Datasets:

webis

/

conclugen

like 1

Follow

Webis Group 32

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I never understood why people find him funny. I love absurdist comedy but I have always been turned off by Williams' manic energy and uninsightful comedy. He was great in his serious roles, such as Good Will Hunting and Awakenings, but his frantic antics and characters never resonated with me. He always just seemed like a hyperactive child starved for attention. It always makes me more sad than happy to see him do comedy. I realize that he has suffered from mental illness and addiction, but you shouldnt have to take that into account when you see him dressed as Ms. Doubtfire on the screen.<|ASPECTS|>addiction, frantic antics, absurdist comedy, mental illness, hyperactive child, uninsightful comedy, funny, sad, manic energy, comedy, starved for attention<|CONCLUSION|>

I don't think Robin Williams is funny

1e3df4a3-f271-4fdb-a67a-fdda02e25980

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Many sources claim that we will be able to have self driving cars by the year 2020. 1 2 3 Getting a driver's license is a huge time and monetary investment, and since basically all people only use it to commute it's better to just wait until self driving cars are here. Concerning money, Tesla's master plan suggests owning a self driving car will be significantly less costly since you can rent it out easily while not using it you might even profit , something most people will want to do. Given the two above statements it's probably better for most people to use other means of transportation for the time being and just wait for self driving cars to become available. Well, maybe not actually most people , but people who live in cities in industrialized countries. To CMW Convince me that it's significantly likely enough you will still need a driver's license by around the year 2020 for the normal use case i.e. not terrain driving or racing to justify both the time and money investment.<|ASPECTS|>time and money investment, less costly, driver 's license, profit, time and monetary investment, means of transportation, self driving cars, commute, industrialized<|CONCLUSION|>

It's not worth it getting a driver's licence since self-driving cars will likely be available in less than 5 years

3e42fb59-ecb9-4545-80d9-49909611dad9

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>So I'll put my situation into context I'm Canadian live in Ontario and a native so I get many government benefits that I am very grateful for. But basically my goal in life is just to be happy nothing else really but I realize happiness doesnt come just because I want it around so the biggest thing I want or think would make me happy is just experiencing life living like it has no walls which might sound difficult because I originally wanted to be a vet but I realized school is a long grueling process that just sucks my energy out I feel restricted and overall it's not a pleasant learning experience nothing there I have taken interest me in the slightest but at home I'm constantly looking for things to learn whether it be about space, philosophy, or drugs and I love it but at school it's just being pushed into my head and it doesnt feel natural having to go through a textbook that's 10 years old and not be really interested in any of it but it's still being pushed into my head I dont think I'm stupid despite my lack of punctuation but i have this strong urge that I'll just be fine no matter what I still feel I could kinda reach for my dreams and still make them come to fruition thus being happy and accomplishing my goal if anyone is wondering what a specific goal I have is it's just to backpack across Europe and Asia seeing things and learning from the people and cultures But as I was saying I personally dont think I'm stupid or I dont like to think which is why I'm asking you guys if you could change my view I'm trying to figure out if im wrong to just leave everything to chance to chase a decent sized dream I have so am I dumb or biased because I'm lazy and my brain is just kinda searching for an excuse to be<|ASPECTS|>government benefits<|CONCLUSION|>

I'm not trying hard in school but I dont think I need it to be happy or even successful based on what I want

756a5325-a9c3-4a7e-8c8f-ba250f5c21c2

<|TOPIC|>The European Union should become a United States of Europe<|ARGUMENT|>Nation-states and national sovereignty are outdated concepts in the light of ongoing globalization which separate peoples and hinder economic, social and political progress Internationalism<|ASPECTS|>social and political progress, nation-states, national sovereignty, separate peoples<|CONCLUSION|>

By turning into a state the USE undermines it's supranational character and the promotion thereof in the world.

3b493084-074f-4256-b111-1524f55b17e0

<|TOPIC|>Should scientists contribute to Wikipedia?<|ARGUMENT|>Particularly on high profile articles in controversial areas like genetic engineering and alternative medicine, heated debate over precise wording and the proper weight of cited studies can go on for weeks, even months. This can be seen as a less than productive use of time.<|ASPECTS|>productive use of time, precise wording, less, weight of cited studies<|CONCLUSION|>

Fighting with everyone else about the content of articles is a waste of time.

ef7262bb-9254-46bb-a50e-69462a35b007

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>He and my mother split up after a few years and were a thorn in each others side for years afterwards, both generally framing the other as manipulative that doesn't matter, young people do silly things and draw them out until they develop and understanding of themselves and stop trying to fit the primary school frame of existence. My dad and I have touched on the subject informally in the past however, I think it would do damage well beyond our relationship, specifically he wouldn't father a child to his 20 year wife out of fear and were it all for nothing it will pose an existential fuck you to his wife or not fuck you . I am indifferent to the situation, he's still my dad through upbringing and blood pales in significance to time spent. with him aged 50 telling him achieves nothing other than he gave up a trade due to child support manipulation mothers never used to need proof of a father's income and gave up on life for nothing. My dad isn't my dad and telling him will probably ruin the life he's scraped together over the years. I should not tell him what I now now, change my view.<|ASPECTS|>child support, situation, fear, blood pales, change, silly, understanding, damage, nothing, time spent, view, manipulative, significance, father 's income, primary school frame, life, ruin the life, existential fuck<|CONCLUSION|>

28 just found out my dad isn't my real dad. I should not tell him.

2273ca77-d487-4ec9-a7fc-217c32d139f0

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I mean, fonts, themes the real reason of the success of iOS vs. Android is that you're not supposed to change the main graphic , because even if you think so, you don't have a better taste than the hundred of graphics who spent years working on it. That said, Apple already copied in iOS 90 of the best tools available on Cydia. I think we owe big thanks to the jailbreak community things will never be sas boring as they were thanks to them, but i just can't find a good reason to perform a jailbreak today. Except for Kodi. And some of u rpetrich tools. edit Context, and tribute to rpetrich.<|ASPECTS|>context, rpetrich tools, rpetrich, jailbreak, boring, best tools, tribute, better taste<|CONCLUSION|>

Apart for Kodi, is there any real reason for jailbreaking?

74af62c5-e928-40db-80df-a3e92a9fc5b2

<|TOPIC|>NATO countries and the government of Afghanistan should negotiate a power-sharing deal with the Taliban.<|ARGUMENT|>If a diplomatic solution is not reached or even proposed , the security situation in both Afghanistan and Pakistan will deteriorate and this is a matter of serious concern since the latter is a nuclear power. Violence in the region can only be disseminated if the Taliban feel they are not being attacked but are included; then peace has a chance of prevailing. If the region were to be left as is Increasing Taliban activity could further destabilize the border regions of Pakistan, while attacks mounted against the Afghan interior would cause significant damage and endanger thousands of live. 1 An entrenched Afghani Taliban could support and embolden groups with similar ideologies elsewhere in central Asia and the subcontinent. For instance, groups ideologically identical to the Taliban effectively subdued the Pakistani military in the Swat Valley allowing them to impose their version of sharia law and institute measures that included closing girls' schools, banning music, and installing complaint boxes for reports of anti-Islamic behaviour.2 Continue with the status quo and the Taliban will simply re-conquer Afghanistan when the coalition leaves. 1 Amna Saboor, «The Waziristan problem», December 14th, 2008, 2 Jane Perlez and Zubair Shan Truce in Pakistan May Mean Leeway for Taliban, The New York Times, published March 5, 2009, <|ASPECTS|>ideologies, re-conquer afghanistan, status quo, security situation, taliban, damage, peace, embolden groups, law, anti-islamic behaviour, banning, complaint boxes, endanger thousands, deteriorate, support, prevailing, destabilize, violence<|CONCLUSION|>

The threat of Talibanization is too great under the status quo to continue with current policy.

b904d502-68a7-4068-9aa5-a729670e40c5

<|TOPIC|>Is it Time for Hungary and the EU to Part Ways?<|ARGUMENT|>There was no war in Western Europe or Eastern Europe because they were directly under immediate US and Soviet spheres of influence<|ASPECTS|>war, immediate us<|CONCLUSION|>

Post-war peace in Europe is actually because of the bloc-forming nature of the Cold War.

a35190f3-d42e-4679-9463-1f927ebabe7b

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I don't understand why people get married. I've been with my SO for 3 years, and a piece of paper isn't going to make me love him more or be more committed. It won't make me try harder to make things work when we have problems. All it will do is muddle things if we ever would want to get divorced. He can adopt any biological children, co adopt any adopted children. We can write our wills to include each other. The only possible reason I'd see to get married is to be included on a job's health insurance plan. But as we both have good jobs with good plans, this is unnecessary. It just seems like a colossal waste of time money to have a wedding, and if it's just a courthouse thing, then it just makes things difficult if we ever want to get divorced. All my friends are so excited about planning their weddings, and my SO wants to be married and have a wedding someday, and that it just the last thing I'd ever want so .<|ASPECTS|>good jobs, weddings, problems, wills, committed, biological children, good plans, things, include, write, work, co, muddle things, health insurance plan, adopt, difficult, waste of time money, love, get married, adopted children, unnecessary, job 's<|CONCLUSION|>

I never ever want to get married and don't see any reason to.

79861868-198f-4a78-9fae-e463c7d43888

<|TOPIC|>Actively circumventing Internet censorship is a legitimate foreign policy tool<|ARGUMENT|>Autocratic governments that breach their people’s human rights have no legitimacy domestically as they do not represent the people or protect their interests. They also have no international legitimacy, as they are violating their obligations that they have signed up to through various international agreements such as the universal declaration of human rights1 and the international covenant on civil and political rights2 which oblige states to respect their citizen’s human rights. Other states therefore are legitimate in acting for the people of the repressed state to undermine their government and take up their cause. By imposing censorship the government is violating its people's freedom of expression which that government has promised to uphold therefore it is right that other governments should endeavour to uphold that standard. It was therefore right for the west to undermine the USSR and the communist governments of Eastern Europe through radio broadcasts such as Voice of America and Radio Free Europe, they gained immense audiences, a third of urban adults in the USSR and almost half of East Europeans with these sources often being considered more credible.3 1 UN General Assembly, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 10 December 1948, 217 A III, 2 UN General Assembly, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 16 December 1966, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 999, p. 171, 3 Johnson, A. Ross, and Parta, R. Eugene, “Cold War International Broadcasting: Lessons Learned”, Briefing to the Rancho Mirage Seminar, p.54<|ASPECTS|>, credible, undermine, freedom of expression, international legitimacy, repressed, undermine their government, legitimacy, violating, audiences, people, political rights, protect their interests, human rights, citizen ’<|CONCLUSION|>

It is legitimate to undermine illegitimate governments to promote human rights

24bceedc-49c9-4e7b-ac7e-5d357725b53f

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I think some of the people who say 'they were spanked and are fine' are in denial. I've met too many people who made that claim who were emotional messes. Children are still being abused by parents who trick them into thinking their beatings are normal spankings. Banning spanking would make it easier to catch people who abuse their children. 37 countries have banned spanking, different things work on different children, but if alternitives to spanking worked on the children of 37 COUNTRIES than it should work on our children. There has been no study that show spanking is the only thing that works on some children. There are many studies that show spanking can be dangerous to the well being of the child. It can be debated that these studies only apply to people who don't spank correctly ie calmly, gives child explanation, only for deliberate disobediance and or safety, only a few open hand swats but there has never been a country or state to successfuly make a law about only being able to spank in this safe way, but there have been countries to successfuly ban it all together. Children are easy to misunderstand. Swatting a child who did nothing wrong a bit too often can cause anxiety issues for the child while breaking the trust between parent and child.<|ASPECTS|>dangerous, fine, well, deliberate, emotional messes, trust, catch, child, denial, anxiety issues, alternitives, spanking, disobediance, abused, easier, abuse their children, normal spankings, banned, safety, children, misunderstand, beatings, easy, spanked<|CONCLUSION|>

I believe America needs to ban corporal punishment in all states in schools and homes.

e13f2a12-ad73-4c04-b088-aa78810eb1c6

<|TOPIC|>Mark Twain used the N-word in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. Should it be censored?<|ARGUMENT|>I have a PhD in English but haven't taught it for 20 years. I regret never having taught the unexpurgated version of this profoundly moral and beautiful work of art. I regret even believing that I would be afraid to teach it as Twain wrote it. To back away from art is little other than moral cowardice. It doesn't show respect for the tender sensibilities of young people. It reveals a cynical contempt hidden under a hypocritical veil. I say that because I too engaged in that hypocrisy.<|ASPECTS|>respect, hypocrisy, moral and beautiful, tender sensibilities, moral cowardice, young people, teach, afraid, unexpurgated, hypocritical veil, cynical contempt<|CONCLUSION|>

