some people from drinking alcohol, but the main part of population will want more. Because there is a strong inelastic demand and the illegal supply will flourish. This can be seen already with both and illegal drugs. It is also the lesson of Prohibition in the USA in the 1920s. Smuggled alcohol brought in from much cheaper continental countries will undercut both pubs and law-abiding retailers, and will circumvent the normal regulations which ensure consumer safety, such as proof-of-age or quality controls. In Saudi Arabia, a country with an alcohol ban, the Saudi police had seized over 100,000 bottles of eau-de-cologne with an expired expiration date. The methanol in cologne recently led to the deaths of over 20 people who drank it and many others were blinded. Earlier, over 130,000 bottles were confiscated.1 Because people wanted alcohol so badly and could not get it. While in Europe there might not be much of poisoning going on, a great amount of alcohol because of the different wine regions. Only Spain has already 2.9 million acres of land devoted entirely to the planting of wine grapes. However, it is only number 3 when it comes to the amount of wine actually produced.2 So in comparison to the Arabic countries, there is a lot of ground where easily to produce alcohol and therefore making it hard to control. Worse, criminals will find a market for cheap, home-brewed alcohol, of the kind which kills or blinds hundreds of people a year in countries like Russia.3 Overall criminality will flourish, with the gang violence associated with Prohibition or the drugs trade. An alcohol ban has worked mainly in countries where it is very tight tied to religion and to the religious practices. Especially in countries that are secular and more multicultural, the ban would be impossible to enforce. The harms associated with black market alcohol are too great for us to risk introducing this proposal. 1 Hanson D., Alcohol – Problems and Solutions, State University of New York, accessed 08/18/2011 2 A Beginners Guide to Spanish Wine, accessed 08/18/2011 3 Sodertorns Hogskola, The Alcohol Use in Russia and the Baltic Sea Region, published April 2000, accessed 08/18/2011<|ASPECTS|>population, consumer safety, legal implications, land, gang violence, hard to control, black market, black market alcohol, deregulation, undercut, wine grapes, illegal supply, bottles, tight tied to religion, illegal drugs, criminality will flourish, producing alcohol, ease, expired expiration date, prohibition, quality controls, cheap, market, wanted, confiscated, – problems, religious practices, blinded, deaths, inelastic demand, risk, cultural acceptance, wine actually produced, poisoning, alcohol, blinds, kills, planting, ground, lesson, loss of taxes, amount, secular, scare, criminals, engraved, multicultural, harms, culture, ineffective, methanol, regulations, easy to produce, easily to produce alcohol, home-brewed alcohol, impossible<|CONCLUSION|>

Prohibition would be impractical and serve only to create an enormous black market

40bb5577-8234-48ec-8169-955d0b7645d8

<|TOPIC|>Should ISIS fighters be allowed to return home?<|ARGUMENT|>The prospect of a return to their home country could act as an incentive for wavering recruits to desert, thus weakening the influence of ISIS.<|ASPECTS|>incentive, wavering recruits, influence, isis<|CONCLUSION|>

Allowing former ISIS fighters re-entry could help to weaken the organisation.

050467e4-bf65-4111-83d0-306e7b4c2b3f

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I'm not a very 'sensitive' person, racially speaking or at least, I wasn't before Reddit. I grew up hearing, laughing at, and retelling 'black jokes' with the rest of my white friends. I'm well respected in my small town, but I figure that only has to do with the fact that 1 My father is a well known doctor, 2 I was well spoken and considered 'gifted' from a young age and 3 I don't conform to common stereotypes. Over the years white folks who knew me have invalidated my blackness whitest black kid, etc. , and reacted with surprise to the way I speak or act, suggesting they were prejudging on my skin color. Hell, my girlfriend's mother outright told me that she was racist before she met me. Sometimes I just see Reddit shitting on black people in beyond a joke ways, with a lot of upvotes to back them up, and I start to wonder if all of the white people around me believe things like that black people are loud, annoying, ignorant, don't raise their children, criminals, trashy, etc. . It's honestly started to scare and depress me in real life and make me paranoid of friends I've had for years. And when I saw this I just felt like utter shit. At the end of the day I have to suck it up, live my life and try to prove myself to people even if it is true that most white people think like this. But is that really true? . EDIT view ∆view Haha, this kinda blew up. Thanks for all the helpful and supportive responses guys, I appreciate each one. I think one of my biggest problems in regard to this is that I let negative things take more effect on my mind than positive things IIRC I think there's an actual name for that phenomenon . I'll chill out a bit. I wish you all good weeks and whatnot<|ASPECTS|>prejudging, shitting, common stereotypes, skin color, chill, black people, white, invalidated, jokes, racially, negative things, positive, utter shit, annoying, person, hearing, helpful, trashy, blackness whitest black kid, live my life, prove myself to people, depress, upvotes, scare, good weeks, supportive, racist, surprise, loud, blew, suck, paranoid of friends, ignorant<|CONCLUSION|>

I've become so jaded from Reddit and other parts of the internet that I truly fear that the vast majority of white people around me either hold racist views or prejudge me/my white girlfriend for dating me. I'm black

81336d71-ae4c-4dc9-bacc-32e6501cee59

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Used to love these videos, all the crying, passionate hugs and just the genuine love shown in these videos. That was until I joined the military about 3 years ago. Now I just find them so cringe. What is the purpose of you showing up in uniform, as if going out of your way to say “hey everybody Look at me I serve the country, praise me, thank me for my service, feel proud of me.” ? For the most part other members I work with are proud of being in the military and would defend our organization and nation with their lives. But that is a whole different kind of pride. It is comparing a genuine want to serve and providing safety to our country and being proud of what we accomplish vs wanting the approval of randoms and only feeling this pride when others praise you. I’ve heard many arguments saying that “maybe they don’t have anything else to wear”. Maybe if your whole bag was lost at sea or blown up or your friends had pranked you and hidden it. But even for those coming off of a long deployment not having any civilian clothes at all is next to unheard of. On top of that can’t speak for the other branches, as I don’t know their rules and regulations for the navy coming home videos you always see the blue camp uniform. It is literally written in black and white, this uniform shall only be used for work and to commute to and from work, stops along the commute to work are permitted. There is absolutely no reason to wear it except to draw attention to yourself and be able to post a video for all of your friends to thank you for your service. But maybe I’m just angry not sure.<|ASPECTS|>approval of randoms, , attention, crying, rules and regulations, organization and nation, cringe, want to serve, uniform, pranked, proud, lost at sea, hidden, angry, work, service, passionate hugs, civilian clothes, safety, country, defend, pride, genuine love, unheard, praise<|CONCLUSION|>

Military coming home videos are the cringiest thing

6d42f2b4-46c4-4b9d-b096-7b48ed327639

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I’ve seen people who don’t have a license that are good drivers these people follow rules of the road, don’t drive under influence and don’t endanger other motorist. I’ve also seen people having a driver’s license who do the opposite. Why shouldn’t people from the first group be allowed to drive if they are doing everything necessary to drive safely on the road? If someone is speeding or driving under the influence or driving wildly you should fine him or her for that crime that that crime alone. If someone is driving with a broken taillight or doesn’t have the proper registration for that, then they should be fined for that, there is no need to bring a driving license into it. Note My view is applicable only for driving passenger vehicles only and not for heavy duty vehicles. Reason for this is accessibility of a qualified trainer. Not everyone knows a truck driver or a forklift operator, but everyone knows someone who can drive.<|ASPECTS|>drive, trainer, fine, crime, driving license, rules of the road, driving passenger vehicles, driver ’ s license, proper registration, endanger other motorist, fined, influence, accessibility, broken taillight, driver, opposite, drive safely<|CONCLUSION|>

I shouldn’t be fined for not having a driving license if I’m following rules of the road in a fully functioning vehicle.

9c675124-3902-4acb-b10f-7aa52b9ca4c4

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Please leave the footnote below the following line, but remember to delete this sentence by replacing it with the body of your post. Before you read on, please don't try to convince me that climate change isn't real. That's not what I'm asking to have my view changed about and I know that it is real. My opinion is that we need to stop burning fossil fuels because the CO2 traps heat in the atmosphere and causes global warming and climate change. I'd like to hear other people's opinions so I can get a wider view on the subject. <|ASPECTS|>traps heat, view changed, wider view, real, global warming, 's, climate change, co2, opinions<|CONCLUSION|>

We should use alternative power sources rather than coal, oil and other fossil fuels that make CO2 because of climate change.

1e372056-f74f-4dc6-a3d9-9f857909d39d

<|TOPIC|>Free Will or Determinism: Do We Have Free Will?<|ARGUMENT|>Since we evolved from very primitive organisms that don't possess free will, it is not possible that we have free will, since there is nothing in the biology or structure of the forms of life from which we evolved that could have mutated into whatever the source of free will is alleged to be.<|ASPECTS|>biology, free, mutated<|CONCLUSION|>

Evolutionary biology undermines belief in the existence of free will.

