argument
stringlengths 116
44.5k
| conclusion
stringlengths 8
1.16k
| id
stringlengths 36
36
|
|---|---|---|
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I love sports but don't understand the rabid loyalty fans have for their chosen teams. Cursed and underperforming franchises are enabled by fans who continue to fill seats year after year, despite the team's record. Some fanbases even revel in this mediocrity and see it as part of the team's personality. Sports teams make money not by winning games, but by filling seats. And if lost games do not translate into lost customers, the economic incentive to improve approaches zero. And so if you really want your underperforming sports team to win the championship, the best thing you can do is stop supporting them, stop attending games, and stop buying merchandise until you see results on the field. Switch allegiances, be happier, and your team will benefit too. <|ASPECTS|>underperforming franchises, benefit, team, lost games, rabid loyalty, cursed, money, buying merchandise, filling seats, allegiances, mediocrity, lost customers, personality, economic incentive, underperforming, supporting, happier, make, winning games, results, stop attending<|CONCLUSION|>
| Unconditional loyalty to sports teams is dumb and breeds mediocrity
| 412848f8-3531-4344-922f-7b46f18f5921 |
<|TOPIC|>Is the Standard Model an incomplete theory?<|ARGUMENT|>Because the Standard Model doesn't explain particle mass, scientists rely on other measurements and mathematical equations to do so, which come with a level of uncertainty<|ASPECTS|>uncertainty, particle mass<|CONCLUSION|>
| Missing components of the Standard Model has lead to the impossibility of it being able to predict particle masses accurately.
| 54478805-9b09-49b2-8c63-6a79521db6a5 |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>To expand on what I mean, I believe that anyone who I do not personally know or share a bond with aren't part of my life, and therefore aren't my concern in the slightest. That means charity, world news and current affairs are completely irrelevant and not part of my life. Why should I care what happens to people I've never met and will never witness their troubles?<|ASPECTS|>troubles, concern, current affairs, bond, charity, life, world news, irrelevant<|CONCLUSION|>
| I believe that people outside of my acquaintance are not deserving of any compassion or empathy,
| 2875bacb-8f6c-41f0-9984-7c1ebe08df00 |
<|TOPIC|>Is Gender a Social Construct?<|ARGUMENT|>According to research "gender-based victimization, discrimination, bullying, violence, being rejected by the family, friends, and community; harassment by intimate partner, family members, police and public; discrimination and ill treatment at health-care system are the major risk factors that influence the suicidal behavior" among the trans community.<|ASPECTS|>risk, ill treatment, harassment, suicidal behavior, victimization, gender-based, discrimination, violence, bullying<|CONCLUSION|>
| Transgender people face a high risk of prejudice and mental health problems: approximately 41 percent of trans people in the U.S. have attempted suicide according to a 2010 survey by the National Center for Transgender Equality and the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.
| 1f3b5358-a268-4a53-9785-b26728292239 |
<|TOPIC|>Should Turkey be part of the European Union?<|ARGUMENT|>Joining the EU would increase Turkey's market competition and put pressure on domestic monopolies from EU rivals.<|ASPECTS|>domestic monopolies, eu, market competition<|CONCLUSION|>
| Turkey's economy is struggling and it would greatly benefit from EU membership.
| 3d066ddd-152f-4206-9f71-5a6e91d3ea38 |
<|TOPIC|>Funding for space exploration<|ARGUMENT|>The argument that humans need to be in space in order to find out the effects of being in space should be treated with caution; it is essentially a circular argument as with no manned missions, there would be no need to find out the impact of space on humans.<|ASPECTS|>impact of space on humans, effects, argument<|CONCLUSION|>
| Going into space to discover the effects of space on humans is circular logic.
| 284c55b2-e79d-4a32-98e4-9ca33022c522 |
<|TOPIC|>The Rebel Alliance would defeat the United Federation of Planets in space combat.<|ARGUMENT|>The Federation uses antimatter power generation, while the Rebel Alliance is powered by fusion. This is a massive difference in power output that would be of benefit to shields, weapons, and other supporting devices.<|ASPECTS|>benefit, difference, antimatter power generation, power output<|CONCLUSION|>
| The Federation's ships are technologically superior to those of the Rebel Alliance.