It is important to preserve the artistic integrity of great works of art like Huckleberry Finn. As such, none of its language should be modified.

d934bacd-67aa-4f75-8a8a-f2d0e401a46b

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I don't see the problem with sex for rent offers. The ones that openly say in the advert you won't have to pay for rent, but you will have to have sex with me . These are different from the normal rent arrangements where the landlord manipulates the tenant into having sex with him because they can't keep up with their rent. I'm talking about rent arrangements that specifically ask for sex up front. Here's a video of one such landlord being interviewed, and he sounds like a reasonable guy. He said he would not accept a vulnerable person, and that he has reported underage people to social services, which I think is responsible of him. Thoughts? PS if you can identify an ethical issue, please make sure it is one only limited to this situation. If it is a general ethical issue that already applies to other things that are already legal and morally accepted, I don't see how it can be used as a valid reason to oppose this idea. <|ASPECTS|>, sex, thoughts, pay for rent, ethical issue, rent, reasonable guy, underage people, morally accepted, manipulates, rent arrangements, vulnerable person, sex for rent<|CONCLUSION|>

There is nothing wrong with sex-for-rent offers

e0ac0542-f98f-4386-9719-4ca19a7744f9

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>For everyone who hasn't seen it, you can watch it here Last Week Tonight with John Oliver Debt Buyers HBO . According to their description Companies that purchase debt cheaply then collect it aggressively are shockingly easy to start. We can prove it What I watched seemed like a sensationalized piece that only succeed in saying that debt is bad and criminals are bad. There were some good points that they made in the show, but I have made a list of all of the things that bothered me. The show talks how it is bad that debt collectors buy debt for a low amount, possibly sell it for a lower amount and eventually try to collect it for the full amount What's wrong with debt being sold for less than it's worth and then collecting the entire amount? The reason it is sold for less than it is worth is because someone promised to pay a company for a loan but the didn't. The reason it is being sold for less is because the company realizes that they probably won't get their money back and they might as well get what they can. Or, they are a company that doesn't deal with debt collection such as a store with a payment plan and they don't want to have to go through the hassle of collecting it. However, the borrower still promised to return the full amount so why should it matter who is collecting it? The show listed examples bad debt collectors who break the law by doing things like threatening to kill them their dog. There will always be people who break the law but there are law against it. Debt collectors still have to follow the law. That is like saying that Americans are bad because there are Americans who murder people. . ~~ The show said that debt collectors sue a lot.~~ Obviously Their job is to get the money back and suing is a good and legal way to do so. The whole reason that suing is allowed is so that the court can see who is right and what should be done. A small company might not know what the process is to sue borrowers who don't pay their debt. So, a logical way for them to get their money back is for them to pay cut heir losses someone who know how the legal system works, to do the legal work for them. edit u rocqua changed my view with regard to the litigious nature of debt collectors. . Debt collectors garnish wages if they win case even by if by default So what? The person has to pay the debt back, garnishing wages is a good way to get the money back. If the court realized the the debt wasn't valid or that the borrower had another reason not to pay back the debt then the court would go through the alternative route. Otherwise, there is evidence that the borrower is earning money but not paying back what they promised that they would. The show talks about how it is bad to collect debt from dead people the dead person doesn't need to feed themselves or pay rent. Why should the money that they borrowed from people be giving to their estate and not to the lenders? . ~~ In Johns debt collecting company he says it is terrifying that he bought debt and can now collect them~~ The lenders could have done that themselves if they wanted to but instead someone else is doing the dirty work. I see nothing wrong with that. 1 John said that we need protection from companies like his Why? They serve a very important role in society. Without debt businesses wouldn't be able to start, expensive or emergency purchases wouldn't be able to be made, and investments would earn much less interest. . edit u Ansuz07 changed my view with regard to the issues that can arise without having a licensing process even if for the sole purpose of being able to take it away if the debt collector breaks the law. . Now I understand. No one likes to pay their debt and some might not be able. Debt collecting is the dirty work who many people don't like. But the reasons that the show gave that I listed in no way prove that debt collecting is bad. One final example, I worked at a company that offered a payment plan. We would sell things that not everyone could pay off right away. If there was no way for us to get some of that large amount of money back after someone decided to to pay us, we would probably not offer that service.<|ASPECTS|>, role in society, giving, bad, money back, cut heir losses, money, collect debt, pay their debt, sell things, debt cheaply, debt back, debt collection, feed, earn, americans, criminals are bad, emergency purchases, protection from companies, terrifying, less interest, sensationalized, debt, litigious nature, legal, dirty work, breaks the law, investments, payment plan, easy to start, service, important, alternative route, borrower, break the law, law, sold for less, buy debt, murder people, right, paying, amount, debt is bad, licensing process, estate, garnish wages, pay rent, pay, debt collecting, hassle, debt collectors sue, bought debt, sold, bothered, earning money, debt collectors, company, expensive, sue borrowers, follow the law, large<|CONCLUSION|>

John Oliver's show on Debt Buyers is misleading and makes a lot of false claims.

39e7e476-8f85-4c7a-849f-cd9b52fd5490

<|TOPIC|>Should all religions be banned on a global scale?<|ARGUMENT|>A free society supports diverse systems of thought -- even wildly divergent systems, provided they do not negatively impact democracy, individual rights .etc. A more selective approach is what's needed here.<|ASPECTS|>diverse systems of thought, individual rights, negatively, free society, democracy, selective approach<|CONCLUSION|>

This is no different than the church "banning" the heliocentric view of the solar system. Bans on systems of thought are fascist at their core.

44da00a7-1f35-45e4-8ae7-31243c133619

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>EDIT 2 I have thoroughly enjoyed this thread. My understanding of the issue has broadened.Thank you to everyone who participated. You have all received upvotes. I still hold that the collective intelligence of the whole is superior to the intelligence of any one individual. That being said, it seems as though, for now, the collective intelligence of the whole subreddit suggests we have one individual in charge and I can live with that. Anyway, thanks again to all. Time for me to focus on other matters. EDIT embarrassing typo in title should be 'a president whose sole mission ' It seems to me that the truest essence of democracy is the belief that the collective intelligence of the whole is superior to the leadership of the few. Overall, this principle seems to hold true as in the following examples Radio Pandora vs 106.7fm News Reddit GoogleNews Twitter vs New York Times. Videos Youtube vs Cable TV. Encyclopedias Wikipedia vs Encarta. Applications App store vs Native. and the list goes on and on and on Imagine a presidential candidate who ran for office with only one purpose to return the government to the people. He She decided to be completely transparent and open up all communications to the public. More importantly, this prez would communicate the pros cons of each decision and allow the public to vote. Then, they would simply following the decision made by the people. To effectively communicate, they could hire a team to make simple, clear videos explaining all sides of the issue. The public would have a certain amount of time to vote, then the decision would be made. To eliminate unnecessary debate, here are what I believe are the most likely arguments and my initial rebuttal. Checks and balances is a good thing We would still have them, this would only be one branch of the gov turned over to the people. Lobbying would increase yes, but it would be aimed at the general public, not the select few. The average joe is stupid and would make bad decisions maybe, maybe not. I still think the collective intelligence is superior to any one human. People would get tired overwhelmed with all the decisions if they voted on everything, most definitely they would. This would mean that those voting on any specific issue would be the people who are most passionate about that specific issue a huge benefit . In addition, I see no reason why people couldn't align their votes with those who have similar political beliefs similar to political parties today. This would slow everything down why? Bureaucracy is a bottleneck. If we were able to determine a decentralized way of making decisions, I actually think it might speed the process up. We don't want to make EVERYTHING public ex how to build a nuclear bomb couldn't the population make decisions on what not to make public also? example should we make x public? Someone, please intelligently debate with me. Feel free to add pro's con's to any of it. Thanks for the discussion to any who partake.<|ASPECTS|>population, political beliefs, decisions, lobbying, branch, discussion, matters, everything, public, collective intelligence, intelligence, unnecessary debate, public to vote, decentralized way, tired overwhelmed, bureaucracy, bottleneck, following the decision made, communications, checks and balances, focus, democracy, pro 's con 's, understanding, decision, leadership, pros cons, speed the process, stupid, intelligently debate, clear videos, applications app store, transparent, return the government to the people, enjoyed, individual in charge, upvotes, benefit, bad decisions, time to vote, superior, voted, general public, communicate, received, slow everything, x public<|CONCLUSION|>

A president who was sole mission was to represent the will of the people would be superior to a president that tries to 'lead' the country. This could theoretically be accomplished now example in submission text. Why does no one even talk about this?

54cc2743-178a-40ca-ba6e-2154c09bbceb

<|TOPIC|>Are Humans fundamentally different from other animals?<|ARGUMENT|>As far as we know, humans are the only species capable of self-reflection and introspection.<|ASPECTS|>introspection, self-reflection<|CONCLUSION|>

Humans possess significantly more advanced cognitive abilities than any other species.

f8dbad9f-6fd8-45c7-80ee-0ba20205a283

<|TOPIC|>Classics Latin and Ancient Greek, should be taught in schools<|ARGUMENT|>These benefits should be extended to all, not just the privileged few who can currently learn Latin and Greek. If the benefits of classical study are as great as those the proposition points above claim, Latin and Greek should be compulsory in all schools. This is possible, despite the shortage of qualified Classics teachers, because of the wealth of internet resources available e.g. the Cambridge School Classics Project.<|ASPECTS|>compulsory, privileged, benefits, internet resources, classics teachers, wealth, classical study, shortage<|CONCLUSION|>

These benefits should be extended to all, not just the privileged few who can currently learn Latin ...

f9a5f6a8-f862-4194-ad87-3f3cb3c763d7

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I was having this discussion last night with my wife in light of the Larry Nassar sentence. As much as he, and other similar criminals are horrible people who probably deserve to be put away forever, doing so seems to somewhat trivialize the fact that many 1st degree murderers get lesser sentences, such life with possibility of parole after 25 years. In practice, many murderers are released much sooner than this due to various circumstances, whereas I'm 99 confident that Nassar will die in prison. A similar case would be Bernie Madoff, who was sentenced to 71 years in prison. Even though these people brought untold misery on a number of people, those victims are still able to get up in the morning and go about their day. Although they will have to carry the trauma of what happened to them forever, many of them are probably relatively happy people with more or less normal lives. Murder victims are dead. Their parents will never get to sit next to them at a holiday dinner. Their friends will never laugh at one of their jokes. Their kids will never give them another hug. If someone who steals from or sexually assaults numerous people should be put away for life, shouldn't all murderers? So we got to discussing, can the number of victims of a lesser crime make a crime worse than murder? I put forth this thought experiment What if I stole 10 from every person in the country? That's over 3 billion way more money than any individual has ever stolen before, but still the impact to each victim would still be relatively small. Would that warrant a greater punishment than someone who beat their wife to death? Now consider if I stole everything that 100 people had, leaving them destitute. For purposes of nice math, let's use a very generous ballpark number of 300,000 per person, so 30M in total. This 1 3B, yet I've probably ruined the lives, at least temporarily, of 100 people. Which one is worse? I would argue in this case that stealing everyone from 100 people is worse because the victims have been as victimized as they possibly can by theft, even though I only stole 1 as much. Now what if I reduce this to stealing everything from one person? I still feel that that would be worse because that person is destitute, where everyone else, worst case, doesn't have money to eat for a day. So my takeaway is that a large amount of harm to one person can be worse than objectively more harm to fewer people. This comes down to the utilitarian debate how much misery to many people is worth the life of one. If we accept that the misery of many people can be worth the life of one? And if we accept that, we basically have to accept turning it around and say it is worth sacrificing the life of one for the happiness of many. This would mean that we could justify having Martin Shkreli eaten by lions on national television because it would make a ton of people very happy, for example. I just don't feel that taking a life for the happiness of many others can be justified. Yet at the same time it also feels right that someone who deliberately victimizes so many people for a purely selfish reason gets a hefty punishment. There's also a part of me that says that a murderer shouldn't always have no chance at redemption, which is why I'm open to changing my view. Please note I am excluding theoretical examples of crimes that most people would feel are worse than murder on a single victim basis. For example, torturing someone for months, blinding, disfiguring, and amputating all of their limbs but letting them live i.e. to the pain from Princess Bride . Also please note I am not trivializing the trauma that victims of sex crimes go through.<|ASPECTS|>, blinding, worth the life of one, worse, crime, parents, pain, sex crimes, money, victims, chance, trivializing, one person, misery, harm, steals, hug, crimes, trauma, sacrificing the life, prison, letting, sexually, hefty, friends, redemption, amputating, murderers, happy, money to eat, math, life, sentenced, justified, utilitarian debate, die, disfiguring, stealing, harm to one, happy people, sooner, forever, murder victims, lesser crime, theft, put, happiness, holiday dinner, circumstances, murder, horrible, greater, years, victimized, bernie, released, murderer, examples, live, laugh, destitute, victimizes, torturing, dead, stealing everything, punishment, lesser sentences, stole, parole, ruined the lives, selfish, lions, happiness of many, impact, normal lives, worth, generous ballpark<|CONCLUSION|>

Sentencing a non-murderer to more prison time than a 1st degree murderer is unjust, regardless of the number of victims the non-murderer had.