6d823a31-b936-4933-9b7a-96dd4608551b

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>All languages are constantly changing. It's well known that change in spoken language always outpaces change in written language, rendering phonetic spelling systems less accurate over time. This is why we have words like knight, whose spelling reflects an archaic pronunciation. Despite spelling reform getting proposed perennially since the 1800s, it's not likely to catch on. For one, there's never been a governing body for the English language to hand down such mandates, and I doubt there'll ever be one. A spoken language standardization effort like what took place in communist China would essentially require the Anglosphere to be under the thumb of an Orwellian dictatorship. On the other hand, English spelling has been static by common consent for a couple hundred years, and it's now very entrenched. A more or less standard way of writing English has survived the dawn of the Internet age. Without huge scale intervention, I think it will now be perpetuated as long as there are people using English. At some point in the future, I believe our alphabet will no longer be recognized as a code for speech sounds, but as a set of symbols that, when arranged in patterns, represent concepts. English will essentially be written in hieroglyphics. Change my view, guys<|ASPECTS|>standard way, speech sounds, anglosphere, hieroglyphics, view, spoken language standardization, languages, language, constantly changing, perpetuated, spelling, outpaces change, archaic pronunciation, code, less accurate, spelling reform, common consent, governing body, dictatorship, internet age, represent concepts, spelling systems, static, entrenched, intervention, english<|CONCLUSION|>

In a few hundred years, written English will no longer meaningfully reflect spoken English. Given enough time, English words will become as opaque as Chinese characters with regard to how they're pronounced.

013a47bf-e1ab-411e-a31c-6c4a97513dd4

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Following too closely is one of the most dangerous things you can do when traveling on the highway, and there is never an excuse for tailgaing in any driving situation, ever. If someone is going slower than you in the left hand passing lane, it's much safer to pass them on the right hand side, than to follow them closely to try and force them to move over. If passing on the right is not an option, you should wait patiently until a passing opportunity presents itself. If someone is already traveling over the speed limit, and you choose to tailgate them because they aren't going as fast as you would like, you are an overly aggressive driver posing a dangerous risk to everyone on the road. While it's true that, legally, the left lane should only be used for passing, this is not realistically what the lane is used for. Arguments from a legal perspective will not sway my view.<|ASPECTS|>, dangerous, dangerous risk, passing, passing opportunity, tailgaing, right, slower, excuse, safer, legal, sway my view<|CONCLUSION|>

When driving on the highway, it is much safer to pass on the right, than to tailgate until the person in front of you moves over USA.

4340da01-7345-4750-bbd0-eaddbd5e585f

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Hello It is my first post here and I guess this opinion is not really popular nowadays and might generate some snarkiness, but please don't eat me up. I really want this view to be changed, because right now Linux and everything it represents is for me like last rampart of virtual freedom and privacy in todays virtual world, nevertheless freedom it gives is probably part of reason why simplicity is so hard to reach and politics of hardware manufacturers another big part . After years of on and off, more or less casual usage my experience and skills with Linux and userspaces built on it is IMHO above beginner. With time, appreciation remained, but blind amazement faded, shortcomings became apparent. I don't really see elegance, standarization for example man pages are pure anarchy, seem like written from developers to developers to me as end user seems only theoretical, centralization of scattered around file system configurations settings for example non existant. Documentation for software built to work with Linux is often abstract, not straightforward, specific to certain scenarios or simply not working. Looking for help on online forums yields hacks that might solve issues, and cause more later. Working efficiently requires memorizing different sets of keybindings, command switches, methodologies. I would prefer to avoid comparisons in discussion, but let me just say Sticking with Linux relatively to Windows seems like giving away JustWorks^TM for ideology. It feels hardcore. I can explain more in depth above view by answering questions, but I am not willing to defend it, after all, I came here to get it changed and maybe learn something by the way . English is not my main language. <|ASPECTS|>skills, anarchy, centralization, depth, appreciation, abstract, snarkiness, shortcomings, privacy, pure, popular, cause, casual usage, freedom, ideology, later, yields, learn, comparisons, efficiently, virtual freedom, explain, solve issues, politics, memorizing, feels, hardcore, blind amazement, english, elegance, main language<|CONCLUSION|>

GNU/Linux environment together with everything build on it is system that is inconsistent, overbuilt and it keeps going away from simplicity.

84942225-5129-4f37-9370-579901783712

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Right now, many college students end up graduating with crippling debt because it's so expensive. There are some proposals at the federal level to forgive student debt or make college tuition free, but that's really expensive so there's inevitably going to be pushback. And frankly I agree with the pushback I already paid for my own tuition, why should I pay for yours too? But it seems like the situation can be made better for everyone by moving to a system where instead of paying anything upfront, you pay some percent of your future earnings. One way to look at this would be an opt in tax. If society decided to pay for everyone's tuition, we'd have to raise everyone's taxes x to cover that cost, whether they like it or not. Instead, we allow you to opt into this system you can have free tuition if you want, but your taxes will increase as a result. Another way to look at it is an investment. If I start a business, I would look for investors to front some money in return for a share of future earnings. Economists sometimes consider education an investment, and this would be the college investing in your education as well. There are some details to be worked out what's the percent? Does it vary based on your major? Is it progressive like income taxes? How do we deal with the transition period, where colleges are bringing in less tuition and nobody's graduated yet? But it seems like these can be worked out and we'll end up with a system that's more fair and doesn't result in crippling debt for college grads.<|ASPECTS|>college investing, investors, , money, transition period, less tuition, free tuition, tax, situation, progressive, raise, pushback, fair, taxes, income taxes, forgive student debt, investment, details, 's, crippling debt, future earnings, cost, college tuition free, made better for everyone, education, expensive, vary<|CONCLUSION|>

Instead of tuition, universities should charge a percent of your future earnings.

33f6a13c-a1e4-4a13-adf0-8fe04fce609d

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Let me explain I'm not saying it's wrong to have views on issues. Of course not. However, when people get wrapped up in an ideology ANY ideology, this is where I see problems happening. For example, I know a lot self proclaimed Feminists who view nearly everything as an attack on women. I'll be walking around with them, and they see this and that solely existing as 'patriarchy' How about Marxists? Now, everything is a Conflict a power struggle. The explanation for every social ill lies in the fact that there are power imbalances. How about Libertarians? Now, it's because the free market is being regulated. This or that social ill? They are caused by 'big government' or 'bureaucracy' and so on. However, it just gets tiring. I understand using each of these lenses in certain cases. However, it often ends up forcing people to hold ridiculous views in order to 'stay consistent'. I don't want this to read as nihilism, but someone convince me that it is positive to 'hold an ideology.' What is the benefit of this consistency? What difference does it make?<|ASPECTS|>social ill, free market, difference, benefit, ideology, nihilism, consistency, regulated, power struggle, wrong, libertarians, attack on women, ridiculous views, problems happening, government, power imbalances, views on issues, consistent, tiring<|CONCLUSION|>

I believe that it's wrong to espouse any ideology.

3f87c450-71fe-4cbb-a982-043af78653d6

<|TOPIC|>General AI should have fundamental rights<|ARGUMENT|>Without "massproduction" there would still be enough food worldwirde, if food was distributed fair and equally.<|ASPECTS|>food worldwirde, massproduction, fair<|CONCLUSION|>

It is not about producing food "for need" as most of it is thrown away.

9d97048e-cc79-4ef1-80b5-6c1612e8f1c1

<|TOPIC|>Artificial Intelligence AI: Should an artificial general intelligence be created?<|ARGUMENT|>It is difficult to predict the motivations of an AGI. With a powerful range of tools at its disposal via the internet and manufacturing tech, AGI has the potential to irreversibly alter the course of humanity without human input or the opportunity for human intervention.<|ASPECTS|>human intervention, alter, irreversibly, predict, course of humanity, motivations, human input<|CONCLUSION|>

AGI's creation raises serious ethical and philosophical concerns we are not currently prepared to deal with.

a69be853-31e5-42d5-82ba-4e7ea8161acf

<|TOPIC|>encourage the creation of private universities in the UK<|ARGUMENT|>In the rest of the economy, when consumers are allowed to choose between goods or services, the higher quality products are successful and the bad ones fail. Similarly, when consumers can makes choices between universities, and are putting money on the line thus taking a risk they will choose the good universities, and consider the bad universities as not worth wasting their money on. As a consequence, the best universities will expand, and the worst universities will either improve or fail. The New College of the Humanities for example is aiming to rival Oxford and Cambridge1 so helping to provide these two elite institutions with the necessary competition to force up standards. This will result in a higher quality of education being available to more people. 1 BBC News, "Academics launch £18,000 college in London.” 5 June 2011 improve this<|ASPECTS|>best universities, improve, fail, money, bad ones, standards, choose, bad universities, good universities, choices, worst universities, quality of education, higher quality products, competition, successful, higher, wasting their money<|CONCLUSION|>

The introduction of more private universities would increase the quality of education by allowing open competition