| 908224ab-be66-495d-a469-601db05d4f3e |
<|TOPIC|>Sporting Idols and Domestic Abuse: Where Should Sporting Leagues Draw a Line?<|ARGUMENT|>Cross-cultural studies of rape have shown that all-male membership groups such as a sports teams or fraternities are a highly contributing factor to sexual violence.<|ASPECTS|>sexual violence<|CONCLUSION|>
| Many sports promote cultures of hegemonic masculinity Thus, the leagues must do something to combat the harmful impacts of the cultures they foster.
| 29844d01-63a1-462d-b66e-a5813ad699ad |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Now, before I even state why I have this opinion, I'd like to say one thing I am in no way saying The White Death was a bad sniper, what I'm saying is that his kill count shouldn't be a representation of his skill for several reasons. He's good, but I don't think he's the best. For those who don't know about him, early in WW2 Joseph Stalin insane dictato decided to invade Finland. Early on his attacks failed horribly and continued on for several years. Even after the tides turned, he was a laughing stock due to the horrible losses against a country that was less then a 10th of Russia's size and with a fraction of Russia's military power. The white death was the best sniper in this war, dubbed the winter war, and got the highest kill count of 505 confirmed kills, and maybe more unaccounted for. With that said, many think of him as the greatest sniper because of this and I think those who do a very much wrong, and here's why I think his kill count isn't all that great Russia had poor leadership for its soldiers. Now during this time, Stalin was fucking up his own nation like a puppy destroys their toys. One way he did this was replacing most of his generals with people who basically groveled at his feet, resulting in obedience being more important then skill. Not only that, but he undermined Finland so much that he sent the worst of the worst to deal with them, resulting in generals essentially leading troops into suicide missions ranging from walking over ice, walking in the open snow in standard uniform, something which heavily contrasted with the snow of Finland , and taking shortcuts that usually resulted in more retreats and deaths then advancements. malnutrition among soldiers. Now the worst type of soldier is a hungry soldier, and Russia had no shortage of that. The low rations and shitty leadership resulted and sluggish, hungry, tired soldiers walking on to no end, shaking from both the cold and the hunger. There were instances where soldiers ran off Finnish soldiers, and then just sat down and ate the food they left behind because that had nothing left to eat. It's bad enough they got rushed into open fields with clothes contrasting against the snow, but they were also slow in both speed and reaction time from lack of food, making them even easier pickings for a guy in a white snow coat and a rifle home field advantage. I'm not gonna count that as much of a fault on anyone, but by God it's far easier to defend your own nation then attack another as a sniper. In a setting where you almost always have the option to sit and wait for someone to show up so you can line your sight with their body, it's gonna be easiee. If he was on the offensive side of things things would have been very different as he'd have to be sure that him getting up wasn't gonna result in his head exploding while he advances to the next place he has to rest his rifle on. It's just easier to hold the line rather then support advances as a guy with a rifle then the other way around. Now I'll give credit where credits due, he did use an iron sight for his kills rather then a scope, and he still is skilled compared to the average rifle man, but I think it's a bit of a stretch to call him the best or deadliest sniper. <|ASPECTS|>low, deadliest, nothing left to eat, retreats, sniper, poor leadership, hungry soldier, easier to hold the line, shortage, support advances, puppy, slow, line, kill count, cold, sight, white death, attack, stalin, failed, shitty leadership, skill, hungry, hunger, finland, deaths, soldier, military power, unaccounted, fault, bad sniper, confirmed kills, fucking, ran off finnish soldiers, horrible losses, malnutrition, horribly, speed and reaction time, nation, skilled, iron sight, rations, tired soldiers, head exploding, suicide missions, different, easier to defend, obedience, destroys their toys, easier pickings, food, sluggish<|CONCLUSION|>
| The white death's kill count isn't that impressive.
| b6cabc07-5042-4d2e-9c3b-1b8db4a407e9 |
<|TOPIC|>Should Turkey acknowledge the Armenian genocide?<|ARGUMENT|>Turkey is a strategically important country in the ongoing Syrian war Destabilising Turkey could significantly compromise military efforts in the region and worsen the humanitarian crisis.<|ASPECTS|>humanitarian crisis, important, compromise military efforts<|CONCLUSION|>
| Acknowledging the genocide would disrupt the stability of Turkey's domestic politics.