5ca10766-aeb3-4222-9bdd-02b1b673d5bc

<|TOPIC|>Should the sale of genetically modified food be banned?<|ARGUMENT|>The much more rapid laboratory engineering of genetic material generates diversity in the timeframes and at a scale nature is not capable of under normal conditions.<|ASPECTS|>diversity, engineering<|CONCLUSION|>

GMO crops could lead to more artificial biodiversity as researchers experiment with strain combinations that would otherwise not exist within nature.

b68d7d2b-8273-4eff-b3f4-3c8ff97d1399

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I don't think people should have to work well into or after their 60s and that employers should be compensating them enough either through actual compensation or through some kind of retirement investment assistance like a 401K in addition to social security no matter what you do for work. If you work hard all your life, you should be able to retire before you are too old to enjoy it. And before you start the argument that it would bankrupt most companies I'd like to remind you of the statistics that show how much money most CEOs of big corporations make compared with their low wage workers who actually do most of the work to get the company it's profits. EDIT I've had some great and convincing responses. Thanks for making me feel better about our financial situation in the U.S.<|ASPECTS|>, retirement investment assistance, convincing responses, bankrupt, social security, financial situation, compensating, money, compensation, retire, profits, work, work hard<|CONCLUSION|>

I believe people should be able to retire by the time they are 62 years old, and that their employers should be paying them well enough to do so.

8dc8d688-fe4a-4e6b-9c4e-4efdfd21a3a9

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>While I do want to go back to watch Pokemon for nostalgia reasons, I do think that the series is very stale. The fact that the villains, Team Rocket is so incompetent ruin the series for me. Every episode they appear with an extremely dumbfounded goal and failing every time. I think the creator could have done better if they introduce a better villain for an arc like many anime have done and provide better development. For example, Hunter x Hunter is an anime that came to mind that have extremely good villains. Honorable mentions include Bleach, Naruto, and One piece that have villain that aren't entirely incompetent and successfully achieve short term goals. <|ASPECTS|>dumbfounded goal, short term goals, better, better villain, better development, incompetent, good villains, stale, ruin the series, nostalgia, failing<|CONCLUSION|>

The incompetent villains in the Pokemon series makes it boring.

5fb56fdc-4d74-4dd7-958e-af9eadadca01

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>We all know these jokes exist. We also know that there is usually at least one person who could be offended by pretty much anything. That being said using the fact that someone not a party to the joke could be offended would pretty much nullify any joke. I propose that it is acceptable to tell such jokes in a setting where all parties are ok with the jokes and no one supports the actual acts i.e. I would not support a joke about rape if the audience included a rape victim or someone who doesn't see rape as a bad thing . Some stipulations The entire audience is known no eavesdroppers being offended , the acceptance of such jokes is not contested if an audience member is offended they either don't mention it or go along with the group . I would agree it is the responsibility of the joke teller to know their audience this includes not assuming outright they will be ok with certain jokes as well as any stated or known opposition it should be assumed a rape victim would oppose a joke about rape . I would put the responsibility on the audience member to voice their opposition should it not be known if they say nothing or laugh along with the joke but are offended it is not the joke tellers fault . This came about because a former boss of mine was just recently convicted of his involvement in a child pornography ring. While at work he was generally professional and he wouldn't make jokes like this. Outside of work however he could joke about some of these taboo topics. Discussing this with some former coworkers one made the mention of his humor, in hindsight, being a tell that he wasn't really a good person and jokes like that shoudn't be made. I contested this as there were people that made and laughed at these same similar jokes and I assume not all of them are deviants in some way.<|ASPECTS|>bad thing, jokes, joke, offended, taboo topics, rape victim, rape, eavesdroppers, humor, good person, child pornography ring., nullify any joke, acts, responsibility, deviants, professional, supports, acceptance<|CONCLUSION|>

Jokes about taboo or offensive subjects are acceptable e.g. rape, racism, child exploitation so long as all parties are ok with it in a joking sense and don't support the actual acts.

e6e1c749-ebe7-4e3c-a4ec-e0a87f14153b

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I would argue a large percentage of 14 21 year olds have already tried some form of alcohol before they hit 21. It's part of the curiosity of growing up and becoming an adult. I think it's hypocritical to assume that an 18 year old is mature enough to understand the implications and potential consequences for enlisting to serve in the army but they are not mature enough to understand the implications of drinking alcohol in excess, or otherwise . It's also hypocritical to allow an 18 year old to purchase and use a known cancerous, addictive drug before they're allowed to buy and consume a can of beer. I find it unbelievable that America will allow an 18 year old to sign up to potentially end their life while deployed overseas three years before he she would have been allowed to legally enjoy a glass of wine.<|ASPECTS|>curiosity, hypocritical, implications, alcohol, cancerous, form, addictive drug, end their life, potential consequences, legally enjoy, drinking alcohol in excess<|CONCLUSION|>

If the minimum age to enlist in the Army and purchase cigarettes is 18 years old in America, the legal drinking age should also be 18.

65497e91-c5b5-45e4-a72e-aeb2187c77c5

<|TOPIC|>Is There A Need For Testing on Lab Animals in Research?<|ARGUMENT|>Medical testing, even on our closest biological relations, cannot account for the disparity between species and can cause adverse impacts even after sufficient testing.<|ASPECTS|>adverse impacts, disparity between species<|CONCLUSION|>

Physiological reactions to drugs vary enormously from species to species.

b002b5ba-d0ac-49bd-bae8-d62a94da33ee

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I see traditional news outlets as a dying industry, struggling to keep up with modern consumption habits social media, YouTube, etc . I see paywalls on a lot of sites requesting ad blockers be turned off, to help support the website financially. In response, I believe the only option these news organizations have to stay afloat is to sensationalize news to the extent it becomes clickbait, generating ad revenue or increasing their brand’s awareness by Facebook shares. Sensationalist news, coming from sources like fox, cnn, huffington post and the like, sow anger and resentment in communities they feel are not being portrayed accurately. I view adblocker as the root of the issue, as these media outlets are left with limited choices else besides publishing this type of clickbait news. Might not be the most thoroughly thought through argument, but would love people’s opinions on it. <|ASPECTS|>adblocker, ad revenue, brand ’ s awareness, dying industry, financially, anger and resentment, opinions, paywalls, consumption, blockers, limited choices, support, clickbait, ’, sensationalize news, thought through argument<|CONCLUSION|>

ad blockers are the cause of the political polarization occurring in the us

e0e02892-8a2c-406b-9f5c-c204428980ba

<|TOPIC|>US 2020 Presidential Election: Who should the Democratic nominee be?<|ARGUMENT|>Moulton is a member of the New Democrat Coalition This group is on the right of the democratic party, and has supported centrist and moderate policy ideas.<|ASPECTS|>policy ideas, right of the democratic party, centrist<|CONCLUSION|>

Moulton is a white man with moderate views. As the Democratic party moves further left these factors become less desirable.

1ca73ff5-3d91-44a6-a8e6-5d5f9e0762a5

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Here's my top 10 The Dark Knight The Dark Knight Rises Logan Wonder Woman Captain America Winter Soldier Ant Man The Avengers Guardians of the Galaxy Iron Man Captain America Civil War Note I haven't seen Deadpool or Spider Man Homecoming, so neither of those is on my list. Captain America Civil War was good, but to me it felt like it was setting up other movies in the future especially the ending instead of being a self contained good movie in itself. Also, Batman Begins was great but it was made in 2005 so it doesn't qualify. Some Reasons It Was Great The acting was great in almost every single scene, and Gadot and Pine's chemistry was a highlight. The smaller characters, including Chief, Sameer, Charlie, Hippolyta, Antiope, and Etta Candy were all great and none of the subplots felt like a drag. The movie stood 100 on its own and didn't need to make references to other characters or inside jokes to succeed. The action scenes were great, even if the final fight was nothing special. The fight between the Amazons and the Germans is really exciting, but the best action scene is No Man's Land, which stood out above the rest of the movie and was very well done. She feels more super than most other superheroes in movies nowadays. The movie was structured well no part of it felt like it lasted too long, and the scenes in Themyscira and London never felt like they outstayed their welcome while also showing, not telling, what those worlds were like with vivid colors and imagery. The movie conveys its messages on feminism and the nature of humankind subtly, both making its points clear and not shoving it into the viewer's face. The movie depicted Wonder Woman as strong as independent without being overly sexualized, which is another positive without making the men around her look weak. The movie manages to take a stance on social issues and feminism without alienating either gender or feeling overbearing about it. Steve Trevor's death was one of the most emotional moments in a comic book movie in recent memory and felt like a real loss even in a movie as great as TDK, Rachel's death wasn't nearly as emotional . <|ASPECTS|>drag, chemistry, structured, lasted too long, emotional moments, strong as independent, feminism, overbearing, acting, emotional, real loss, weak, fight, done, super, imagery, outstayed their welcome, self contained good, vivid colors, social issues, gender, nature of humankind, alienating, qualify, war, references, exciting, action scenes, inside jokes<|CONCLUSION|>

Wonder Woman is one of the best superhero movies since the creation of the MCU in 2008.

eda14623-6d3e-45ab-a7a1-757041743969

<|TOPIC|>Humans should act to fight climate change<|ARGUMENT|>It is obvious when looking at the paleoclimate evidence such as these ice cores that the rate of change and the temperatures we are witnessing are nothing out of the ordinary for the Earth - this does not prove global warming isnt partly or wholly man-made but it does strongly suggest that a warming world isnt catastrophic for its biosphere or humanity.<|ASPECTS|>rate of change, global warming, warming world, catastrophic<|CONCLUSION|>

Estimates over large scale time periods seem to suggest that we aren't warmer than the worst warming 120 thousand years ago. Temperature estimates over last 800,000 years - and these represent a global temperature since its a measure of O16/O18 oxygen isotopes that tell us global ice volume. Oxygen Balance

2f9a958c-84bc-419c-b237-268f5bf87b90

<|TOPIC|>Gender Neutral Bathrooms: Should They be Standard?<|ARGUMENT|>Unisex bathrooms have been introduced in bars all over Beijing indicating that there is no problem with or significant resistance towards them.<|ASPECTS|>resistance<|CONCLUSION|>

There are already many public places in which unisex bathrooms exist and are being accepted.

f73889ef-b84c-403e-99a9-92a710b19bb1

<|TOPIC|>Should There be a Universal Basic Income UBI?<|ARGUMENT|>A stable UBI in the hands of the financially illiterate is a beacon that draws in predatory loansharks or bogus employment middlemen. The advantage of a layer of bureaucracy with means-testing or in-kind assistance is that the Government's audit processes serve as additional check and balance to protect the financially illiterate.<|ASPECTS|>stable ubi, protect, illiterate, check and balance, financially illiterate, middlemen, predatory loansharks<|CONCLUSION|>

Poor spending choices are often the result of coercion or manipulation that cannot be solved by education. Empowering those in poverty with a UBI payout is likely to embolden these oppressive actors, and put those in poverty at a greater risk of manipulation.

75e9bfe0-d6a8-44a7-a404-b2bfffc47686

<|TOPIC|>Should Referendums Be Abolished?<|ARGUMENT|>In Germany, half of all voters believe that politicians are out of touch, three out of four have little or no trust in political parties, and 40% are not satisfied with how democracy works in Germany infratest dimap, p. 12-14<|ASPECTS|>democracy, trust in political parties, politicians, of touch<|CONCLUSION|>

At the same time, the specialization of a political class further detaches those who are supposed to be represented by politicians.

49e3a11b-b02b-4b0f-bbf0-76a02965b54e

<|TOPIC|>Falkland Islands, return of<|ARGUMENT|>President Kirchner - "The Malvinas are Argentine and they will return to Argentina by peaceful means."3<|ASPECTS|>peaceful means, return<|CONCLUSION|>

The "Falklands" are the Malvinas and are part of Argentina.