60aa4921-bd5d-4dd8-834a-e5235ba82718

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Canada I am proud to say is a pretty tolerant nation it is I think one of the best examples of tolerance and good governance. Canadians are rich and free, diverse and united. All except a single subsection of our population reap the benefits of our peace and prosperity the First Nations. They have very high, in relation to Canada as a whole, rates of poverty, teen pregnancy, alcoholism, drug abuse, domestic abuse, crime, and low education outcomes. In great part I believe this is from neglect and bad governance from the rest of Canada and particularly from the Federal Government, which is responsible for ‘Indian Affairs’ in our constitution. Because the Federal Government is responsible for all things ‘Indian’ they run First Nation Healthcare and Education while all other Canadians get those services though the Provincial Governments. This means that First Nations effectively are governed differently based on their race getting services that are generally subpar from those given to other Canadians. This situation is made all the worse because First Nations do not trust the Federal Government to govern them fairly because of past abused of federal power. This situation cannot last much longer indeed that is only thing the Chiefs, the Federal government, and the First Nation People can all agree on. I believe that as long as First Nations are given their services solely through the federal government there won’t be great improvements to how First Nation people are governed. I also believe that First Nations will not expect any deal that doesn’t involve a greater degree of self governance, as the white paper presented by the Trudeau government has shown. My suggestion is that we should scrap the idea that First Nation Affairs are the domain of the federal government. This would mean that the Provincial governments would be partially responsible for governing First Nations in their territory, as they are for all other citizens of Canada. The federal government would keep the appropriate powers given to them by the constitution such as currency and telecom. But here’s the twist, each First Nation band tribe would govern all most all of their own affairs so long as an independent audit found that their services were on par with those that other Canadians enjoy. Hopefully they would exist in relation to Canada as the City of London does to the Kingdom of England. Separate but very much a part of our system of governance. This would mean that for the most part First Nations would be self governing, unless that audit found that their services were found subpar. Then the Federal Provincial, depending on the failure, would take control for say ten years. This would ensure that each First Nation band would be pressured into providing excellent services to their people, while giving them the opportunity to be free under their own laws and customs so long as they do not violate the Charter. My hope is that this arrangement would give First Nations more peace, order, and good governance then the current system that has so failed them.<|ASPECTS|>excellent services, tolerant nation, crime, self governance, relation to canada, governed differently, govern, drug abuse, great, benefits, first, self governing, low education outcomes, united, teen pregnancy, trust, improvements, last, effectively, governed, subpar, federal power, people, federal government, race, indian, alcoholism, rich and free, domestic abuse, responsible, bad governance, free, customs, peace, appropriate powers, take, fairly, control, rates, healthcare, services, domain of, currency, affairs, tolerance, good governance, order, separate, peace and prosperity, system of governance, poverty, governing first nations, neglect, longer, diverse<|CONCLUSION|>

First Nations Canadian Indians should be given the highest degree of self government that is reasonable.

e73fbb08-0235-4c6a-a60d-f00e7365f15f

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>The most fundamental argument if time travel existed, then someone from the future would have come by now. Even if it did exist, something must be functionally wrong if no one from the past are allowed to know about it. EDIT A lot of people are getting into the technical jargon of time travel . Travel in my definition is the ability to control direction and magnitude towards the destination, ie. backwards or forwards, how much. Much like how when you jump off a building, you aren't flying downards, you are falling.<|ASPECTS|>falling, functionally wrong, time travel, control direction and magnitude, future, flying downards, technical jargon<|CONCLUSION|>

I think time travel will never exist.

bdef9cd7-ac0a-4083-8c7e-d84d10378377

<|TOPIC|>Should institutionalized education go completely digital?<|ARGUMENT|>Having a student learning from home creates a home dynamic that families must adjust to.<|ASPECTS|>home dynamic<|CONCLUSION|>

The family has to be deeply involved every step of the way

7d217e9d-8332-48a3-8a48-2b0bf4039b09

<|TOPIC|>ban animal testing<|ARGUMENT|>It is possible to conceive of human persons almost totally lacking in a capacity for suffering, or indeed a capacity to develop and possess interests. Take for example a person in a persistent vegetative state, or a person born with the most severe of cognitive impairments. We can take three possible stances toward such persons within this debate. Firstly we could experiment on animals, but not such persons. This would be a morally inconsistent and specieist stance to adopt, and as such unsatisfactory. We could be morally consistent, and experiment on both animals and such persons. Common morality suggests that it would be abhorrent to conduct potentially painful medical research on the severely disabled, and so this stance seems equally unsatisfactory. Finally we could maintain moral consistency and avoid experimenting on the disabled, by adopting the stance of experimenting on neither group, thus prohibiting experimentation upon animals.1 1 Fox, M. A., “The Moral Community”, in La Follette ed., Ethics in Practice, Malden, Mass; Oxford : Blackwell Pub, 2007<|ASPECTS|>cognitive impairments, experiment on animals, morally inconsistent, experiment, unsatisfactory, moral consistency, possess interests, develop, moral community, experimentation upon animals, ethics, human persons, capacity, painful medical research, morally consistent, vegetative state, persistent, abhorrent, suffering, specieist stance<|CONCLUSION|>

Some groups of people have less capacity for suffering than most animals

26a5e36b-fd83-4ffe-82fb-da86caf6a8c4

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>As a native English speaker working in a Japanese school, I feel that for the most part, the way in which English is taught should be overhauled. There is a tendency by Japanese teachers of English to spend an entire 45 50 minute class laboriously going through a dialogue line by line, asking the occasional question and simply instructing students on the way in which the dialogue has been constructed. Whilst I do not disagree with the fact that grammar needs to be taught in a way which clearly conveys its meaning especially since Japanese and English grammar are very different , going through a dialogue which students cannot understand line by line to explain each sentence ultimately does not improve one's understand of a language. English in Japan is specifically taught so that students can pass tests. There is usually no speaking section of any test from JHS onward, just listening and reading. My evidence for this is the current state of English in Japan. Considering that English is a mandatory subject taught on a national level, with the government even going so far as to employ native speakers of English to improve the English of students even further, the state of the language in Japan is horrendous. I do understand that the Japanese are a typically shy race and often do not openly speak English as much as they are probably able. Despite this, I think a much bigger focus should be put on speaking, which in my opinion would be most beneficial for their future. I appreciate that some of you will say that it is my job as a native speaker to enforce this in the school. I agree that to a large extent, it is. I try my best to speak English with students as much as possible, even going so far as to tell a lot of them I can't speak Japanese so that they have no choice but to speak English even ignoring words in Japanese like hello so that they will speak English. However, Japanese law states that ALT English teachers such as myself may not teach a class without a qualified Japanese teacher in the room with them. As a result, teachers often ask to use the whole lesson for their own instruction of grammar as they are usually very busy trying to make sure all the material is covered for the mid end of term tests and I am relegated to tape recorder , simply practicing pronunciation for 2 3 minutes in a 50 min lesson. I do not resent this, just presenting it as a counter argument Change my view<|ASPECTS|>dialogue, mandatory subject, current, overhauled, pronunciation, beneficial, teach, qualified japanese teacher, speaking section, understand, listening, resent, improve, state of english, future, instruction of grammar, focus, openly speak english, pass tests, speak english, state, shy race, enforce, grammar, teachers, native speaker, horrendous, english, meaning, choice, reading<|CONCLUSION|>

I believe the Japanese system of teaching English should be totally overhauled.

51773920-4526-415f-b417-ae49cae008f7

<|TOPIC|>Has Xi Jinping been good for China?<|ARGUMENT|>Under the rule of Xi Jinping, many people living in China now lack fundamental freedoms.<|ASPECTS|>fundamental freedoms<|CONCLUSION|>

Authoritarian rule has been bad for the people of China.

ff48a6b1-5cee-4204-8df6-ef49f472eedb

<|TOPIC|>Has Religion Been a Good Thing for Humanity?<|ARGUMENT|>People do terrible things in name of many reasons, even those wich are seen as good for sure for ex. science, general well being.<|ASPECTS|>terrible things, general well<|CONCLUSION|>

People do terrible things and they name religion as the reason. This is different from the religion making them do it.

88cca6e6-86a1-4543-849f-0e89b731b5f9

<|TOPIC|>Does mainstream feminism exploit women of colour?<|ARGUMENT|>If women of colour do not buy into or support the feminist movement, they may be more susceptible to rhetoric which brands feminist issues as being extreme orunnecessary This may result in them failing to support, or actively voting against, policies which may be in their interest.<|ASPECTS|>extreme, voting, susceptible to rhetoric, unnecessary<|CONCLUSION|>

The power of the feminist movement to affect change comes from the number of people who buy into its message and support its cause. If the movement is seen as excluding women of colour by ignoring the issues which affect them, its overall power is weakened.

522b75ed-a458-43d7-8b4b-345fa028e585

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I don't know how common this is in four year universities I've talked to my friends in four year universities and they say it varies based on class size and the professor. I go to a community college, and the schoolwide policy is that if you miss more than 20 of a class, you're dropped from the class. For a sixteen week class that meets twice a week, that's about six days, to give you an example. I believe the professors have to manually drop you, and some are willing to work with you, especially if you have an actual emergency some are strict and give no exceptions. The average class size is around 25 40ish students, so the professor usually starts learning your name and face and it's easier to see if someone's absent. I disagree with this, because I believe that as long as the student is getting their work done, who cares just how many days they're actually in class? I think it's fair to require attendance on test quiz days so the student doesn't just show up two days later wanting to make it up, but for the most part, class is just about reading directly from the textbook or copying down notes that most instructors post online anyway. A huge number of my classmates have jobs and families to take care of, so it's not realistic to expect them to be in class every single day when it's something that could easily be done at home. For some classes, every assignment of the semester is posted online at the beginning of the semester, so someone could get all of that done ahead of time if they wanted to, and what's the point in being forced to continue coming to class if you finished all the coursework in the first month? I can understand high schools having mandatory attendance policies, because the kids are required by law to be there, but we're adults and I think we should be allowed to make our own decisions and deal with the possible consequences. Anyway, change my view?<|ASPECTS|>manually drop, decisions, strict, mandatory attendance policies, class size, consequences, work done, view, jobs, schoolwide policy, possible, miss, class, learning your name and face, easier, dropped, attendance, someone 's absent, emergency, families, varies, change, copying<|CONCLUSION|>