| a8bd4afe-a697-4b2b-bd9f-46caae0a0602 |
<|TOPIC|>Doctors should be banned from performing genital reshaping surgery on intersex infants<|ARGUMENT|>Parental decisions depend on the health professional counselling received, to a degree of which neither parents nor professionals appear fully aware. There is a danger of medicalised or demedicalised parentalism resulting in irreversible and inadequately grounded decisions.<|ASPECTS|>medicalised, inadequately grounded decisions, parental decisions, irreversible, demedicalised parentalism<|CONCLUSION|>
| There is insufficient or misleading information that affects decision making.
| 1acd3b41-f244-48c5-b39c-ab8fc289a461 |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I started thinking about this two summers ago when a nurse working a tent at an event told me that he had 3 days worth of water and food stored up in case the power grid failed. He cited the risk of air conditioners supplying more demand than the grid can keep up with on extremely hot days in summer, but it got me thinking about larger image stuff. America's electrical grid is one of the most important aspects of our infrastructure, yet it it incredibly simple. There are reports of rising attacks on the grid, and it is a problem that has been acknowledged by many cyber security experts. With North Korea and China increasing their cyber security offensive abilities it would be the easiest single strike to weaken every other part of America's infrastructure. But who knows who else would want to do this kind of damage. Many of the people attempting these attacks haven't been identified so far, so we don't even have any idea who our enemies are. If things got that far, there would be international chaos. People don't know how to operate without electricity. Factories would shut down, perishable food would disappear, people would die from weather conditions and hospitals would overrun. Life would entirely change in the matter of a week. But that's just a view, and one I really wish to change. So prove me wrong. Here are the two articles I based my info off<|ASPECTS|>perishable food, life would entirely change, view, operate without electricity, identified, enemies, infrastructure, larger image, rising attacks on the grid, overrun, simple, weather conditions, important, security offensive abilities, damage, supplying, air conditioners, weaken, water and food stored, demand, international chaos, electrical grid, hospitals, security<|CONCLUSION|>
| a massive failure of America's power grid is coming soon, and will lead to catastrophic effects
| 7e02af2e-c20d-49be-9b5d-97822d58d30f |
<|TOPIC|>Should Protesting in Front of Abortion Clinics Be Prohibited?<|ARGUMENT|>Women who struggle with the idea of getting an abortion may have a religious upbringing which reinforces the notion that abortion is sin and murder. These women are particularly vulnerable to the guilt inducing tactics used by protestors who shame women.<|ASPECTS|>religious upbringing, sin and murder, vulnerable, guilt inducing<|CONCLUSION|>
| Protest tactics use emotional manipulation and shame to try and dissuade women from having abortions. This pressure comes at a time when woman are entering an abortion clinic and likely feel some apprehension and nervousness.
| a99a3ec8-ff57-4d63-8549-7f9a334b49f4 |
<|TOPIC|>Should the US remove Confederate memorials, flags, and monuments from public spaces?<|ARGUMENT|>A third or half statues can be moved to museums or historical societies. However, some should be up. Not only because history cannot, and shouldn't be, erased; but because total removal could cause apathy or national amnesia. Americans need to know what was done to Native Americans and African Americans. Citizens do not need to be soothed or coddled, but need to be "slapped" back to reality, and to remain awake and vigilant.<|ASPECTS|>apathy, native americans, statues, reality, history, vigilant, national amnesia, historical societies, african americans<|CONCLUSION|>
| By destroying the iconography memorializing history, we forget history. Those ideologies, if even they were wrong, are doomed to repeat.
| 2554fef9-88fa-480f-8bc9-d1b9c33b826a |
<|TOPIC|>Will Liquid Democracy be a better mechanism of governance than Representative Democracy?<|ARGUMENT|>If they were to be understood by everyone, referendums would have to be written in clear laymen's language. This would makepork-barreling harder.<|ASPECTS|>'s language<|CONCLUSION|>
| Liquid Democracy's direct voting model would increase the transparency of legislation.