65e2a5be-b204-45b2-bb4e-62225e8b018c

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I feel cyber bullying isn't really that big of an issue and can simply be stopped by ignoring what people say online. Avoiding cyber bullying is as easy as closing the tab so parents being punished is kind of unnecessary and harsh. Children should realize that to avoid cyber bullying all you have to do is push a button to turn off your cellphone computer and parents shouldn't have to hover over their children and read everything they do. This lowers trust and privacy between parents and children. please.<|ASPECTS|>cyber bullying, parents, ignoring, read everything, privacy, unnecessary and harsh, trust<|CONCLUSION|>

Punishing the parents of cyber bullies is unjustifable.

41f4514c-a93a-4aaf-a51c-bdbf4c95701b

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>So I'm a 26 year old 5ft 10 male, I have a slight frame but go to the gym alot and weigh 68kg 150lb , that puts me bang in the middle of a healthy BMI. I use Myfitnesspal to track my calories every single day, I hit fitness related protein goals but I hardly ever eat fruit or veg. I don't any health problems and walk for about 30mins a day on average as well. Conventional wisdom tells me this diet is bad for you, but I hate eating until I'm stuffed, hate it, and to bulk I have calorie goals that mean doing so, so to make my life easier I eat junk food like cookies to fill the gaps. I have never really found anything solid enough to make me want to make any significant changes to this routine, though I am open to the idea, the unpleasantness of having to stuff my face and prep food much more regularly has just never outweighed the potential benefits of doing so. Please, change my view.<|ASPECTS|>slight frame, junk food, hate, walk, fitness related protein goals, calorie goals, life easier, healthy bmi, gaps, health problems, benefits, diet, unpleasantness, calories<|CONCLUSION|>

I eat cookies and frozen pizzas every day and there are negligible repercussions

2107b947-9dbf-4ae2-bcc5-412910024e9a

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>First of all, english isn't my native language, sorry for mistakes I may make. I don't feel like abortion should be legal. Fetus is human in certain stage of development, like youth, adult or elder. We cannot set an objective criteria for allowing one to be killed, therefore we shouldn't do it at all. New human life starts when sperm connects with ovum, that's biology and that's all we need. Messing self consciousness, nerve system, brain etc. with this is as arbitrary as to say that one is human when he has all 5 senses or when he's white or when he graduates high school. Only situation I can understand one's argument for legalizing abortion is when he says I know I'm letting innocent people die by this law, but I don't give a f, because that's how I roll. I don't think there's more reasonable thing to say in defend of abortion. gt Hello, users of This is a footnote from your moderators. We'd just like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please remember to read through our rules If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than just downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views If you are thinking about submitting a yourself, please have a look through our popular topics wiki first. Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us Happy ing<|ASPECTS|>self consciousness, innocent people die, remind, brain, human life, letting, mistakes, popular topics, reasonable thing, legal, human, concerns, objective criteria, effective, downvotes, biology, happy cmving, stage of development, message us, change, downvote, nerve system, youth, sperm connects with ovum, questions, fetus, english<|CONCLUSION|>

Abortion is bad

11ae8f8d-87f8-46af-a5d4-66cd3e1073d3

<|TOPIC|>Abstinence-only vs. comprehensive sex education<|ARGUMENT|>The obvious problem with relying on parents to teach children essential sexual information is that many children do not have parents, or responsible ones. Should these children just go without such information? The reason the answer must be no is that it would put such children at much greater risk of pregnancy or contracting STDs. In a compassionate, equal-opportunity society, sex education in schools is required.<|ASPECTS|>equal-opportunity, risk of pregnancy, responsible, information, sex education, contracting stds, sexual information<|CONCLUSION|>

Many teens don't have responsible parents; schools must teach sex-ed.

13af3389-1ac4-49a4-9d75-47fbd7549059

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>To preface, I have an MS in Exercise Physiology and have spent the last 4 years of my life making lt 20. For comparison, people with less than a BS have potential to make around 40. Now, I'm not complaining about this, as nurses are more integral to health care than an exercise physiologist in cardiac rehab. However, I am complaining that the government continues to raise the minimum wage yet companies do not increase the wages of the specialized people. I will summarize my arguments as follows 1 Pay should increase based on merit and merit alone 2 Pay should reflect the benefit of the employee to the company and to society 3 Inferior work or skills should be treated with inferior pay, and vice versa.<|ASPECTS|>inferior pay, inferior work, merit, bs, integral to health care, 40, physiology, benefit of the employee, potential, specialized people, make, wages<|CONCLUSION|>

I do not think government should determine minimum wage

0bd865d8-e65e-49e2-a92e-61cf91305136

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Many people seem to equate male circumcision to genital mutilation that will violate the child for life. This view has gained so much popularity that it influenced policy making and medical guidelines. However, I personally think that this issue is seriously blown out of proportion. Male circumcision is literally just removing a small piece of skin that covers the glans tip penis. This foreskin serves no function, neither biological nor aesthetic. Evidence shows that it does not play a role in sexual pleasure. It's removal does not cause any damage short term or long term to urinary or sexual function. So, with that said, I really don't see the point of this debate and the people that cry child abuse because someone decided to circumcise their child. Also, circumcision is an important cultural practice in many parts of the World. You can't claim to be respectful of other cultures and also want to outright ban circumcision or at least stigmatize the practice. If a Muslim or Jew decide to circumcise their child, then there should not be an attack against them and trying to ostracize them for their beliefs or culture. Again, they are not engaging in a harmful activity, so this hostility against the procedure is not warranted imo. It's not like FGM, where the procedure can affect genital and even reproductive function and dooms the girl to a life of constant UTIs and pain. Now, one of the biggest talking points in this discussion is bodily autonomy. The baby should be left alone to decide for itself when it is 18 . However, if the cultural practice is to circumcise the baby at birth or early in life, then that should be respected. By demanding that the decision be left to the baby, you might be trying to kill that cultural practice and trying to push an anti circumcision agenda on the population. The 18 year old teen might get succumb to the vilification of this procedure and so refuse it and if this attitude grows, then the procedure will be abandoned all together, especially as the older generation starts to die out. So, this argument of bodily autonomy appears to me as a disguise to push a particular agenda against circumcision and to shift public opinion against it, even though it does not deserve that. My point is that bodily autonomy is meant to give time for children to be swayed from this procedure and made to understand that it's an absolutely horrible thing, which is unjustified. Now, the medical guidelines are neither in favour of universal circumcision nor the banning of this procedure. Research has shown the circumcised males are statistically less likely to contract and carry STD's, but it's not a very significant benefit. Other research has shown that circumcised and non circumcised males experienced the same level of pleasure and it is widely agreed that the foreskin has no role in sexual pleasure or performance. Some countries have chosen to ban the procedure completely, but I think that it's not done out of medical or practical concern, but rather to pander to a growing population with sentiment against the procedure, ie political pressure. In conclusion, people that routinely circumcise their children should not be stigmatized and the very act of male circumcision should not be vilified. It's not a harmful procedure and may have some benefits probably not very significant , so it should be left to the discretion of the parents. If you don't condone circumcision, all the power to you and you can go ahead and not circumcise your child, but you don't have to force your ideology on others and create a cultural shift against the practice.<|ASPECTS|>, aesthetic, cultural practice, removal, unjustified, parents, pain, bodily autonomy, sexual pleasure, ostracize, male circumcision, benefits, biological, harmful activity, constant, abandoned, function, carry std 's, contract, shift, discretion, level, blown out of proportion, serves no function, affect, policy making, harmful procedure, pleasure, performance, left, attack, medical, cultural shift, influenced, genital, respectful of other cultures, stigmatized, utis, sentiment, ideology, removing, generation, violate the child, damage, decision, vilified, alone, stigmatize, vilification, decide, universal circumcision, political pressure, urinary, anti circumcision agenda, horrible, outright ban circumcision, less, public opinion, medical guidelines, hostility against, child abuse, benefit, reproductive function, culture, practical concern, dooms, banning, skin, circumcise the baby, genital mutilation, beliefs<|CONCLUSION|>

The controversy over Circumcision is seriously overblown and those that choose it for their children shouldn't be criticized.

4529c43b-b956-4563-8f9b-93ec1022b6c9

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I'm about to go into college from a decent University and plan on Co Majoring Finance and International Business. I'm thinking of taking out about 10,000 20,000 over the next 4 years but I see no serious problem in that. Once I graduate from Uni With no kids or anything to hold me back hopefully , I'm expecting to make anywhere between 40,000 60,000 a year. Assuming the the former, and paying anywhere from 500 1000 a month. I should be done paying it off within 1 2 years. I'm not planning on making any large purchases my first few years out of college such as a Car or a New home. I'm thinking a reasonably priced apartment with maybe a bro or 2 . I feel like as long as you play your cards right not getting a chick pregnant or getting yourself into any additional debt , It shouldn't be that big of a deal.<|ASPECTS|>international business, back, additional, paying it, finance, paying, debt, reasonably priced apartment, large purchases, co, problem<|CONCLUSION|>

Student Loans aren't as bad as people make them out to be.

c52a6103-2a29-4907-a4c9-9e308fb2312a

<|TOPIC|>Is Narendra Modi good for India?<|ARGUMENT|>The top 1% own about 73% of India's wealth - up drastically from a figure of about 58% from one year before.<|ASPECTS|>india, wealth<|CONCLUSION|>

There has been a dramatic increase in wealth inequality in India in the past year alone.

9baffa9a-9106-4cf8-9fd5-8a7be4b33c41

<|TOPIC|>Do we need nuclear power for sustainable energy production?<|ARGUMENT|>Smart grids can help even out fluctuations in the power production across the various types of renewable energy to create a continuous and reliable supply.<|ASPECTS|>fluctuations, production, reliable supply, continuous<|CONCLUSION|>

Grid storage technology is a strong option which helps out with energy storage peaks.

d4f62fc8-d8e0-4811-b876-6729ec096720

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Some little white suburban girl gets and it's to the national headlines and everyone comes together to try to stop gun violence. Some black girl or Pakistani girl gets shot and no one even bats an eye. Sandy Hook? People are overly saddened and sympathetic. A drone strike that accidentally kills twice as many people and people shrug it off. Make a PSA about some black girls or some Pakistani girl getting shot on a weekly basis and people finally decide to do something about it. So my question is why did you wait now? You didn't care then so why do you care now? We hear these type of things happening all around us in commercials, books, newspapers or on the internet but yet we take no action until someone else makes a sad documentary to provoke some action out of people. And after the event is mentioned they quickly lose support and people stop caring about them. Kony 2012, remember that? What happened to that collective manhunt that everyone agreed should happen when the whole debacle finally came to light? Where did it go? Most people do not want to lift a finger to actually change the world. They rather jump on the emotional bandwagon from their couches or chairs, giving empty support while not actually doing anything about them. Facebook is proliferated by this. People try to like the problem away or give a chain link to a problem they didn't really care about before, while trying to look honorable in the process. They aren't righting a wrong, they might think they have but they all really just want the attention by feigning support from a cause that they knew nothing about and a tragedy they never cared about before. It's narcissistic, naive, lazy and shallow at its core and I'm downright appalled that people can cash in on tragedies like that. People are shallow and this is so disgusting. I refuse to mourn for tragedies here until the same support, sympathy and action is applied around the world.<|ASPECTS|>attention, shot, accidentally, sympathy, lazy, narcissistic, gun violence, disgusting, naive, want, lose support, collective, tragedies, bats an eye, people, tragedy, support, empty support, righting a wrong, overly, black girls, proliferated, shallow, care, emotional bandwagon, mourn, debacle, kills, facebook, chain link, action, change the world, wait, manhunt, drone strike, caring, like the problem, saddened, sympathetic, honorable<|CONCLUSION|>

People are very shallow and sheepish when it comes to mourning tragedies.