I believe mandatory attendance policies in college are stupid and unnecessary,

d7dee8f2-4545-4902-b7fc-923c5b3f22db

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I do not believe women should be allowed to fight on the front lines and in battles of war. My opinion is based on the following reasons. The women physique is weaker than male physique not all women but i would think that the greater majority are In battle, men are more prone to go out of their way and endager themselves and others to defend help female soldiers. Women can be held the enemy and be subject to greater physical and mental torture than males. Females can be a distraction that will shift the attention of male soldiers on the frontline away from the frontline. Females are much more likely to get injured than men from carrying heavy equipment ex. Women are 7 times more likely to tear a knee ligament than men i am open to new ideas. <|ASPECTS|>tear, get, injured, attention, male soldiers, women, lines, distraction, new ideas, endager, knee ligament, physical and mental torture, female, fight, battles of war, weaker, enemy<|CONCLUSION|>

I do not believe women should be allowed to fight on the front lines of war

24b7b9b1-1655-4c3c-bd2c-c1aa3051c32e

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Firstly, I'm talking more about a direct democracy than a representative democracy like the US currently has. I feel that any large population that has a democratic system is not necessarily doomed to fail, but is guaranteed to be riddled with problems and dissonance within the population. The very idea of a democracy dictates the need for a political minority that will disagree with the other majority of the population. One party will vote for one thing, while another will vote for the opposite ie. gun control, abortion . One party will always win, and be satisfied with the way things are being run in the country, however on the other side is the people who lost the vote, that don't agree aren't satisfied with the way things are being run in the population ie. if abortion is legalized, pro lifers will be discontent, while pro choicers will be content . This political strife leads to a discontent in the losing populations that in large populations leads to a large portion of the population being dissatisfied with their country. An example of this in action is the American Civil war One portion of the country is against slavery, while another is in favor of it. The minority being pro slavery eventually get fed up with not having their way, and having the numbers to do so eventually secede from the nation to form the confederacy, leading to one of the bloodiest conflicts in history. While personally I don't think that this minority vs. majority strife will lead to an all out civil war in the future, I believe it will continue to drive a wedge into the population. In smaller populations this minority will obviously be smaller and not able to do as much damage to the population as a whole, but in a country like the US, with a population of 300 million, give or take, the minority is a HUGE number up to about 150 million people of people that are in disagreement with the way things are run in the country. This leads to mass dissonance in the population and a further separation of the population. EDIT Clarity<|ASPECTS|>population, lost, separation of the population, populations, smaller, pro, problems, edit, doomed to fail, discontent, damage to the population, majority strife, content, mass dissonance, satisfied, political strife, bloodiest, democracy, confederacy, slavery, control, representative democracy, dissatisfied, secede, political minority, democratic system, dissonance, conflicts, minority, country, direct democracy, civil war, vote, disagree<|CONCLUSION|>

Democracy falls apart in large populations eg. United States

7a01aa53-8f23-4b45-a0c5-7548332e6a87

<|TOPIC|>Should There be a Universal Basic Income UBI?<|ARGUMENT|>People would be able to be in a more expansive way of living, and to manage all the things that no one dreamt of doing: We could use a schedule of volunteering where we would help each other and the community we live in to keep going. As people would be more happier with their lives, it would be easier to manage the things that by now we average see as "problems that aren't ours" as managing garbage and keeping the city clean etc. We would be aware of our compromises with our community.<|ASPECTS|>compromises, expansive way of living, help, community, problems, happier, clean, managing garbage, easier to manage, volunteering<|CONCLUSION|>

A UBI would enable a lot of people to do what they really like, instead of what they currently do for a stable income. Doing what you really like for a few years helps you master some skills which, together with great quality coming from your enthusiasm around that "hobby", might result in an increase of small businesses.

b1c6b8f6-3943-45ff-ab38-6f4797d01eb3

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>In my own personal opinion and observation, I believe that the most chill and laid back person will be the one that will make the most friends relative to someone that is high energy, intensive, and extremely talkative. The person I am describing Not the type of person to dominate the conversation. Always seems jaded, but can crack jokes occasionally and can hold a conversation. This person isn't That guy , in where he tries hard to fit in a social setting. Isn't a high energy, in your face person that tries to show that they are energetic when talking to you. Every time I try to mingle with a group, there is always that guy that tries hard to fit in. This person either try to show that they can converse, but really fails. Instead, I feel that to fit in is just be chill. That's really to it. Don't try to show that you are an extrovert when you are conversing with a new group of people. <|ASPECTS|>jaded, tries, high energy, , chill, laid back, friends, fit, converse, social setting, conversation, dominate, talkative, group, extrovert, person, crack jokes, energetic<|CONCLUSION|>

The most chill person is the one that is likable and ideal for making a lot of friends.

978acaad-1be2-4e36-b446-4ac28600fd60

<|TOPIC|>Should There be a Universal Basic Income UBI?<|ARGUMENT|>Right now, people can make illegal purchases. Later they get in trouble for it. Preventing illegal purchases through a UBI from occurring in the first place will eliminate much legal trouble for people.<|ASPECTS|>illegal purchases, legal trouble, trouble<|CONCLUSION|>

A conditionally provided basic income one that provides for people's needs effectively is better in that it prevents misuse.

17bb538f-9225-470d-b674-8a6dc6d2e662

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I've never understood the reason why some drugs and medications aren't available to everybody. I've always assumed the reason for this is that they will most likely be misused. If that's the case, I think I should take my own responsibility for this and the law shouldn't be concerned with this because it only affects me and nobody else. The same goes for swimming in restricted areas or things like that. I get it, it IS dangerous and it's not a good idea, but I don't really understand why that should be forbidden to me. It shouldn't be the society's concern, but only mine. Oh, and also, you should ALWAYS wear your seat belt. , this is completely ok, I agree. But the law says you MUST always wear your seat belt , now that is something I've always considered unnecessary for the same reasons I mentioned before. It is highly recommended to do so, but I shouldn't be required to do it because it doesn't really affect the other people in the society. In general, I think laws that require of me to do things to protect only myself shouldn't exist at all, because that's not the idea of the whole legal system. The necessity of having laws comes because we live in a society, but we should be allowed to do things that only affect ourselves.<|ASPECTS|>ok, , dangerous, society, always, affect, drugs and medications, restricted areas, seat belt, laws, available to everybody, belt, affects, people, responsibility, protect only, legal system, misused, forbidden, unnecessary, society 's concern<|CONCLUSION|>

I think I should always be allowed to do things that could potentially hurt only me e.g. some drugs.

3a77546b-3803-4e35-bf84-364a4fb0c6c0

<|TOPIC|>Who will win the UK general election?<|ARGUMENT|>Rachel Warby, the British MP candidate for South Northamptonshire, “totally agreed with a tweet that former Prime Ministers, politicians and journalists should be “arrested for treason”, and once the UK leaves the EU, face “execution” for their actions.<|ASPECTS|>“ execution, treason<|CONCLUSION|>

Brexit MPs have been reported to issue comments that back the death penalty. This is a problematic stance, given that capital punishment has already been abolished in the UK.

3f38a4fe-6381-48c0-aa94-d14ec589d868

<|TOPIC|>Should the BAR exam be eliminated as a requirement to practice law?<|ARGUMENT|>Preparatory tuition, essential materials to prepare for the exam, the exam fees themselves and filing fees vary from state to state, but are all significant; these make taking the BAR exam a large and often unviable financial commitment<|ASPECTS|>financial commitment, essential materials, exam fees, preparatory tuition, unviable, filing fees<|CONCLUSION|>

The BAR examination, and training, are expensive; those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds may not have the funds to manage it.

b5423964-5b4b-4e78-ba78-38f69561f647

<|TOPIC|>Does science justify atheism?<|ARGUMENT|>Ethical naturalism is the attempt to get morals out of the real world instead of out of holy texts.<|ASPECTS|>morals, naturalism, texts<|CONCLUSION|>

There are other, superior, sources of philosophical frameworks and moral codes.

447757e1-5cb8-4011-819c-cf8f0f5d8eb3

<|TOPIC|>Should all religions be banned on a global scale?<|ARGUMENT|>Secular laws, governments, and constitutions have played a part in religions starting to use the word tolerate not only to allow a degree of interfaith cooperation to defend their rights as they see them, but also to suggest that they'll conform to secular laws and drop some antisocial practices used against infidels.<|ASPECTS|>interfaith cooperation, secular laws, antisocial practices, rights, infidels<|CONCLUSION|>

In recent decades the favourite word which religious leaders use to suggest they're not bigots is a giveaway that that's exactly what many of them are: They claim they "tolerate", a word that's open to interpretation either as biased to placate their bigots or unbiased to placate everyone else.

7e06255e-6761-4547-93e4-6565a4bdd744

<|TOPIC|>Is the Book of Mormon an authentic ancient scripture?<|ARGUMENT|>Alma 60:23 quotes a letter, ostensibly dated to about 62 BCE, states that "God has said that the inward vessel shall be cleansed first, then shall the outer vessel be cleansed also." This refers to a Jesus saying that post-dates the story in the Book of Mormon. Matthew 23:26 KJV: "clean first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also".<|ASPECTS|>clean, god, post-dates, saying, inward vessel, cleansed<|CONCLUSION|>

The Book of Mormon uses phrases, idioms, and analogies from the New Testament in passages ostensibly dated prior to the Christian era.