| 1cfa980c-413e-4ec3-a8b9-e8d6fa5e670b |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>The main reason for this is that religion is a choice, most of the other protections under anti discrimination laws are not due to choice, they are a result of biology or circumstance out of one's control. The exception to that is pregnancy and veteran status and I have no problem affording protections to people who are pregnant or those who are veterans as I can see that they are necessary to society and national security. I believe that protecting religion is largely redundant and is no different than freedoms already constitutionally protected in the First Amendment encompassing freedom of speech and the right to assemble. If someone doesn't want to hire someone else because they are Christian, Hindu, non religious, Muslim, etc, I don't see how it is different than not hiring someone because they disagree with anything else that person chooses to believe. <|ASPECTS|>freedom of speech, biology or circumstance, society, religion, necessary, pregnancy, affording, protections, national security, protecting religion, disagree, freedoms, right to assemble, redundant, veteran status, choice<|CONCLUSION|>
| I don't believe religious beliefs should be specifically protected by anti-discrimination laws or the Constitution -
| 47411407-6d3c-4031-a27e-906a18929671 |
<|TOPIC|>Children Voting: Should the Minimum Voting Age be Abolished?<|ARGUMENT|>Politicians are mostly elected based on ideological and emotional appeal, not on actual competence. An assessment of their competence only becomes possible once they are in their elected role.<|ASPECTS|>competence, ideological and emotional appeal<|CONCLUSION|>
| Politicians neither pass a special education nor is there a minimal education requirement e.g. in the USA
| b297bf7a-809d-4202-89b4-4af0551b47df |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I do not believe that the human mind is fully or functionally reducible to its material substrate i.e. the brain body material environment , and that a phenomenal level of explanation is therefore a necessary explanatory level for psychological phenomena. I have a number of reasons for holding this position, such as the pragmatics of real time processing others' cognitive functions, the likely existence of emergent mental phenomena, the relative paucity of data in reductivist explanations when compared to phenomenal experience, as well as, if I'm going to be honest with myself, something like faith in the significance of my own experience. Change my view EDIT While I'm at it, I believe that many mental phenomena are structured at least in part though by no means fully by social forces, which, because they are dynamic and reactive to inquiries into their functioning, will change along with our account of them, thus removing the possibility of some perfectly stable ground of observation.<|ASPECTS|>mental phenomena, explanatory level, reactive, structured, explanations, level of explanation, functionally reducible, data, fully, stable ground of observation, functions, social forces, psychological, material environment<|CONCLUSION|>
| I Do Not Believe that Mind Is or Ever Will Be Fully Reducible to Matter. !
| d45383e0-8a3e-4b92-a475-8a23d3b4ded2 |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Should teachers of high school and lower be offered tenure? If so how should they earn it? In eighth grade we did a mock congress and out of the 300 laws mine was picked for debate. No one gave their opinion to me before if made the law so I considered both sides of the argument. I am not biased to the subject in anyway. Here is what I wrote Hobart Middle School Congress Introduced by Representative my name House Bill Number 077 A BILL FOR AN ACT TO REPEAL TEACHER TENURE AND ENACT MERIT PAY FOR SCHOOLS Be it enacted by the Hobart Middle School Congres Section 1 The bill will reform teacher tenure. The bill will enact merit pay. Section 2 This bill will be called “Eliminate tenure and enact merit pay “ Section 3 The reason this bill should be passed is because. In a capitalist country it values hard work and results and rewarding them. Teacher tenure needs to be reformed because it is nearly impossible and overly expensive to fire a teacher. Section 4 Merit pay will encourage teachers teach as best as they can not only so they can keep their jobs but also collect bonuses to their paycheck. Since education is considered a state issue this should be a reformation on the federal level. Section 5 A teachers base pay will be decided by the school’s board of education Section 6 45 55 of a teacher’s students have to pass a federal exam about the subject the teacher teaches. The difficulty of the exam will be decided with the difficulty of the course, at the end of the year so that the teacher’s pay will remain constant. A passing rate above 55 will give a pay increase a passing rate of below 45 will result in a pay decrease. Minimum of 20 students taking the final exam. Here is my final draft Teacher Tenure Law Repeal By My name The teacher tenure law should be repealed. The union sticks up for any teacher and it can make it nearly impossible for a teacher to be fired. A reason this its a problem is because they protect the bad teachers also. If there is a bad teacher that can’t fired and a good teacher that doesn’t have a job then the good teacher won't be able to be brought in to be a replacement. In order to fire a tenured teacher it requires more than 219,000. If a teachers know they are good then what do they have to worry about? It can take up to 335 days to fire a tenured teacher before the courts get involved in Michigan. In Sacramento Charter High School 900 teachers applied for 80 job openings and they didn’t offer tenure so teachers will still apply for jobs even if they don’t include tenure. Massachusetts was the first state to introduce teacher tenure back in 1886. Back then it was a good idea because you could be fired for personal or political reasons any time before tenure. But since the court can handle that