8ba3981f-6fb8-4425-80ce-dbbd87d903ba

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>So, the president gave a batshit press conference today. He claimed that the press treats him unfairly, that they are dishonest, and that the negative stories written about him are fake. I disagree. I'm a center left guy who voted for Obama and Hillary, so naturally, I don't like his policies on principle. But his being nominally a conservative isn't the issue for me we've had conservative political leaders before, including presidents, and I haven't disliked them, only disagreed with them. I dislike Trump intensely, mainly because he's an entitled, petty, whiny, self important little child of a man all the time. Clearly I perceive him negatively, but I don't think I've been tricked into perceiving him this way by a biased media. Ever since he got into politics, back when he got in on the birther conspiracy, I've disliked him based largely on his own statements. In situations where there have been no questions asked or commentary offered like seeing him deliver a speech live I consistently think he's absolutely awful, based solely on what he himself says freely. In fact, if the media took it easier on him and gave him the benefit of the doubt which they aren't supposed to do , I'd probably just hate him more for having somehow secured a free pass from scrutiny in a job that is rightfully the most scrutinized in the world. To , convince me that the media has somehow pulled the wool over my eyes. Show me that he's actually a responsible and thoughtful leader who cares more about uniting the country than validating his own bloated ego. Show me how the press has buried that fact and twisted his words to cast him as an incompetent and selfish buffoon. As a caveat, I should add that pointing out a single instance of a journalist being unfair to him probably won't do it. He's said a LOT of stuff to make me dislike him, so I need to see a pretty decent pattern of manipulation by the press to make me question that. <|ASPECTS|>conservative political leaders, disliked, negatively, entitled, conservative, thoughtful leader, batshit, bloated ego, awful, hate, treats, child, conference, petty, free pass from scrutiny, biased media, negative stories, easier, responsible, incompetent, self important, manipulation, unfair, unfairly, policies, dishonest, disagreed, fake, eyes, dislike, selfish buffoon, uniting the country<|CONCLUSION|>

The mainstream media has not negatively impacted my opinion of Trump, and I don't think they necessarily treat him unfairly.

83d6284c-afb5-4976-97fc-e01997163e85

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Victim blaming occurs when 'the victim of a crime is held entirely or partially at fault for the harm that befell them'. Victim blaming absolutely, 100 happens. And, of course, it primarily happens where the victim is a woman and the crime is sexual assault harassment. I have no doubt that women are disproportionately subject to victim blaming, because there are many sick deluded people mostly men, I'm sure who have a disgraceful view of sex. This should end, and we should call out anyone who targets women in this way. However, I believe the extent to which this is a widespread and or societal problem is overstated. Significant amounts of so called 'victim blaming' is well meaning, non sexist, pragmatic crime prevention which individuals and institutions broadcast equally for every other crime. This might be best illustrated by an example. Police departments everywhere give advice towards preventing your home from being a target of burglary. Lock your doors at night, install alarms, leave the TV on when you go on holiday, install cameras, install a motion activated light, get a dog, put a sign up, advise your neighbours when you're away. None of this invokes responsibility. It's so obvious that a burglar is criminally and morally responsible for a burglary, that it doesn't even need to be said. The police aren't saying that if you don't lock your doors at night you're responsible for someone coming in and taking your TV. They're saying that burglars unfortunately exist, and they look for empty houses, so leaving a light on will make your house less of a target. And the thing is, everyone understands the rationale behind burglary PSAs. We don't respond by saying 'Stop burglars burglarising, don't blame me for being burgled I have the right to leave my door wide open at night ' . We know that the police aren't saying that we don't have the right to leave our house unsecured. We know that the police are trying to stop burglars burglarising, as well as giving advice to the public. We understand that they're giving us advice towards reducing our likelihood of being victims to the criminals who unfortunately exist. Why do we neglect this pragmatic reasoning when the crime in question is sexual assault? There's no doubt that a girl walking alone, at 3am, whilst intoxicated, looking beautiful, is more likely to be a victim of sexual assault than the sober girl who gets in a taxi with her friends. I wish so much that we lived in a world where it was equally safe to take both paths. But we know that it isn't, in the same way we know that it's less safe to leave our doors unlocked. So why, exactly, do we conclude that giving women the same crime prevention advice that we give to homeowners is sexist victim blaming? Change my view<|ASPECTS|>stop, sexual assault, morally responsible, pragmatic reasoning, burglars burglarising, activated, victims, preventing, crime prevention, right to leave our house, harm, safe, advice, unsecured, blaming, victim of sexual assault, sexist victim blaming, rationale, societal problem, widespread, victim blaming, burglars unfortunately exist, sexual assault harassment, sick deluded, disgraceful view of sex, open, crime prevention advice, target, burglary psas, responsible, likelihood, empty houses, right, criminals, less, victim, taking, burglary, targets women, criminally, responsibility, advise, tv<|CONCLUSION|>

Most advice given to women about staying safe isn't 'victim blaming', it's crime prevention

a2ee290c-8aa3-4ea8-a89a-8ffd1b84e364

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Now then, let me clarify. I believe that having access to healthcare is a right. That no government should deny you the right to procure it. However, I do not see it as a right in the sense of right to free speech, self defense, freedom of assembly etc etc are rights. More or less that rights are abstract things, and not material items. Excluding things like right to property, ability to procure property, etc etc. I find it abhorrent the idea healthcare should be paid for by the point of a gun, and not of their own labor. What I mean by this is that when I hear health care is a right and should be provided by the government , I see it as, I think the government should tax other people, and take their money by force if necessary, to pay for my healthcare. I can understand the view of, its just the right thing to do. Which is fine if you personally want to do such, but it becomes morally suspect IMO once you force others to provide that charity. edit its 1 00 PM and I have to step away for a lab that'll run till late this afternoon. I'll try and answer a few from my phone, if this continues. I haven't had that Δ answer yet, but there have been a few that have let me struggling to answer. So far interesting discussion.<|ASPECTS|>right to free speech, access to healthcare, struggling to answer, rights, interesting discussion, tax other people, freedom of assembly, procure property, view, abstract things, ability, material items, healthcare, right, morally suspect, self defense, paid, health care, right to property, right to procure<|CONCLUSION|>

I do not believe healthcare is a right

a5bded1e-774e-4b7e-8729-a64ed1c20afc

<|TOPIC|>Should religious education be compulsory in public schools?<|ARGUMENT|>Many students only ever encounter certain subjects, like ethics, philosophy, etc. in "religion" courses. However, these things, as well as religion, could also be taught in a secular alternative course, such as "ethics".<|ASPECTS|>religion, encounter certain subjects, ethics, philosophy, secular alternative<|CONCLUSION|>

There is no reason that religion should be taught as its own subject. If a religious ideology is important for historical or literary context, the context should be part of the lesson.

c5c083c8-d1f9-4ec6-be97-894d7b44db92

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Batman and others like Superman are a net loss to the world. Because they refuse to kill, they don't permanently remove any criminal elements. Whoever they lock up, they get out again and terrorize Gotham or Metropolis and kill people, causing permanent harm. Also, in their super heroic escapades, they cause immense collateral damage to city and personal property. How do they actually benefit society? At least police and other law enforcement are willing to kill in defense of innocent people.<|ASPECTS|>benefit society, defense, permanent harm, kill people, loss, kill, collateral damage, city, criminal elements, remove, terrorize, net, innocent people, personal property<|CONCLUSION|>

Batman, Superman, and other "good-guy" superheroes are a net loss to the world.

3352d57f-01bf-4574-843a-7167e74fcd37

<|TOPIC|>Should Israel Remain Democratic Even If that Would Ultimately Lead to it No Longer Being a Jewish State?<|ARGUMENT|>It is the duty of every democracy to reflect the basic preferences of the majority, as long as they do not infringe on the rights of others. In Israel’s case, this means preserving the Jewish character of the state.<|ASPECTS|>rights of others, jewish character, basic preferences<|CONCLUSION|>

It is possible for a state to maintain an emphasis on certain cultural and religious values even as it maintains an equality of democratic civil rights for all. Israel is no exception.

27abc76e-9893-4d27-87fd-b9ce21cc0df0

<|TOPIC|>Should Laptops be Allowed in University Classrooms?<|ARGUMENT|>Teaching methods that allow students to interact with laptops during class and utilize them to engage with the subject at hand e.g. programming exercises have the potential to put the student and his/her progress at the center, not the teacher's lecture Barak et al, p. 255<|ASPECTS|>interact with laptops, student, teacher 's lecture, progress, engage with the subject, teaching methods<|CONCLUSION|>

Laptops allow for more effective and engaging forms of tuition.

f8d69ac2-9245-4e10-bc21-5788121afc1f

<|TOPIC|>Pro-Life vs Pro-Choice: Should Abortion be Legal?<|ARGUMENT|>A blighted ovum is a type of non-viable pregnancy. This is a fertilized egg that implants and doesn't become an embryo but the placenta and embryonic sac form. These can take a while to end in a natural abortion but a medical abortion can be used to remove it sooner.<|ASPECTS|>non-viable pregnancy, natural abortion, remove, ovum<|CONCLUSION|>

Not all pregnancies that get aborted are unwanted. Some are done for medical reasons or poor prognosis

85044430-23eb-4ead-9e82-9ee1f834d6c6

<|TOPIC|>Should everyone's wealth and income information be publicly available?<|ARGUMENT|>Our hyperconnected world already causes anxiety, envy and self-consciousness. Why should the public know such personal info on private citizens? Possibilities for misuse include a teacher checking their students' parents for wealth, or cops checking a name before starting a search of someone. Who would want to live their entire life wondering about the motives of people in their lives friends, lovers?<|ASPECTS|>self-consciousness, misuse, possibilities, personal info, anxiety, motives, hyperconnected world, wealth, envy<|CONCLUSION|>

Increased knowledge of others' financial status could cause jealousy and a breakdown in social ties.

299c683c-5ed4-465f-81e5-ac458f1b415c

<|TOPIC|>Should the US stop trying to force North Korea to abandon its nuclear program?<|ARGUMENT|>Accepting North Korea as a nuclear power opens the doors for possible international regulation and transparency.<|ASPECTS|>transparency, international regulation<|CONCLUSION|>

The US should not try to force North Korea to abandon its nuclear program.

73d69c66-6c4e-44e5-9765-5b4e0b4f63b8

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Privilege is the idea that certain facets about you will influence your life in a subtle and positive for you way if you have them, specifically with regards to how people treat you. Of all the things which can positively, and unfairly, influence how people perceive you, none are greater than having money and being attractive. And by attractive I mean both physically attractive and charming charismatic. If you have these two things, no other social disadvantage will matter. If you take someone who is dirt poor and unattractive, but has every other kind of privilege white, male, hetero, able bodies, etc. and compare them to someone who is wealthy and attractive, but has every other kind of disadvantage trans, female, queer, person of color, disability, etc. the other things wont even matter. The second person is unambiguously going to have an easier life in terms of how people treat them. When people talk about privilege and dissecting people's biases, they almost always ignore these two, 300 pound gorillas in the unfair treatment room, despite the fact that they are the most influential. Change My View.<|ASPECTS|>attractive, wealthy and attractive, positive, privilege, money, physically attractive, dirt poor, disability, change my view, social disadvantage, influence, disadvantage, subtle, charming charismatic, easier life, unfair treatment, unattractive, matter, biases, unfairly, influence your life<|CONCLUSION|>

As far as types of "privilege," the privilege from having money and being attractive do more to influence how people see you than any other kind.

2c5c8193-7055-4a0b-bd9e-3ce50896e725

<|TOPIC|>South Korea should abandon its goal of unification with North Korea<|ARGUMENT|>The premise behind SK's desire for unification is primarily based on a shared history and sense of ethnic identity, not political agreement or mutual trust. This inhibits, not enhances negotiations.<|ASPECTS|>negotiations, shared history, ethnic identity, mutual trust, political agreement, inhibits<|CONCLUSION|>

Abandoning unification increases the chances of better inter-Korean relations, improving the security of the region.

579ea6bd-4e98-4057-9ebc-9d7b0ffeda6c

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I am specifically referring to the federal government. First of all, there's only two mainstream political parties of people who are filthy stinkin' rich, wasting money that could go to charities or shelters, on advertising and mudslinging. There seems to be very little difference in what they want, which is more power. The Conservatives want a near theocracy, with all the money and social rights to themselves, whereas the liberals want an all powerful federal government that demands society be conforming and homogeneous both groups in order to control every little detail of the individual's life, both public and personal. The higher up a politician is, the more they lie and scheme and bullshit the public and waste money. Both Bush and Obama, seemingly so different, commit war crimes and shocking monetary transgressions and a whole host of things. While I originally though Obama was the lesser of two evils, after reading about the unsanctioned drone strikes on civilians and Americans not on American soil, obviously and all the political cover ups, he just seems like a different face on the same political monster. That being said, I'd be quite happy if people could offer me evidence that this is an unrealistically bleak view, I'd be happy to change my mind.<|ASPECTS|>monetary transgressions, wasting money, money, filthy stinkin, advertising, unsanctioned drone strikes, commit, bleak view, political monster, scheme, war crimes, federal government, lie, shocking, little, homogeneous, mind, theocracy, power, bullshit the public, difference, political, rich, waste money, social rights<|CONCLUSION|>

I think the American government is corrupt,

b62c49da-5856-4a8c-961e-21fa40aa192e

<|TOPIC|>Should God Have Tested Job?<|ARGUMENT|>Fundamentally God allowed Job to be assaulted by Satan for all those who follow after, so they can see the difference between good and evil. Ultimately, given that everything was restored ten-folds is to his gain and for the gain of people in general, it was restoration for him and knowledge of what God values for others.<|ASPECTS|>assaulted by satan, good and evil, difference, god values, restoration<|CONCLUSION|>

God used the trials of Job to reveal more about God to the world.