8558873f-65ca-486c-bf21-17f3cb8fd91b

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I recently enrolled myself in a health insurance plan which required transmitting a lot of personal information over the phone. I quickly realized how annoying and inefficient it is to constantly repeat yourself and say the letter followed by a random word T as in toothpaste, E as in elephant, N as in Nancy, etc. Phone conversations which require data transmittal wouldn't be such a hassle if everyone was familiar with a uniform phonetic alphabet. Seems like a minor benefit of time savings, but multiplied over an entire country I think those 2 minutes one person saves on a phone call would be hundreds of thousands of hours saved for a nation. <|ASPECTS|>data transmittal, uniform phonetic alphabet, hours saved, hassle, personal information, inefficient, time savings, health insurance, annoying<|CONCLUSION|>

The NATO phonetic alphabet should be taught in elementary school.

3ba9b60a-c2d4-4241-b0e9-b7af48356f75

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>The reason why I think this is because a person who has not had a really hard dark past never lived in a state of perpetual depression or anxiety and since a person who has had a very bad past has lived many years like that they can only heal themselves up to a degree from the past hurts but not completely as as it doesn't even affect them negatively at all not even 1 like a person who never had a rough past. My view People who have had extremely tough past can't get to a point where their past, completely 100 doesn't affect them negatively.<|ASPECTS|>depression, negatively, affect, perpetual, past, anxiety, tough past, heal<|CONCLUSION|>

A person who has went to a really dark place in life, crippling depression/anxiety can't become "completely" healed from the past so it doesn't affect them at all negatively

da1ead5c-6980-4521-b74b-aa8f4e4df328

<|TOPIC|>Minors Should Be Able to Obtain Abortions Without Parental Consent<|ARGUMENT|>Parents have a right to know what their children are doing: they are legally responsible for their care, and as parents they have a proper interest in any case. Any good parent would want to know if their daughter were having an abortion; any good parent would want to help her daughter make a good decision on the matter, and to prevent her making a bad decision.<|ASPECTS|>right to know, good decision, proper interest, legally responsible, bad decision<|CONCLUSION|>

Parents have a right to know what their children are doing.

026a3d48-1a3e-45ab-94df-d1a90fc43f65

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>While I tend to both identify and vote as liberal, and given the current candidates available I will most likely be voting for Senator Sanders, I really, REALLY , really want someone to throw some 'hard issues' of his at me for consideration. 'Hard issues' in the sense that some of his specific viewpoints are difficult to compensate for. As an example A Republican candidate that is pro homosexual rights marriage. Such a stance may be generally seen as a voting liability and thus seen as a 'hard issue' for their Republican constituency to have to overcome to vote for the candidate. Please, PLEASE , rip Bernie Sanders to shreds based on his voting record or quotable views with sources please for me. I want to be challenged and after some basic searching I'm only seeing top comments in threads concerning his viability based on being too progressive to win a popular vote, some of his wife's activities or issues concerning his age all of which have nothing to do with the fact if he personally is or is not qualified to hold the office of the Presidency. On the other side, I only see perpetual circle jerking that doesn't seem to address anything specific outside of the standard ' Presidential Candidate speaks about about topic that everyone can agree is bad ' fill in the blank style headline. I want someone to expose some dirty secret view to make me have to re consider if I actually want to vote for him. Thank you<|ASPECTS|>record, voting liability, homosexual rights, rip, issue, shreds, dirty secret view, sanders, viewpoints, progressive, viability, perpetual circle jerking, quotable views, issues, difficult<|CONCLUSION|>

Give me some 'hard issues' concerning Bernie Sanders.

05675be5-b75e-415e-933e-90b0ce7726de

<|TOPIC|>Should people marry outside their religious faith?<|ARGUMENT|>Research shows that, of Americans that married from 2010 onwards, 39% had spouses of a different faith, compared to only 19% of those who wed before 1960.<|ASPECTS|>spouses, different faith<|CONCLUSION|>

The increase in interfaith marriages around the world in recent times suggests that interfaith couples are becoming increasingly accepted by communities all around the globe.

229e8661-0673-425e-a13b-6c546b6aaa58

<|TOPIC|>Western democracies should openly try to circumvent Internet censorship in oppressive regimes<|ARGUMENT|>Western businesses have been seeking entry into external markets, some of which could well be classified as oppressive. These firms have invested significant time, money, and manpower into building up their businesses. By enforcing this policy they will face huge challenges in growth, and even maintaining their place in these countries at all. Internet service providers and other technology firms in particular will suffer. Google and Yahoo have claimed that their efforts in these countries, much like those of Western governments, have helped soften regimes, much more than not engaging at all at least.1 As Western companies face more and more competition in international markets they, and the Western economies of which they are a part, cannot afford to undermine themselves for the sake of making a political statement, one that would ultimately not necessarily serve to further the cause of freedom anyway. 1 Gunther, Marc, ‘Tech execs get grilled over China business’, Fortune, 16 February 2006, <|ASPECTS|>, freedom, soften regimes, undermine, money, external markets, challenges in growth, competition, oppressive, manpower, time<|CONCLUSION|>

It results in Western companies getting kicked out of the countries, damaging significant Western businesses

31e1e400-bcac-4010-a738-ef2a71838e67

<|TOPIC|>Should Sex Work Be Legal?<|ARGUMENT|>Research indicates that a significant share of the men who buy sex - according to one study about one in three - not only crave sexual satisfaction but also emotional intimacy.<|ASPECTS|>emotional intimacy, sexual satisfaction<|CONCLUSION|>

Bonding between sex workers and their clients undermines any commodification of a woman's body.

551a3b32-1d5d-4e7f-893f-a494c07069fb

<|TOPIC|>Kialo should separate voting into relevance and veracity of claim.<|ARGUMENT|>"The earliest evidence for life on Earth are graphite of biogenic origin found in 3.7-billion-year-old metasedimentary rocks discovered in Western Greenland."<|ASPECTS|>biogenic origin<|CONCLUSION|>

The first evidence for life on Earth is approximately 3.7 billion years old.

8c213f56-db47-4dfa-8b7d-019fe9929c17

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>If you take a step back, and look at what religion has done to this world, it is all negative. I can't count how many wars were started purely based on religion. The Crusades were a period of time solely based on religious warfare. Religion has caused people to move from their country, and has caused more bloodshed then any spread idea. If you look at modern day, there is a new plethora of issues. Now people isolate others with non religious beliefs, and believe there is no way one can be a moral person without religion. Look around at the current governments of the world to see more harm caused by religion. In Islamic countries there are a whole culture being oppressed due to their strict religious beliefs. The only positive that I can even think of is it gives people faith, but even that seems fishy. Faith doesn't actually do anything, and in retrospect is the religious term for confidence tl dr Religion has only caused division and bloodshed throughout it's history. EDIT I know the title is over exaggerating. That was stupid of me lol <|ASPECTS|>division, strict, exaggerating, religion, culture, religious beliefs, fishy, faith, oppressed, religious warfare, isolate, moral person, negative, wars, stupid, harm caused by religion, issues, bloodshed<|CONCLUSION|>

Religion has no positive attributes

ec08f507-1343-4466-a532-3383855cc978

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I'm not going to explain in detail the differences between the books and the anime reimagining. I'm here to have my views changed about the manga and whatever influence that manga has on the upcoming movie, not to type out and possibly infringe on copyrights prose that is readily available for purchase online. Disclaimer I write sci fi and I love Ghost in the Shell it's one of my biggest influences. It's great, it's genius, and one of the most hilarious things about anime fans and delusional critics is Motoko being entirely mistaken as a feminist hero. It's no secret that Shirow Masamune loves drawing girls in erotic ways. Almost every last of age female depicted in all three Ghost in the Shell volumes is obviously sexualized. It's easy to refer to his other works and say that he just loves eroticism that much. It's certainly reasonable to assume that's part of the man's motivations. But I think there is a clear, obvious, logical, and lore required reason for this ubiquitous eroticism Ghost in the Shell takes place in what fantasy and science fiction literature calls simply a single gender world. The only thing off is the date, which Shirow threw out as 40 years after he wrote it, but his universe is clear. Every female is either entirely a weak, mindless AI cyborg, or in Motoko's case unsure as to their own originality or origin and dwell on this anxiety very often. Mass produced sexbots, maids and sexbots doubling as bodyguards are the norm in his post female society. Not just the norm, but almost every last female depicted fits into one of the aforementioned roles. FURTHER EVIDENCE OF THIS is the fact that Shirow specifically claims he shouldn't have included the explicit lesbian sex scene in Chapter 2 it is removed entirely from the most recent printing . This scene depicts Motoko as selling sexual service to female entities services which, in Shirow's single gender world, would not appear to be needed as fembots could just simulate it themselves if they ever even wanted to experience those feelings. This is removed and, left in its place, is a scene where Motoko administers something to the girls through clearly cybernetic ports and cables. The original, mistaken depiction of the girls as full of life and fully organic didn't fit with his true vision. Now, we have an American production of Ghost in the Shell on the way and they'll have to shoehorn in all sorts of living female characters with motivations and thoughts and development of their own none of which, besides the main character, exists at all in the original universe.<|ASPECTS|>administers, full of life, universe, differences, influences, development, genius, infringe, weak, obviously, sexual service, feminist hero, cables, copyrights prose, views, erotic ways, sexualized, living female characters, sci, cybernetic ports, origin, eroticism, thoughts, man 's, explicit lesbian sex scene, loves, motivations, single gender world, sexbots, fully organic, mindless ai, originality<|CONCLUSION|>

The original Ghost in the Shell manga is greatly misunderstood by mainstream media and contemporary readers and professional critics, and Hollywood is making a hilarious mistake by adapting it. It takes place in a single-gender world.