now why do people still think there is a need for a tenure? Teachers don't need tenure to protect them from dismissal anymore because of job protections in court ruling and state and federal laws. At kindergarten through 12th grade tenure is not earned, all teachers have to do is stick around for a short period of time in order to receive tenure. It might benefit some teachers but does nothing for the kids education. If the law was repealed and a good teacher got fired then the teacher can sue them and the court will handle it fairly. A good teacher doesn’t need a tenure because the court can take care of you. A copy of Indiana’s tenure law shows a table of each state that has a tenure and when it was enacted. In Indiana tenure is only given to educational employees except county superintendents, which means that teachers get tenure but Dr. Buffington can’t. State and Year Enacted California 1921 Colorado 1921 Illinois 1919 Indiana 1927 Louisiana 1922 Maryland 1921 Massachusetts 1914 Minnesota 1927 Montana 1915 New Jersey 1910 New York 1917 Oregon 1913 Wisconsin 1921 If you would like me to explain my thoughts on this just say so because this was made a year ago and it might be kind of hard to understand. I am 15 years old go to a public high school. my whole family is liberal and my views are mostly conservative so my opinion is pretty well formed. I like to keep an open mind about things so if you give a good argument that I can't prove wrong I will reevaluate my thought on the subject.<|ASPECTS|>court, fire, protect, tenure, merit, keep, teachers teach as best, public high, bad teacher, liberal, teacher tenure, collect bonuses, worry, reform, thought, conservative, good teacher, open mind about things, educational employees, bad teachers, personal, rewarding, hard to understand, teachers base pay, political reasons, job openings, teacher ’ s pay, dismissal, eliminate tenure, pay decrease, teacher tenure law, subject, passing rate, overly, state, take care, requires, merit pay, any teacher, reformation, federal exam, kids education, biased, benefit some teachers, good, hard work, fired, job protections, values, difficulty, teacher, debate, mock congress, sue, encourage, opinion, expensive, results, earn, impossible<|CONCLUSION|>
| Teacher tenure
| 5a505ba8-a89d-4fb7-9fe1-380e26bf1e7d |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>The concept of a creator explained why things happened in the time of hunters and gatherers. Having a god was a necessity because the workings of the world could not be adequately explained by anything else. Obviously, things have changed and humans can now explain a great many things through science and cause and effect. That’s the main reason I see religion is no longer relevant to society. I understand that many religions aim to assist those in need, which is very useful. However, it’s a bit upsetting to think that a lot of religion based humanitarian relief wouldn’t exist without religion, simply because people wouldn’t feel as compelled to help others without it. I suppose I just made a case for how religion can be and is useful, but it’s the motive behind that type of kindness that has always bothered me. That leads to my last point some people are not kind, but are cruel, and they use religion as an acceptable excuse to act as such. I’ve personally seen others use religion to serve their own means, and although I don’t care much for any god, I know that many people do, and to see someone abuse what many people hold dear is absolutely reprehensible. Why I am open to hearing the other perspective like I said, religion is very important to a lot of people . . . a LOT. With so many people believing in one god or another, including many people that I love and respect, there must be something to the whole religion thing that does some good, and I want to hear about it. <|ASPECTS|>things happened, kindness, creator, god, cruel, assist those in need, means, useful, necessity, cause and effect, workings, help others, serve, adequately explained, motive, important, good, compelled, science, explain, kind, humans, relevant to society, religion, lot, changed, reprehensible, abuse, humanitarian relief<|CONCLUSION|>
| There is no useful role for God/religion in modern society.
| 317f7b50-bb94-4680-813a-7b1ec48d34ad |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I have lived in Columbus, Ohio my entire life and have now been legally able to drive for 5 years. I have driven near and far and have never had to take a toll road. I recently ventured into Pennsylvania for an internship and was absolutely flabbergasted by the toll roads. I have always heard from people that they are good because they have higher speed limits. A lot of the free highways i have been on have 70 mph speed limits and when I went into Pennsylvania, I paid 5.00 to go 40mph on a highway for a whopping 2 miles. I also have gone through some other toll roads since my time here but that was the most obnoxious one. Anyways I just think they are pointless because in no way did it make my travel more convenient. Maybe I just don't know enough about them but please change my view Edit After reading through the comments, I really like the explanation I heard that either there will be a toll road in place or that road simply won't exist.<|ASPECTS|>toll road, speed limits, toll roads, pointless, enough, obnoxious, convenient, legally able to drive, flabbergasted, higher speed limits, travel<|CONCLUSION|>
| I think toll roads are pointless
| e2ab03c3-ef4d-4977-8573-4bd135118ef7 |
<|TOPIC|>Assassination of a Dictator<|ARGUMENT|>In that time not only will many more people suffer under a repressive system, but the policies pursued by an out-of-touch and unrepresentative regime are likely to do serious if unintentional harm to the whole nation and its economy, making eventual rebuilding much more costly in both human and economic terms.<|ASPECTS|>unrepresentative, harm, costly, repressive system<|CONCLUSION|>
| The alternatives to assassination would all leave a dictator in power for many years.