52cc2402-a352-4e31-90cd-ac21da04f92b

<|TOPIC|>Should unpaid internships be banned?<|ARGUMENT|>The state or universities could certify certain unpaid internship programmes on the basis that they provide valuable experience.<|ASPECTS|>valuable experience, unpaid internship<|CONCLUSION|>

This can be mitigated without a blanket ban on unpaid internships.

2b8280ad-f2de-4ebc-92cd-45ff69792935

<|TOPIC|>Is the world of Harry Potter really the place to be?<|ARGUMENT|>Female roles seem to fit into conservative patterns, with having a career and having children usually not going together.<|ASPECTS|>female roles, conservative patterns<|CONCLUSION|>

Society has a patriarchal vibe with most women being confined to specific roles.

50d8896f-3a90-41c2-88c0-cbe77a78f33e

<|TOPIC|>State Funding of Elite Athletes<|ARGUMENT|>There exists a current problem that many talented athletes cannot devote themselves full time to the extensive training required to compete at Olympic level, instead they often have to work part-time to fund their living and training costs. Indeed in 2005, B&Q in the UK developed ‘Team B&Q’ to employ athletes in their home hardware stores but offering the flexible hours that athletes find it difficult to secure at other employers. Those who cannot find work are forced to borrow money, often from their parents, as was the case with the 1992 US Olympic sailing team. This need to scrabble for money puts pressure on the athletes, takes their minds off competing and sometimes can even make them consider quitting. The amounts of money involved are large, for instance the 1996 Olympic gold medallist Todd Elderidge’s build-up training cost over $250,000 and financial pressures in the late 1980’s almost forced him to quit. State funding of elite athletes would remove undue pressures which impair their performance for their country.<|ASPECTS|>flexible hours, quitting, pressures, scrabble for money, cost, financial pressures, extensive, borrow money, money, pressure, performance, minds off competing, elite, impair, living, training costs, athletes<|CONCLUSION|>

There exists a current problem that many talented athletes cannot devote themselves full time to the...

fc5ff50e-e23d-4bb4-a139-76fa91bf8011

<|TOPIC|>All drugs should be legalized.<|ARGUMENT|>Marijuana use in the Netherlands has not increased following decriminalisation; in fact, cannabis consumption is lower compared to countries with stricter legislation such as the UK.<|ASPECTS|>cannabis consumption, use<|CONCLUSION|>

Places that have decriminalised some or all drugs have not observed a long-term increase in consumption, and occasionally even a decrease has been observed.

56a6bb2d-7775-4ad8-87ea-634d68c90355

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Pros to folding your clothes and organizing them in a dresser Easier to find your shirts or pants. Takes up less space. Keeps your clothes cleaner due to them not being exposed to dust from the outside environment. Keeps your clothes out of sight and makes them less of a target for getting stolen. Looks neater<|ASPECTS|>exposed, dust, less space, target, folding, sight, clothes cleaner, organizing, neater, stolen, less<|CONCLUSION|>

folding your clothes and organizing them in a dresser is a better way to store them than throwing them in a large pile.

23f054f2-7815-4181-9e8a-007edc373a6d

<|TOPIC|>history has no place in the classroom<|ARGUMENT|>Even if no agenda is being consciously or subconsciously pursued, school pupils are presented with oversimplified information in History. This is a result of the limited time available, the limited intellectual capacity of pupils, the limited knowledge of many teachers who may not be history specialists, especially in primary schools and the desire for answers that can be labelled as "correct" or "incorrect" in examinations. Much school history teaching is therefore concerned simply with memorising "facts". However, such learning needs to be accompanied by a deeper understanding of events, lacking definitive answers but providing a narrative to give the 'facts' often figures meaning. As schools recognize this is beyond most students, they struggle to make time spent in history lessons conducive; a study in America found that only 20 percent of fourth graders were proficient in history, while that dropped to 12 per cent for high school seniors1. 1 Resmovits, Joy. "U.S. History Test Scores Stagnate As Education Secretary Arne Duncan Seeks 'Plan B'." Huffington Post. June 14, 2011. accessed July 14, 2011. improve this<|ASPECTS|>oversimplified information, history test scores, limited, definitive answers, time spent, history lessons, deeper, intellectual capacity, limited time available, facts, history, limited knowledge, proficient, understanding of events, memorising<|CONCLUSION|>

History should be left for those intellectual capable of understanding its limitations, and therefore not taught at school

a591bbe0-7b36-48b0-bcd0-2184c2f37eeb

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I think the overwhelming concept is not one of everyone's good , but instead you should be happy, even though you're poor, and not try to make your life better . Some related thoughts no one seems to bring up that Mr. Drummond took in Arnold and Willis when their mother, his housekeeper who was allegedly a beloved part of the family, died. But it's clear that they were kept in poverty their entire previous lives, and therefore the Drummond weren't paying a living wage. a constant theme in the Jeffersons is that rich people have huge problems and are generally extremely unhappy again, the concept being that it's not worth improving your life . In Good Times, the family sits and suffers while continually being exposed to rich people who have an easier time of life, but never seem to have any comeuppance for their negative behaviours I think, on this regard, the politician who makes many appearances, and the everpresent complaints about the landlord . As for this being intentional I understand it's almost impossible to prove that. I just can't see these choices being made at top corporate levels without some inkling of the concepts behind it. FWIW, I grew up as a lower class white Canadian, so my insight into poor black American families is not terribly deep.<|ASPECTS|>suffers, unhappy, huge problems, easier time of life, life better, happy, lower class, negative behaviours, complaints, impossible to prove, 's good, rich people, choices, poverty, poor, living wage, improving your life, poor black american families, intentional<|CONCLUSION|>

I believe that "poor black family" sitcoms like Diff'rent Strokes, Good Times, and in some ways The Jeffersons were intentional efforts at calming growing possibilities of class warfare.

4ae168bf-a006-4d36-89c7-1aea3df69272

<|TOPIC|>Has Xi Jinping been good for China?<|ARGUMENT|>The UK government’s record on bulk data handling for intelligence purposes violated international human rights law.<|ASPECTS|>intelligence, bulk data handling<|CONCLUSION|>

The United Kingdom are demonstrating signs of being a rogue state

0f7f4939-2e21-4fd9-a6da-fefe93561631

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I grew up in a very religious family, but somehow, on the way I came to a realisation that I am no longer sure of the existence of God, and began identifying myself with agnosticism. Why I am not sure of the existence of God If God exists, where did he come from? If he does exist, did he create us just for fun? How can all the bad things in the world happen if someone with a higher power exists The evidence for evolution theory is stronger than that for the creationism theory Uncertainty doesn't satisfy me, so redditors, either way<|ASPECTS|>existence, fun, uncertainty, evolution theory, god, create, existence of god, bad things, agnosticism, religious family<|CONCLUSION|>

I'm an agnostic

2d8514e9-74b7-4245-88be-5615c132be3d

<|TOPIC|>Is Daenerys Targaryen the Prince/Princess that was Promised?<|ARGUMENT|>Even if not literally reborn, the battle was a turning point in Tyrion's character arc where he chose bravery and direct action: "As they need to hold the river at all costs, Tyrion decides to lead the next sortie himself. Shamed into action by the dwarf's display of courage, several defenders gather to Tyrion's side."<|ASPECTS|>bravery, courage, direct action<|CONCLUSION|>

Tyrion could also be considered as having been reborn amidst salt and smoke during the Blackwater battle.

0b29e13e-9854-4306-95e5-a3c62706dade

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I'm from Mexico and politicians over here, like in many other countries, are corrupt. They use fraudulent tactics to increase their wealth at the cost of tax payers without any remorse. Practically all governors from my state and mayors from my city have become rich through corrupt acts without consequences. I'm about to begin generating income from a new source, renting out a couple of spare bedrooms in my house. The correct and formal course of action is to inform my government about this so that taxes can be applied to this new income source. The informal way, which I'm told most people do, is to only collect this money in cash and never let it touch my bank account so that the government doesn't find out about it and so that it can't be taxed. Friends and family have told me that it's not the same because it's not by far the same amounts of money and that I would be taken advantage of. I would be paying money so that politicians can take it for themselves. I believe that hiding this income source would make me as corrupt and despicable as the corrupt politicians and that by doing so I would lose any right I might have to speak up against acts corruption of any sort. My question is Should I change my view and attempt to avoid paying taxes? <|ASPECTS|>consequences, money, spare, fraudulent tactics, corruption, increase, taxed, wealth, remorse, taxes, income source, generating, paying taxes, despicable, take, account, paying money, amounts, right, taken advantage, cost, tax payers, income, corrupt, corrupt acts, rich, avoid, politicians, collect<|CONCLUSION|>

I should avoid being corrupt

662eadc5-927b-4bb0-b1e9-f6abf04f3fd0

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Background I'm a person of color south asian and a medical student working with a free healthcare group in Africa this summer. Look, I understand that feminism and gay rights still has its place in Western society. Women are still undervalued socially and financially, gays are still not allowed to get married in many states, etc. I get that someone needs to fight for their rights. But what really pisses me off is when they pretend that their issues are the pinnacle of social or civil justice in the modern era. For example people who think that marriage inequality, fat shaming, slut shaming, or a transgender man not being able to wear a dress are literally the worst oppressions anyone can suffer in the 21st century. Yes, I hear this stuff all the time from activists and people high up in these organizations. It seems to be a pervasive opinion among anyone in these movements. Open your eyes. If nothing else, be a little humble and admit that your pet issues may be important but they're VASTLY overshadowed by problems that many people face around the world. I've worked with wives who had half their face ripped off as punishment for speaking against their husbands. I've worked with toddlers who are so malnourished their heads are bigger than their stomachs. Starvation, poverty, disease, domestic violence in third world countries are all major issues that need to be addressed. I'm not asking first worlders to drop everything and rush to the aid of the third world, but at least admit that we are all privileged compared to them. Change my view. TL DR There is a lot more wrong with this world than the American European problems that feminists and LGBT activists face, but most of them over inflate their own problems and make it seem like women and gays in the West are worse off than they actually are.<|ASPECTS|>, undervalued, worse, rights, fat shaming, view, domestic violence, inflate, slut shaming, feminism, gays, face ripped, problems, oppressions, malnourished, women, civil justice, financially, vastly, fight, socially, disease, person, marriage inequality, pervasive, important, privileged, social, activists, color, starvation, free healthcare, pet issues, western society, poverty, opinion, gay rights<|CONCLUSION|>

Self-appointed "social justice" groups in America feminists, LGBT activists, etc exaggerate their issues, and are blind to serious problems that people actually face around the world.

ee9cb2c3-b70a-4275-8428-350703ad76df

<|TOPIC|>Should Commercial Surrogacy be Legal in Liberal Democracies?<|ARGUMENT|>For some people, especially for younger women, IVF and other treatments can be successful after a short period of time, and therefore can be considerably cheaper than adoption.<|ASPECTS|>cheaper, successful<|CONCLUSION|>

Commercial surrogacy provides parents with the opportunity to have children without a lengthy waiting period for an adoption to occur.

c4ba53a6-837b-413f-becb-ef7a7f8e65af

<|TOPIC|>Infant male circumcision<|ARGUMENT|>Moreover, the normal healthy body should have the right of way over attitudes, and not vice versa.<|ASPECTS|>right of way over attitudes<|CONCLUSION|>

Circumcision for appearance's is prerogative only of adult owner.

ac6e5291-00da-4eb2-85fa-d93a8c18bb44

<|TOPIC|>Should "women-only" spaces be open to anyone identifying as female?<|ARGUMENT|>There is scientific proof that men are stronger than women on average. For example, this study about gender shows the differences in strength and muscle fiber characteristics.<|ASPECTS|>muscle fiber characteristics, scientific proof, stronger than women<|CONCLUSION|>

Men have greater responsibilities because they are physically stronger than women.