6b867ce4-bc39-4b60-befe-2ff2de5cbed7

<|TOPIC|>Should we have a single global language?<|ARGUMENT|>Concepts specific to a culture cannot always be clearly expressed in languages from cultures without that concept. This could result in cultures being forced to change in order to adapt to the global language<|ASPECTS|>adapt, change, global, cultures<|CONCLUSION|>

A global language would kill diversity of thought and culture.

830a30df-d4a5-469b-b47a-33d3dd347d23

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Cancer treatment can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. That same price could provide tens of thousands of vaccinations for tetanus and treat other cheap to prevent yet prolific diseases in the third world. How can you justify spending hundreds of thousands to save one person rather than hundreds of people?<|ASPECTS|>spending hundreds, cost, prolific diseases, cancer treatment, save one person, treat other cheap, thousands, justify, vaccinations<|CONCLUSION|>

I believe expensive medical procedures are unethical because the same money could help more people in extreme poverty.

0b31b3c5-b8ad-4df8-b200-4335c68d8b90

<|TOPIC|>Homosexuality, should it be legal?<|ARGUMENT|>The right to personal liberty and the right not to be arbitrarily deprived of liberty are universally recognized and protected by international human right laws; LGBT persons have the same rights p.84<|ASPECTS|>personal liberty, human right, rights, right, deprived of liberty<|CONCLUSION|>

Deprivation of liberty based on sexual orientation can amount to an arbitrary detention p.85

97aaed57-213d-4366-9057-bbe39a5754dc

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>My views on communism are as such. It has never been truly implemented in a developed country, and I do not believe that a Stalin run USSR or a Mao China are accurate representations of my belief, since there has been people at the top of the system with vast wealth and power. I believe that money is a superficial motivator for people to work hard and I think that in time, this could be changed. With the current economic wealth of developed nations, the redistribution from rich to poor to abolish rich and poor would be enough for every person to be moderately wealthy in today's terms. The state would be a true democracy, not a totalitarian leadership as shown in Mao Stalinism. Most of the businesses would be state run entirely, leading to the end of private companies for necessities such as health care. I'm sorry for my poor English, and I would be happy to receive any more questions about my views, as I am tired and this post just scratches the surface of my beliefs hopefully I will be able to extrapolate in the comments. I have tried to believe that capitalism is the be all and end all social system for a developed country, but any argument given in real life has been inconclusive.<|ASPECTS|>vast, extrapolate, money, state run entirely, superficial motivator, wealth and power, private companies, capitalism, moderately wealthy, health, views, necessities, economic wealth, poor english, totalitarian leadership, work hard, true democracy, rich and poor, communism, inconclusive, end all social system, beliefs<|CONCLUSION|>

I believe that a pseudo-communist system would work in all developed countries.

0995c2ca-423d-4c04-8526-28d54d0bbe63

<|TOPIC|>Affirmative Action: Useful Once, Outdated Today?<|ARGUMENT|>Even if whites are mistaken in their belief that anti-white racism is important, it is better to pursue non-targeted policies such as universal basic income that enhance life for minorities but do not prompt backlash from majority groups that control most political and financial power.<|ASPECTS|>policies, basic income, financial power, political, racism, backlash, enhance life for minorities<|CONCLUSION|>

Some white people believe that anti-white racism is now a bigger problem than anti-black racism. These beliefs are likely to be triggered by affirmative action policies.

d30747d7-75f8-4447-862f-c4a68413fcf4

<|TOPIC|>Cognitive biases should be allowed to run their course<|ARGUMENT|>It is impossible to process all the information around us, therefore we must resort to mental shortcuts to make decisions quickly and effectively.<|ASPECTS|>decisions, mental shortcuts, impossible to process<|CONCLUSION|>

Sometimes cognitive biases are short cuts with reasonable odds at creating a positive outcome.

cd7ed63e-818a-4825-8457-2576d0271233

<|TOPIC|>Kialo should separate voting into relevance and veracity of claim.<|ARGUMENT|>There are many historical events, which are accepted to have happened by the majority of scholars regardless of whether the New Testament is reliable, which are better explained by the resurrection of Jesus than by any competing naturalistic hypothesis.<|ASPECTS|>historical events<|CONCLUSION|>

The existence of Jesus and the truth of some of his miracle claims are historical claims, and as such can be falsified.

7d743a86-50b6-4193-a1b3-e2ffdf9872c7

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I am your typical progressive straight white male with a strong belief in social justice. I believe that privilege is a thing, and I always try to keep mine in check when I'm involved in discussions with historically marginalized groups. I believe that Black Lives Matter. I support LGBT rights. Yadda yadda yadda, the usual litany. I would not describe myself as transphobic, though I am sure others may disagree after reading this post. I have numerous online acquaintances in the trans community, I am happy to use gender neutral pronouns and to refer to them by their preferred pronouns, and I fully support trans rights. I confess that I am a mild bioessentialist. That alone probably moves me to the transphobic column in the minds of many. But at the end of the day, my guiding principle is that people have the right to self identify . Our time on this planet is short, and if someone feels uncomfortable with the gender identity their chromosomes might suggest, then they should be allowed even encouraged to adopt a different one. The place where the rubber meets the road is when it comes to issues relating to women and their role in society. Because I am a typical progressive straight white male with a strong belief in social justice, and because I always try to keep my privilege in mind, I accept that women in our society have additional hurdles to clear that I, as a straight white male, do not have to deal with. I did not grow up experiencing those hurdles. Not only that, but I am also intimately familiar with the what about the men? derailment tactic, in which guys just can't seem to let the women talk about issues affecting women without trying to turn it into a discussion about men. So when I see transwomen start talking about issues relating to women and their role in society, my thoughts are While transwomen certainly had to clear hurdles in their lives that I did not have to clear, they are not the same hurdles that women had to clear . The fact that they are trying to insert themselves into those discussions seems like the same what about the men? behavior engaged in by cis males. Or a close cousin, at least. It just feels to me like the people who are in the best position to speak on issues of what it's like to be female in our society are those people who were actually enculturated as female from birth. And that will exclude most transwomen certainly all of the transwomen I know personally because they spent the first X years of their life being enculturated as male before deciding to switch. This is an issue I've been grappling with for a while. I am trying to see my way towards a 3rd Wave Feminism viewpoint, but I fear that some of my views will remain mired in the 2nd Wave. Help me change my views, Reddit. <|ASPECTS|>role in society, neutral, gender identity, familiar, derailment tactic, women, bioessentialist, transphobic column, social justice, transwomen, insert, 2nd wave, right to self identify, black lives matter, female, views, enculturated, historically marginalized groups, behavior, mild, change my views, grappling, exclude, trans rights, hurdles, issues affecting women, lgbt rights, transphobic, enculturated as male, privilege, mired, feminism viewpoint, clear hurdles, men<|CONCLUSION|>

I worry that the TERFs may have a point.

cfe42296-67f4-4ec9-a9f5-b4367c028ee8

<|TOPIC|>Should the US Recognize Palestine as a State?<|ARGUMENT|>Netanyahu has promised to continue to build more settlements, illustrating his desire to mark more and more Palestinian land for Israeli settlements.<|ASPECTS|>palestinian land<|CONCLUSION|>

Israel continues to construct settlements in Palestinian territories which makes the two state solution impossible to implement.

e4591d0b-aa05-4823-8f2b-c62d10986c69

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Hunting mammals is only ethical when the person doing it needs to do it to survive or not suffer e.g. experiencing severe although not life threatening hunger . If there are any other options than to kill, those should be pursued instead. All mammals can feel pain, and coming from a utilitarian viewpoint, any suffering is bad if the pros don't outweigh the cons. Yes, hunters do get some enjoyment out of it, but I hardly think that their happiness outweighs the pain of a gunshot wound. I do however place the life and wellbeing of humans over animals, which is why if it is ever necessary, humans can ethically kill and eat animals. Hunting should not be done as a means to merely increase food supplies either because it is very possible to live a healthy life without the consumption of meat. My view boils down to that it is only ethical to kill out of necessity, so if anyone could elaborate on some reasons why it would be ethical to kill without needing to I would genuinely like to hear them. Lastly, I don't only want reasons why hunting without necessity is ethical, but also reasons why hunting is never ethical. Edit My view has been changed when invasive and over all harmful species are taken into account, but there's still room to change my view about non invasive, non harmful species.<|ASPECTS|>survive, pain, food supplies, gunshot wound, necessity, kill, life threatening, increase, hunger, non, harmful species, happiness, ethical to kill, options, healthy life, non invasive, suffering, suffer, enjoyment, ethically kill and eat animals, ethical, feel, life and wellbeing of humans<|CONCLUSION|>

Hunting is only ethical if done out of necessity

40d1b6f5-91bc-4f37-8405-01e6fa458e73

<|TOPIC|>Should short-term apartment leasing services such as Airbnb be prohibited in New York City?<|ARGUMENT|>Airbnb operates in residential areas, listing many apartments of which the neighbours are permanent residents. This means travellers risk impinging on the lives of residents.<|ASPECTS|>residential areas, residents, travellers, lives, risk impinging<|CONCLUSION|>

There is a greater likelihood that those renting short term will damage property than there is for long-term tenants.

345866ce-7068-4552-9dc9-f53690ebf204

<|TOPIC|>Does science justify atheism?<|ARGUMENT|>kant thought that at first a government may need to compel many people not to violate the rights of their fellows; but over time, as citizens come to understand the benefits of freedom, most will respect rights not because they are compelled to do so but because they believe this is the right thing to do, both morally and practically.<|ASPECTS|>freedom, morally, benefits, right, rights<|CONCLUSION|>

The categorical imperative can work on an individual level, but when applied to a society, it fails. The people would use Eichmann as a means to an end, and Eichmann would act out the collective will rather than his own. This function is necessary for the categorical imperative to be applied to government.libertarianism.org

9f079286-f8ae-4781-bb7d-503aae96a012

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I already know this will get turned into a downvoted thread that will cause people to accuse me of being misogynistic and all the usual nonsense but for the sake of argument, let's pretend people are rational. Obviously, the Ray Rice incident has sparked a pretty big story and whether he's right or wrong is none of my business. The thing that really annoys me about the feminist movement is that it seems women would love to be able to pick and choose their spots. This is NOT 'equality'. If I decide that I want to get overly confident as a man and walk up to another man who is physically superior to me, spouting off reckless and offensive slurs or worse, punch smack spit in that man's face I EXPECT consequences. If you are a woman and you claim to want equal rights, you need to treat men equally as well. You can't claim ignorance or stir up a manhunt for someone just because they are stronger than you after you chose to enter into a physical altercation with them. You can only control YOUR actions to ensure that you don't do something worthy of that person using that force on you. I don't want to hear the boilerplate response of well, I'm a feminist and I don't believe violence is acceptable against anyone. That's great and when society reaches your unrealistic utopia where physical violence is a thing of the past, we'l make sure to get you a medal for your little opinion. Until then, we live in the real world, with real consequences for our actions and whether male or female, you need to realize that there's only so much someone will take before you should expect retaliation.<|ASPECTS|>downvoted, boilerplate, story, rational, control your actions, manhunt, pick and choose their spots, claim, consequences, confident, equal rights, ignorance, right or wrong, treat men equally, misogynistic, retaliation, acceptable, stronger, physical violence, violence, reckless and offensive slurs<|CONCLUSION|>

Feminism demands equality, which applies to domestic violence as well. It is acceptable for a man to hit a woman who attacks him.

d404f9c1-6532-4dcd-ba0f-39d0e230e424

<|TOPIC|>A society with no gender would be better<|ARGUMENT|>No one is born or genetically programmed to like to play at child care or with construction toys. The only reason these ideas exist is because they have been socially constructed<|ASPECTS|>programmed, child care, socially constructed, play<|CONCLUSION|>

No one is born or genetically programmed to like blue, or not wear a dress. The only reason these ideas exists is because they have been socially constructed.

10d065de-d5e3-4110-9d98-4da779bb4d18

<|TOPIC|>Pro-Life vs Pro-Choice: Should Abortion be Legal?<|ARGUMENT|>Doctors do not have to work in abortion clinics. If they feel the act is immoral, they can just not perform it.<|ASPECTS|>immoral<|CONCLUSION|>

Women having the right to choose abortion does not mean that all doctors are required to perform abortions.

05cbb1c5-0165-4e52-baa6-d8ded7edc4b7

<|TOPIC|>George Orwell's 1984 is over-rated<|ARGUMENT|>In Chapter 9, he talks about how the Thought Police monitors every aspect of a person's existence. This idea has been covered numerous times earlier, especially in Chapter 1.<|ASPECTS|>existence, monitors, thought police<|CONCLUSION|>

Orwell discusses the idea that privacy does not exist for the individual an unnecessary number of times.

4136b547-0d6d-41e2-97f4-86c416aed639

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>So from the outset, let me say that I think that Get Out is probably in the top 2 3 films of the year. With that being said, I'm not entirely sure it should win Best Picture over some of the other films this year, but I wouldn't be opposed to it taking the award. So for those who have seen the movie, you may or may not be aware of the undertones the film has slamming white liberalism. Obviously, the film also addresses classic racism, but the fact that Jordan Peele actually addressed the elephant in the room in regards to white liberal racism is amazing in my opinion. In simplest terms, Peele illustrates that liberal smugness and their moral high ground are just another forms of racism. Because they go out of their way to prove they aren't racist towards black people, it only solidifies that they are looking at black people differently from themselves which in and of itself is racism. My argument is that given that the Academy is old and out of touch if they actually award Get Out with the Best Picture, it will be for the wrong reasons. It's almost become a running joke about the Academy being out of touch, to the point where a viral campaign forced them to change in 2016. Last year Moonlight undeservedly won the Best Picture Award over Fences, Arrival and Manchester by the Sea. Jimmy Kimmel even made a joke about nobody even watching Moonlight during his monologue which is ironic given many of those in attendance were voting members of the Academy. This year Get Out is a far better movie than Moonlight ever was, and I fear that it is going to get the win because of a smug liberal effort to give black people something, rather than based on it's own deserving merit. And if that is the case, it will win because it is being viewed as different than the other films, an outsider that looks and behaves differently, and is being treated as a novelty in the elitist crowd sound familiar? <|ASPECTS|>viral campaign, liberal smugness, black people, white liberalism, moral high ground, win, outsider, novelty, best picture, wrong reasons, best, looks and behaves differently, voting members, touch, liberal racism, of touch, racist, better, liberal effort, undeservedly, deserving merit, old, different, racism, elitist, classic racism<|CONCLUSION|>

If "Get Out" wins Best Picture at the Oscars, it only hammers in the films true meaning

d042fd2e-cf99-4ce8-b9e8-6ea7f9950924

<|TOPIC|>Is transhumanism the next step in human evolution?<|ARGUMENT|>Transhumanism implies loss in the natural equilibrium due to artificial changes in humanity which is an important actor in the system ~ as effects in nature show, i.e. climate change. An option is to include nature in changes made to a whole system as a sort of transnature, to allow for the collective evolution and minimization of potential risks of the imbalance.<|ASPECTS|>artificial changes, loss, risks, collective evolution, nature, climate change, imbalance, natural equilibrium<|CONCLUSION|>

Transhumanism might have unforeseen dangers, because it has never been accomplished on a mass scale.

455ce7d0-df65-4850-b03b-312f49610e5a

<|TOPIC|>All Humans Should Be Vegan.<|ARGUMENT|>The streams rivers lakes and waterways would be rejuvenated from removing feces sources as at the moment many waterways in America and possibly other countries are polluted with pig, cow and other animal feces making water unsafe to use and consume by humans. This is a human right issue and an environmental issue. A vegan society wouldn't need to accommodate for so many animals and therefore feces would be less.<|ASPECTS|>environmental issue, human right issue, vegan society, accommodate, feces, unsafe, polluted, rejuvenated, water<|CONCLUSION|>

A vegan society would create the least pollution, which damages the environment.

f5bed08b-74a2-4e21-9340-cc122dbf803b

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I will start by saying I do support progressive taxation. As a relatively high earner I know I have benefitted from public schools, subsidized post secondary, legal framework, etc. I might not draw the same benefits as others, but on the whole I am better off than in say Ghana. That said, I cannot morally support a framework that would see the top marginal tax rate exceed 50 of a salary. I can't see a reason why, ever, the government is more entitled to that 1 marginal dollar, than I, the generator of that 1. I know property and sales taxes and service fees increase my tax burden, but for the purpose of this I am just referring to income taxes.<|ASPECTS|>, taxes, tax burden, marginal tax rate, income taxes, subsidized post, service fees, entitled, high earner, morally support, benefits, marginal dollar, benefitted, property, public schools, progressive taxation<|CONCLUSION|>

The marginal tax rate on income should never exceed 50%.

0e3c4a39-8cb1-4641-a48c-46763633f648

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic Arthur C Clarke I'm no physicist so please don't assume I'm an expert on this stuff. But from what I've read, modern physics has accepted that our universal laws are not really universal ie Newtonian laws cannot be applied to small particles and so on . There are probably multiple universes. There are probably more than three dimensions and we can't observe them, we're just like a dot on a page trying to wonder what it would be like outside of that page. But we can't possibly process an existence that doesn't correspond to our current physics and logic because we were born in these conditions and our brains are locked in to analyzing reality according to these conditions only . Now imagine a species that managed to evolve for millions upon millions of years, maybe even billions. Discovered every possible law of physics in existence and managed to control it. Developed a way to bend time and space itself, to gain immortality, to essentially turn the universe into a version of Sim City. Where you can control what happens to everything in that universe because you know what the programming is like. If there are truly an infinite number of universes and an infinite way for life life an entity capable of demonstrated self awareness and willful thought , then it is certainly plausible that some species advanced far enough to ascend into what we would comprehend as Godhood. The omnipotent, the omniscient. I have grown to believe that there is something beyond our existence, simply because with all these possibilities in the universe it is likely that some alien species managed to unravel the secrets of existence itself, and control it. I mean, look at the pace of discovery humans are on. Now imagine if we were to continue this pace for the next thousand years. We would become beings as powerful as the mythological God himself. So I am an atheist, but I am also a theist. And I don't see this as a contradiction. It is likely, due to the nature of infinite time, that there is some self aware being out there who has managed to scientifically discover everything and has turned himself into God. Please change my view.<|ASPECTS|>omniscient, godhood, multiple universes, process an existence, view, god, powerful, unravel, universal laws, secrets of existence, programming, discovery, atheist, infinite time, analyzing reality, evolve, scientifically discover everything, theist, laws, bend time and space, control, mythological god, control what happens, universal, self aware, indistinguishable from magic, gain, observe, self awareness, contradiction, omnipotent, immortality, pace, law of physics, dimensions, willful thought<|CONCLUSION|>

There is no difference between God and a sufficiently advanced alien. Therefore, it's possible to believe in God while being an atheist.