5feef0b2-7387-49bd-9934-023457e15fdc

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>What brings this about is that I have a Japanese friend who had to get some care recently, and I was chatting with her and she told me she was at a specialized ear throat clinic. Being a Canadian, where getting there requires going to a GP and convincing him you have a big enough problem to give you a referral to such specialized care, which can take weeks if not months, I was a bit worried for her and asked her if everything was alright. She told me it's no big deal, it's just a flu that took its time going through its course. And that's when I decided to learn about the Japanese system, check this out Japan has essentially no General Practitioners, it has almost only specialist doctors. The way the Japanese access health care is that they show up to the specialized clinic of what afflicts them, often without the need for a rendez vous. They just show up, describe their symptoms to the nurse receptionist who writes down everything that is relevant. They then wait until they're called, which can take an hour or more, when the specialist sees them, he already has all the symptoms info, he asks a few clarifying questions if need be or goes on to do diagnostic tests immediately, or even prescribe a treatment right there and then. The patient then leaves with a treatment, having seen a specialist the same day he sought to access care. How does that work? Japan spends less than half what the US spends per capita on health care, and less than Canada. They have less doctors per 100 000 people than most Western countries and one of the oldest population in the world. Yet health outcomes are pretty good and wait times are small. They also have an INSANE amounts of MRI and other diagnostic machines. So, overall, pretty damn efficient. So all that made me question why we even have GPs here again, I'm in Canada ? Especially since I'm getting at the age where I might qualify for a routine prostate exam, but having no family doctor, I either have to put myself on the months long list to get one or go to a GP clinic or the emergency in order to get a referral for that exam. So, wait months for a family doctor or lose a day going to a clinic JUST to get a referral from an exam the government tells me I ought to get. Thinking about it, and I know I may be jumping to conclusion here, it seems like most of what GPs do is either routine follow up of people's health that could be done adequately by nurses if regulations allowed them to do so, treatment of small wounds and diseases that, again, nurses often could be doing, or trying to attempt diagnostics and treatments that ought to be done by specialist doctors. The reason they are required is merely regulatory you need to see a GP to get a referral to access the health care system. If we stopped forming them and formed more specialists, we wouldn't even need to use that to control access to specialized health care, we'd have enough specialists to do the job. GPs are probably a relic of an era where rich people used to have personal doctors to take care of them and it's not a model that should be maintained in an era where health care is viewed as a public service that everyone should have access to, almost a right . So, can anyone with insight into the health care system rise up and say why I'm wrong. I admit I'm not an expert in the field.<|ASPECTS|>diagnostic, less doctors, specialists, small wounds, control access, mri, oldest population, health care system, health care, insight, people 's health, treatment, doctor, general practitioners, adequately, efficient, diagnostic machines, diseases, ear throat clinic, gp, family, alright, specialist doctors, health outcomes, care, gps, flu, insane, symptoms, specialized health care, right, diagnostics, specialized care, describe, time, problem, wait times, expert in, long, access care, spends, regulatory, specialized clinic, public service, lose, personal doctors<|CONCLUSION|>

Most of what General Practitioners do can either be done adequately by nurses if regulation was loosened or ought to be done by specialists, western health care systems ought to move away from a GP-based system

213d9b77-1edb-4e02-a12b-7be1fe3b9fac

<|TOPIC|>Does the European Union lack the necessary public discourse to function properly?<|ARGUMENT|>Policies being made on the basis of shared principles rather than a confrontation of interests have far greater chances to result in a win/win in the long term.<|ASPECTS|>win/win, confrontation of interests, shared principles<|CONCLUSION|>

European politics in the USE would be built on merit-based debate in a deliberative democracy, instead of a mere balance of power between state interests.

e14f201b-f3f2-433b-a91b-532e7ef0be3d

<|TOPIC|>Should voters in the UK have a final vote on the Brexit deal?<|ARGUMENT|>The first Brexit vote was manipulated by Russia in order to achieve the geopolitical goal of separating the UK from Europe, as outlined by Alexander Dugin in his book Foundations of Geopolitics<|ASPECTS|>geopolitical goal, manipulated<|CONCLUSION|>

New and significant information has come to light since the last referendum that may mean people should re-evaluate their decision.

17038739-55db-46bf-ba51-11ad029fd7a7

<|TOPIC|>Should there be one World Government?<|ARGUMENT|>China's alleged dumping in the textile industry has cost several foreigners their jobs which will be an avoidable harm to job security in a one world government.<|ASPECTS|>job security, avoidable harm, dumping, cost<|CONCLUSION|>

This would eliminate unfair practices such as dumping and predatory pricing

0430cb60-a3ec-486b-b8c6-0a114c6da45a

<|TOPIC|>The River Sidon was where?<|ARGUMENT|>As Alma 2 states ''he cleared the ground. throwing the bodies of the Lamanites who had been slain into the waters of Sidon.''<|ASPECTS|>slain, lamanites, bodies, cleared the ground<|CONCLUSION|>

The Sidon River had banks upon it, upon which wars took place There are no such banks on the Mississippi.

7d046aca-8fc3-4a84-b119-b9b18bab7f00

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I recently stumbled upon a post on 2xchromosomes where a girl was in trouble for not wearing a bra even though there wasn't a specific rule about bras, so she organized a no bra day at her school. The comments congratulated the girl for being a hero and bemoaned the school staff. Most of the comments were things along the lines of some man boobs are bigger than women boobs, therefore I shouldn't have to wear a bra or forcing us to wear bras is the same as forcing Muslim women to wear burkas . In my honest opinion these people are spoiled. My school has a strict dress code where women have to wear bras whether it be winter or summer and are forbidden any pants which expose the legs above the knee. It's the same for guys, no pants above the knee and no graphic tees. It's not gender discrimination or any discrimination at all School is a formal institution for learning. If you want to walk around in your bikini or whatever, go to the club or the beach, there's a time and place for everything Another thing these people don't realize is that women's breasts are sexualized in western culture and are inappropriate to be exposed in formal settings. If you get in trouble for not wearing a bra or if your clothing is too revealing then you deserve no pity Our English teacher told us about how the students in the UK always have to wear matching socks, their shirts have to be tucked in properly and their uniforms must be ironed and tidy, otherwise they would get in trouble. I don't see anything wrong with that, quite the contrary. School is a place for education, and socialization is only a secondary component. If you don't like it, then leave Nobody is forcing you to stay.<|ASPECTS|>, spoiled, strict, secondary component, settings, formal institution for learning, dress code, pity, graphic, forbidden, women, bigger than women boobs, inappropriate, trouble, socialization, matching, staff, leave nobody, revealing, education, hero, discrimination, gender discrimination<|CONCLUSION|>

Uniforms and strict dress codes should be enforced in schools.

583538c0-f0ad-47c2-a3db-5651d47ad108

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I'm 31 years old, and I can remember a time when cell phones did not exist. I wish I was able to experience this as an adult, because that is not the reality we know today. Cell phones are more or less considered to be mandatory, and people claim they cannot live without them. Well I call bullshit, because mankind existed for thousands of years without cell phones. Imagine You depart for work or wherever, say goodbye to your friends and loved ones, and go about your business until you return Rejoice You have returned, and you can recommence your affection or lack thereof for each other I may be somewhat of a neo luddite, but I for one would be okay if all mobile devices were simultaneously banished from the planet. The constant, redundant contact we have with each other somewhat strips away from real human connection. I'm particularly talking about voice and text communication, but you have to factor the weight of mobile internet and social media into this phenomenon as well. All new technologies introduced throughout history have had an impact, spurning the evolution of culture, law, and quality of life for all, but I believe none have had the effect of the internet and mobile technology. New issues that we couldn't possibly foreseen, such as this most recent example I was inspired to post this after seeing peoples' negative reaction to Dave Chappelle's request for people to put their goddamn cell phones away for half a minute and enjoy the show. All I'm saying is there are tradeoffs to integrating this widespread technology, and personally I would rather live the old fashioned way. I unfortunately don't really have that choice anymore.<|ASPECTS|>mobile internet, real human connection, mankind, tradeoffs, widespread, mandatory, negative reaction, banished, experience, live without, mobile, redundant contact, affection, weight, quality of life, old fashioned, law, communication, cell phones, phones, live, culture, reality, impact, evolution, choice<|CONCLUSION|>

I believe we have sacrificed more than we have gained in allowing cell phones and mobile technology to penetrate our lives.

41e48e2f-c11e-44b7-931c-220902ca7886

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Rule 1 of discussion abortion is not up for discussion this time. Let's hypothetically say it's legal everywhere until the third month and this situation is happening one month in. Woman and man have sex. Woman is pregnant Man wants the child. Woman doesn't want the child. Woman has an abortion. Woman wants the child. Man doesn't want the child. Woman doesn't have an abortion. I believe situation 2 shouldn't be allowed. Please change my view.<|ASPECTS|>sex, want the child, situation 2, woman wants the child, discussion, view, man, wants the child, legal everywhere, woman does n't, discussion abortion, woman<|CONCLUSION|>

women shouldn't be allowed to give birth if the man doesn't want to have a child

949c5909-9fc5-4be5-af2f-de4015fc0d65

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I will start out by saying that I have been recently diagnosed with depression, and the only reason I started was because I was going to commit suicide. That being said I think that talk therapy is useless. Before I got to the point that I was going to take my own life, I talked my self through my issues, and reached conclusions. In my opinion, I think that therapy is only to validate one's own conclusions about there own life. In my situation, half of my family has depression and even my granddad committed suicide because of it. I think the only real solution is through medication, because it is do to a chemical imbalance in the brain, so in turn the only solution is to fix it through medication. <|ASPECTS|>depression, self, diagnosed, talk therapy, validate, fix, useless, suicide, life, chemical imbalance, commit suicide, issues, conclusions<|CONCLUSION|>

I think talk therapy is a joke.

eb415d02-e7dc-401a-83df-b472cf37ed5d

<|TOPIC|>Who will win the UK general election?<|ARGUMENT|>Wind energy, a source of power labelled as "the biggest collective economic insanity by Farage, is increasingly being criticized by other countries because its footprint is bigger than what the earth can tolerate at this point.<|ASPECTS|>collective economic insanity<|CONCLUSION|>

What may seem like Farage's controversial views on climate change to some are actually backed by statistics and logic.

b7060364-d725-4c9e-b7ce-e3ad71513bd3

<|TOPIC|>Should quotas for women on boards and in managerial positions be mandatory?<|ARGUMENT|>When young women see themselves represented in positions of power, they are more likely to apply to these positions in the first place.<|ASPECTS|>positions of power<|CONCLUSION|>

A lack of women in leadership positions means that women lack role models and mentors to help them climb the corporate ladder.

39ec10a0-df9c-41f8-b201-150d964195fc

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Hi So, firstly I want to say that starting from Marx's analysis of the commodity, I think that that displays in stunning clarity why capitalism tends to cause suckishness. I also think that when it costs millions and millions to run an election campaign, and if the flow of money is part of the problem, then anyone who has effective solutions will not be funded. With the amount of people saying any amount of things, juuuust the exact right puppet can be funded. And, finally, I think that having 1300 people own 94 of the planet's wealth and resources, having 10 people be able to feed a billion hungry for 2.5 centuries, and living in a society that spends as much on pet food and alcohol as it would take to fix global malnutrition and poverty, takes a very weird sense of morality. all these are real facts, I got more if ya want 'em I want to finish off with a moral argument, a thought experiment. You're walking down the street, and see the only homeless person on the planet. They ask you for 5 cents, and that will provide education, food, water, shelter, clothing, etc. Are you morally compelled to? What if there were thousands of homeless people, and still 5 cents total was still all it took, would you be compelled then? What if you had 4 friends with you, and each of you had to give 1 cent? Are you compelled to band together and each give one single cent? I would argue yes, definitely to these. I have one more twist. What if someone stole the five cents from you? What if they asked you or asked you and your friends to contribute 1 cent each to either the single homeless person or it would every one of the thousands and you denied, and someone stole it? Instead of taking out one of the 100 bills in your wallet and keeping 99.95 for themselves, simply took a nickel? Are they in the wrong? A parable, for revolution.<|ASPECTS|>morally compelled, wrong, millions, morality, thought experiment, shelter, homeless people, friends, nickel, effective solutions, five, flow of money, band together, global malnutrition, moral argument, funded, suckishness, real facts, compelled, homeless person, water, costs millions, provide, revolution, stole, parable, wealth and resources, education, poverty, food<|CONCLUSION|>

I think that the Laws of Motion of Capitalism tend such that wealth accumulates to such a degree that 'morality' doesn't exist any more. !