0cc9bf7a-806b-4854-a6a5-8cf04c576b2b

<|TOPIC|>Is citizen science beneficial to science?<|ARGUMENT|>The US government used to fund much research and development, especially for World War II 1 2 However, that stopped and citizen science tries to fill in the void i.e. lack of R&D, but lacks the capability to. Citizen science distracts from this issue rather than fully resolving it.<|ASPECTS|>fund, distracts, citizen, capability, research and development, r & d<|CONCLUSION|>

Citizen science is a symptom of larger, structural issues in society Rather than resolving these issues, it enables them to continue.

774e1849-a161-497b-8723-673cdf415fc3

<|TOPIC|>Should Kashmir Be An Independent State?<|ARGUMENT|>A resolution to the Kashmir crisis would likely mean that its funding sources from Pakistan would dry up.<|ASPECTS|>kashmir crisis, funding sources<|CONCLUSION|>

An independent Kashmir would likely reduce motivation for Lashkar-e-Taiba.

06e753b9-281f-475a-b6b5-9a8c1c2bcb12

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>One thing I have always found to be little use is the study of literature. I've never been a fan of fiction and as part if my French class I have to study a novel which is great for learning new words but I'm not too fond of the essay writing and making up nonesense to reach à pointless conclusion. Here's why 1 Ideas should be expressed clearly and openly. If somebody has a message they should write an article or another form of nonfiction text so people are more inclined ti read it and understand what they mean. 2 Historical novels don't really help us understand the past because the novel is a work of fiction. Point 1 applies here too. 3 It doesn't help us understand culture. The reader does not know for sure what is part of a culture and what is ficticious so as a learning tool it seems rather inept. 4 How can you be sure that is what the author meant? Maybe the character just likes blue curtains. 5 It brings little to the world unlike STEM fields, or seemingly anything else I'd really love to hear some thoughts on this and I really want to change my view point as it's holding me back from acheiving the grades I want as I'm just not enjoying the work. Thank you Edit 1 I have changed my view regarding the utility of literature from the past<|ASPECTS|>, learning new words, acheiving, enjoying, learning tool, openly, blue curtains, understand, little to the world, inept, historical, ficticious, little use, ideas, utility of literature, nonesense, grades, understand culture, understand the past, pointless conclusion, culture, study of literature<|CONCLUSION|>

Literary analysis has little benefit

81a42cf0-688a-43cc-bcb9-a5717be0e8a7

<|TOPIC|>We should subsidize space exploration<|ARGUMENT|>space exploration should be subsidized as it allows us to try and find an alternative place to live if we destroy our own planet.<|ASPECTS|>alternative place to live, subsidized, destroy our own planet<|CONCLUSION|>

Space exploration is necessary for the future survival of humanity

3c9a4510-1e8a-40ec-80ff-33650d2dde32

<|TOPIC|>The Trolley Problem: What's the Right Solution?<|ARGUMENT|>Choosing to pull the lever feels different to inaction: it is a deliberate physical action that changes the scenario as opposed to passively observing it.<|ASPECTS|>deliberate physical action, inaction<|CONCLUSION|>

By pulling the lever you actively cause someone to die. That is wrong.

d28edc0e-e784-4b91-b4d5-8cf0880bf36f

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Feminism makes the big and arduous claim that they are for equality of the sexes and fight for equal rights. This could not be further from the truth. For starters, feminists NEVER bring up gender issues that affect men parenting decisions, selective service draft, almost always losing custody to the child, genital mutilation, being incarcerated and victims of crime more often, among many, many more . Then there is the fact that they actually blame men for all of their problems. No matter what the issue, it's always attributed to my individual fault because I happen to be born a man. They even came up with this ludicrous notion of a patriarchy in which men control all of society please go tell that to the many women millionaires, CEOs, and senators. Finally, gender equality is already a thing that exists in many developed countries. Women can choose their career path, have been able to vote since the 20's, have legally been entitled to equal pay since 1964, and have the right to get an abortion. Issues that they say still exist either don't or are something they themselves created. For example, the notion that we live in a society that normalizes rape is false. Literally ask any shmuck who isn't legally insane and they will tell you that rape is objectively wrong. Less than 1 of men rape yet my female friends tell me you don't know how it is, you don't live every day fearing you're going to get raped That type of irrational fear mongering is brought to you by feminism. Men are 6 times more likely to be the victim of violent crime, so how come I'm not shaking in my boots? Unlike most anti fems, I'm willing to shift my position on feminism. Things that may help me see your side and award a delta are arguing that Feminism's pros far outweigh their cons Traditional feminism will be restored soon and will weed out extremists There are some unmentioned gender inequalities that I have not seen Things that will make me dismiss your argument include You telling me I simply don't understand because I'm a white male You insisting on things like gender pay gap and the pink tax existing despite all credible research pointing to the contrary Simply throwing the dictionary definition of feminism at me, as if that somehow validates your point and invalidates mine Claiming men's rights are not equally as important as women's. Edit referring to modern day feminism here. <|ASPECTS|>decisions, equal pay, entitled, equal rights, day, feminism, normalizes rape, problems, irrational fear mongering, selective service draft, mutilation, patriarchy, career path, extremists, society, truth, men 's rights, choose, right to get, exist, objectively wrong, gender equality, gender inequalities, rape, individual fault, insane, control, blame men, violent crime, victim, victims of crime, equality of the sexes, gender issues, gender pay gap, men, pink tax, ludicrous, fems<|CONCLUSION|>

Feminism does not do what it sets out to do and is detrimental to western society

34d1873a-3b0f-4037-a6fd-3309d1fcd4f4

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Animal rights activists sometimes argue that we should do something about the suffering of wild animals. Starting from the premise that suffering is wrong, this seems to make sense. That said, I just can’t wrap my head around this idea, for several reasons Implementation This seems like an idea that is simply too hard to implement. Potential policy solutions I can forsee would be somehow caging or preserving all predator species behind fences, and augmenting their diet, all the way to simply killing predator species the worst of the options, imo . Most of these are too different to address in one paragraph, and if there’s a solution you think is reasonable and often overlooked in this debate I’m all ears. I’ll acknowledge that critiquing implementation doesn’t really bear on whether it’s morally imperative, but i believe that there is a reason none of these ideas appear like good solutions. If you have a solution to this problem it would go a long way to convincing me that this is a real valid concern I should have and can correct, instead of an academic hypothetical. Ruining wild spaces This seems pretty self explanatory but there would be obvious impacts on the environment by undertaking any policy of preventing animals from eating other animals. One of the obvious problems is that you would almost certainly see an increase in population of prey species and possibly an over consumption of vegetation. The ecosystem is fragile and often the destruction of one species can lead to the death of many others. You aren’t going to convince me that the food chain isn’t fragile, but if you had a reason wild spaces don’t need to be preserved I’d like to hear it. Unsustainability Ultimately, all of these policies rely on human effort to implement them. In the case I mentioned above where prey species were becoming more abundant, humans could conceivably observe and correct these problems, but they would require constant vigilance and retesting of hypotheses. Additionally, if humans were removed from the equation by a mass extinction event, or even lost some of the technology needed to achieve this result, animals would return to the status quo ante. Change my view<|ASPECTS|>, death, ecosystem, population of prey species, species, wild spaces, destruction, one species, status quo ante, suffering of wild animals, constant, retesting, hard, problems, caging, solution, mass extinction, correct, valid concern, fragile, consumption of vegetation, unsustainability, hypotheses, killing predator species, preserving, good solutions, chain, self explanatory, vigilance, implementation, impacts on the environment, overlooked, hypothetical, observe, morally imperative, policy solutions, reasonable, human effort, predator species, different, suffering is wrong<|CONCLUSION|>

there is no moral imperative to correct the suffering of wild animals caused by other wild animals.

24a8fb51-2fb3-441e-a965-910b5c041330

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>You always hear people saying that democracy is an ideal system, and that if the 'wrong' people are getting into government, it's because the 'right' people aren't voting. But I don't think that's really true consider, for example, Australia. Mandatory voting, and from what I've heard I recently read this Tony Abbott's government seems like a gigantic fuck up. So I believe that democracy is inherently flawed, and that 'the majority' don't know what's good for them, or don't care enough large voter turnouts don't change much.<|ASPECTS|>voter turnouts, flawed, inherently, mandatory voting, voting, democracy, gigantic, ideal system<|CONCLUSION|>

I believe that "democracy would work much better if everyone voted" is not a valid argument at all.

851562f6-dfdb-46de-9d67-9766e77f72d1

<|TOPIC|>Should selective breeding of animals be prohibited?<|ARGUMENT|>Genetic engineering has resulted in hypoallergenic pets, including cats and dogs allowing those allergic to pets to still be able to own them and enjoy their company.<|ASPECTS|>genetic engineering, enjoy, company, hypoallergenic pets<|CONCLUSION|>

Selective breading has allowed pet ownership to be more accessible.

ffd8675a-2813-4bf7-81c0-7de299e66403