7b16855b-8f63-4db4-98a6-3acaffdd41b9

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>1 A Home No one should be homeless in this world. Everyone deserves to have a place to call home, no one should be living on the street. 2 Food Everyone needs food to be able to live. No reason why people should be starving. 3 Healthcare EVERYONE should receive equal healthcare regardless of their insurance and money situation. No one should be able to buy better healthcare. 4 Education Everyone should be entitled to getting some sort of education. Im not saying put everyone into college, im just saying that if someone wants to better themselves with education, be it getting a basic high school education, a college degree, or some sort of trade, it should be available. This is where it gets unpopular. The government should pay for it. If we had a tax system that taxed the rich more and the poor less there would be money for programs that, feed, house, educate, and care for every single person.<|ASPECTS|>entitled, gets, government, money for programs, place to call home, homeless, equal healthcare, food, taxed, unpopular, buy, insurance and money situation, starving, tax system, basic high school education, able, living on the street, better themselves with education, live, pay, education, rich, better healthcare<|CONCLUSION|>

Every Person on the planet should have the right to 4 things without charge: A home, Food, Healthcare, and Education.

b537dd40-f575-4845-8c2f-cb25e59975ce

<|TOPIC|>Is Adultery Ethical?<|ARGUMENT|>It is not your responsibility to prevent another person from committing adultery any more than it is your responsibility to prevent a vegan from knowingly sharing a beef burger you have cooked, or preventing a Muslim from knowingly sharing some of your wine, even if these things could cause distress to their friends/partners if they found out. Their belief system is theirs to maintain or change as they wish.<|ASPECTS|>distress, maintain, responsibility, change, belief system<|CONCLUSION|>

No. Another person's marriage has nothing to do with you.

54d3df5f-f477-42c3-aa74-cb5e29ad09c1

<|TOPIC|>Downloading Music Without Permission Is an Example of Theft and Is Immoral<|ARGUMENT|>Record companies have been blamed for unfair practices, like DRM, “milking” artists see opposition argument 3, or suing individual downloaders for unfair damages. But record companies also have a very positive role to play: they scout every day for new talent, and offer training and production studios for up-and-coming musicians. Moreover, they provide valuable marketing services, making sure that new artists get heard instead of drowning in the vast sea of information that is the internet. Consider this, how don you even know which song to download? A large part of that is because record companies get the music out there, on to radio stations, all over MySpace, on MTV, so that you get to hear it for the first time. Those are things a musician is not trained to do and very often does not want to do, which is why it is good to have record companies.<|ASPECTS|>companies, heard, production studios, unfair practices, positive role, marketing services, information, new talent, scout, valuable, trained, unfair damages, training, new artists<|CONCLUSION|>

Record companies have been blamed for unfair practices, like DRM, “milking” artists see opposition ...

25f9788e-4728-41f9-8243-6e387c634372

<|TOPIC|>Citizens United Was Wrongly Decided<|ARGUMENT|>This is also problematic because the rich are a minority in America. Their control of government is especially undemocratic.<|ASPECTS|>control of government<|CONCLUSION|>

The rich have different views and interests than other classes in society.

f0a2ee49-df22-41f3-90dd-73e2f9a01eff

<|TOPIC|>The Ethics of Eating Animals: Is Eating Meat Wrong?<|ARGUMENT|>Every organism on earth dies or is killed at some point, so other organisms can live. This is how nature works.<|ASPECTS|>killed, dies, nature works, organisms can live<|CONCLUSION|>

Eating meat is a central part of human nature, evolution, and physiology/biology and thus its consumption is inherent to humankind.

73023780-2be8-49f5-be9c-7f096af1955d

<|TOPIC|>force think tanks to reveal all of their sources of funding<|ARGUMENT|>One can conceive of an infinite amount of cases in which results of a think tank’s research are completely independent of their funders. Their opposition, however, will be likely to signal corruption, when in fact there may be no relation between a funder and certain results. Even if they are associated by sharing a perspective or an aim, this is not a sign of corruption or bias, and it should not enter into the value of a think tank. There has been one study of charity donations as think tanks are that concludes that anonymous donations are “a costly signal of a charity’s quality by an informed donor”.1 1 Peacey, Mike W., “Masked Heroes: endogenous anonymity in charitable giving”, Centre for Market and Public Organisation Bristol Institute of Public Affairs, May 2013, p.27 <|ASPECTS|>quality, anonymous donations, corruption, bias, endogenous anonymity, independent, funders, charity donations, charitable giving, charity, costly<|CONCLUSION|>

Think tanks should be assessed by the value of their ideas, not by who funds them

56627c83-7654-482c-82ad-e2b20cbef8d0

<|TOPIC|>Should Bullfighting be Banned?<|ARGUMENT|>Hunting is legal in most countries, and often leads to slow and painful deaths for animals. Bullfights just happen to have a larger audience for this spectacle.<|ASPECTS|>hunting, spectacle, slow and painful deaths, larger audience<|CONCLUSION|>

There are other animal practices that are equally or more cruel than bullfighting but legal.

134256da-cb29-44f0-89be-879d65858ce7

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>As a small business owner of a company with revenue of over 4M this year, I know that cash is always very thoroughly considered before being used. Any investments have to be tied to a rate of return, with consideration of risk. While increased profits help with these decisions, the increase would need to be substantial in order to justify pulling the trigger on investing in additional manpower. Most business owners will tell you that labor is the most expensive single line item in their portfolio, and we would rather invest in technology that reduces our need for labor rather than hire additional people which come with all the additional budgetary, interpersonal and societal requirements. A smaller increase in profits, such as from tax cuts, is normally just going to go into the owners pockets, or into bonuses. Also, most people agree that the wealthiest among us do less consuming overall. A person putting 40K into an IRA over a year like wealthy Americans are more likely to do is going to have a smaller impact on the economy and jobs than the average American buying a new 36K car. So, knowing all this, I can't see why some people believe that giving a company or very wealthy people a tax cut is going to decrease unemployment or boost the economy. Am I way of base on this?<|ASPECTS|>cash, jobs, need for labor, smaller, bonuses, unemployment, economy, revenue, thoroughly considered, boost, societal requirements, risk, substantial, interpersonal, profits, manpower, base, decrease, wealthiest, impact, expensive, owners, rate of return, budgetary, less consuming<|CONCLUSION|>

Tax cuts for corporations are just a way to pay big political donors, and will do nothing to increase jobs or the economy as advertised.

d0792223-319f-425a-9fd4-f90cf98ca8f5

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>When I asked the question How come some services don't become more efficient when privatized? most of the answers boiled down to this gt What's wrong with private education? Outcomes are better for private education almost everywhere. I personally believe that public education is a good thing. It allows poor people to receive education and therefore work themselves out of poverty. Sure, there are some people who don't take their education seriously, but from a governmental standpoint, doesn't the economic benefits of education outweigh the fact that some people don't take their education seriously? Also, if you want to go the extra mile in changing my view, can you please supply me with Examples of countries which don't experience the benefits of public education Examples of countries that fared worse after introducing public education Examples of countries which privatised their public education system and ended up with a better educated populace<|ASPECTS|>public education, efficient, better, economic benefits, benefits, education, better educated, poverty, good, poor people, outcomes, private education<|CONCLUSION|>

Public Education is a good thing

b16ad326-9ec1-4190-a41d-b297c212f4f5

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>This is inspired by the recent post concerning the whistleblowers that have exposed government corruption and illegal surveillance programs. The top post is a rebuttal stating that these programs are necessary for combatting terrorism. This brings me to my point Am I the only one who does not fear islamic terrorism against Western nations? As far as I understand it, my chance of being killed by terrorism is astronomically low, and that I am much MUCH more likely to be killed by health reasons, an accident, or even by my own police forces than by a terrorist attack. In addition to this, what have the destruction of our personal liberties and freedoms garnered us in the way of safety in the past decade? What plots have actually been uncovered that weren't bullshit honey pots or entrapment either? And if these are for uncovering terrorist plots, clearly it isn't effective re Boston . So the fact that it is illegal, subverts personal freedoms, and isn't even effective, regardless of being important points, pale comparatively to the fact that terrorism isn't even a force to be feared. <|ASPECTS|>destruction, personal freedoms, chance, accident, illegal, subverts, entrapment, freedoms, personal liberties, terrorist plots, combatting, government corruption, islamic terrorism, terrorist attack, effective, health reasons, pots, illegal surveillance, killed, safety, force, effective re boston, plots, terrorism<|CONCLUSION|>

I do not think terrorism is a legitimate fear in Western nations.

f17db9f0-42c4-4f76-8a63-7f3581561eb8

<|TOPIC|>Free Julian Assange<|ARGUMENT|>Assange's decision to release 90,000 Afghanistan War-related activity reports revealed the identifies of at least 100 Afghans who were informing on the Taliban to the US.<|ASPECTS|>taliban, informing<|CONCLUSION|>

The US government has condemned Wikileaks, saying that its work puts the lives of staff in sensitive positions at risk.

f30dd57d-74dd-4807-bf13-2b819749c210

<|TOPIC|>Wire-tap and ‘intercept’ evidence, admissibility in courts<|ARGUMENT|>Those countries which do not allow intercept evidence have created a bizarre form of legal limbo in order to do so. British courts admit intercepts from phones on a private network, calls on the public network where one party is an informant, and tapes from bugs. Most strangely of all, they allow intercept material lawfully obtained by foreign polices forces. This led to the conviction of the Merseyside drugs squad chief Elmore Davies for his corrupt relationship with drugs baron Curtis Warren on the basis of intercept evidence gathered on Dutch mobile phones by the Dutch police force, but where some conversations took place entirely in the UK. Thus, in order to maintain the intercept prohibition, Britain ends up with inconsistent legal standards which are damaging to the accountability and transparency of its courts and legal system. Allowing wire-tap evidence would remove these anomalies.<|ASPECTS|>inconsistent legal standards, accountability, intercept material, transparency, anomalies, legal limbo, corrupt relationship, intercepts, intercept evidence<|CONCLUSION|>

Those countries which do not allow intercept evidence have created a bizarre form of legal limbo in ...

75ecce14-82be-42bd-a480-a72c2bc1a017

<|TOPIC|>The parties participating in elections for the European Parliament should hold primary elections<|ARGUMENT|>Voters would vote whoever they most identify with into power, not whoever is the most competent.<|ASPECTS|>competent, voters<|CONCLUSION|>

Voters would not choose the best candidate for the jobs.

c3e7c0a9-be93-4c2d-9ede-fd60b4711a4d

<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I've been looking at the various forms of government. Presidential systems, Parliamentary systems. George Washington stayed non partisan and warned USA against forming parties. I firmly believe USA's government can be fixed by making it non partisan. People blindly voting democrat or republican are ruining USA. I believe the parties should be destroyed, all voters should be informed of potential candidates, and pick accordingly. I was reading about government gridlock that occurs in presidential systems, but not in parliamentary systems. In parliament, the PM is elected by the legislature, so he is guaranteed to pass laws. Look at T. Roosevelt's 1904 presidency. It was pointless. The Congress refused to pass anything. Imagine if Clinton or Sanders won in 2016. Gridlock, nothing would be passed. People are waking up to the fact they voted for the wrong party, but we only have 2 choices in USA which is not enough don't say 3rd parties can win, I haven't seen a Libertarian or Green party president in USA . There is definitely a reason USA has terrible voter turnout a lot of people don't feel represented. The ones that do turnout are usually mindless sheep voting for the party they think they are apart of like sports teams, Americans blindly cheering for a team and a small portion actually have some idea of what is going on. I feel George Washington's vision and guidance would completely fix USA. If we had non partisan candidates, people had to be informed about who they were voting for, we'd have a much better government. Currently Congress rarely votes against their party for fear of losing re election. Also, that party may run advertising to purposely destroy that person. Politics is just incredibly dirty, and I think non partisan government would make it pure. <|ASPECTS|>, government gridlock, mindless sheep, various, passed, informed, government, non partisan, elected, parties, government can, fix usa, nothing would, fear, blindly cheering, congress, pass laws, better government, choices, parliamentary systems, pure, destroyed, informed of potential candidates, person, guaranteed, pointless, voted for the wrong party, votes, terrible, dirty, legislature, voter turnout, losing re election, forming parties, fixed, guidance, vision, destroy, ruining usa, politics, voting democrat, forms of government, presidential systems<|CONCLUSION|>

Non-partisan government is the best government

aca32d6d-d92e-4fa7-84ab-5cbdd6ef9dfc

<|TOPIC|>Partitioning Iraq<|ARGUMENT|>Some have argued that Iraq cannot or should not be partitioned because there is too much integration between the sectarian groups there. Yet, this demographic integration is changing more and more over time, with Shia, Sunni, and Kurdish groups continually separating out into their respective communities and regions. This means that the demographic conditions for the partitioning of Iraq are becoming increasingly favorable over time.<|ASPECTS|>partitioned, demographic integration, demographic conditions, sectarian groups, integration, favorable<|CONCLUSION|>

The partitioning of Iraq would simply formalize the sectarian separations that are occurring more and more on the ground now

3d213cbe-aba5-4c48-bd5e-312145e61ef8