| 77148b2d-0bd3-46fe-a350-04afe00e2112 |
<|TOPIC|>Kialo should separate voting into relevance and veracity of claim.<|ARGUMENT|>The mind is an emergent property of the brain, evidenced by changes in the mind relating to physical or chemical changes in the brain like tumours or damage or hormonal imbalances and by the apparent disappearance of the mind at the cessation of brain activity.<|ASPECTS|>disappearance, changes, property, mind, brain activity<|CONCLUSION|>
| The mind is not the soul, despite what the parent claim implies.
| 0f80655d-9fff-44c5-a552-7d4af4c4bf78 |
<|TOPIC|>Should private property exist in outer space?<|ARGUMENT|>International treaties, such as the UNHRC, give special consideration to the wellbeing of humans. This can be used to justify galactic property policies that give special protection to planets to with life.<|ASPECTS|>property policies, protection, wellbeing of humans<|CONCLUSION|>
| Galactic property policies can be adapted to restrict ownership claims on planets that are found to harbour life.
| 37b96f09-ed16-42a7-920e-5aa221eac502 |
<|TOPIC|>Does Transgenderism exist?<|ARGUMENT|>Babies at birth instinctively crawl to and suckle on their mothers breast - proof of some pre-programming. Not a massive leap to suggest there may be some difference in programming between male and female babies.<|ASPECTS|>crawl, difference in programming<|CONCLUSION|>
| It's possible there is some pre-programming of human brains which is different between men and women which is undetectable as its form is connections as opposed to major brain structure differences
| 5153659b-581a-47f2-86d5-10b9187ac496 |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I understand there were two issues at play Backpage was shut down by a law enforcement investigation. Craigslist voluntarily took down their casual encounter section due to H.R. 1865. Here is my view. Shutting down backpage to go after the CEO does not help further the cause of stopping human trafficking and prostitution. Legislation such as H.R 1865 that causes sites like craigslist to shut down their casual encounter page does not help further the cause of stopping human trafficking and prostitution. Here is why The bad guys are now harder to find. With sites like backpage, it was shooting fish in a barrel. You had very obvious prostitution ads with phone numbers and locations. Vice operations were easily taken bust these rings. If you wanted to find the bad guy, all you had to do was go to backpage, find a hooker, text her and boom, you have a lead for criminal investigation into human trafficking. With that gone, the bad guys are finding a new place, which means law enforcement has to spend more money to find these new places. Further more, they are now taking even more steps to stay under the radar of law enforcement. This hurts the effort of stopping human trafficking and prostitution because now the bad guys are even harder to find. I am open to having my view changed. What will change my view is showing me the opposite of what I have stated. <|ASPECTS|>view changed, human trafficking, bad, casual encounter section, new place, backpage, bad guy, harder to find, shooting fish, stopping, places, vice operations, prostitution, radar, bad guys, play, law enforcement, easily taken, find, spend more money, criminal investigation, opposite, prostitution ads<|CONCLUSION|>
| Legislation/FBI seizure that lead to the shut down of sites like Backpage and the casual encounter section of Craigslist makes it harder to find “the bad guys”.
| 8e7a3305-d1e7-4738-a6cc-fe27291115e4 |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>DISCLAIMER This is not saying that democracy or capitalism or inheritance are fundamentally bad just that, in certain configurations, monarchy would be better. Think about the average person. What is their relation to royalty, if they live in a monarchy? They probably won't meet them, and if they do it will be a passing thing. The monarch makes all the rules and takes some of the peasants stuff so they can maintain their lavish lifestyle and military and so forth. The monarch protects the people so they can keep making more stuff to take. One day, the monarch will die, and their kid takes over the family business of being monarch. Now consider capitalism, unchecked. It's all fine and well to say Well, this is America. Anyone can make it And, without a doubt, there have been a lot of success stories. But they are the extremely rare exception, not the rule. Anyone that says persistence and hard work are all it takes to succeed is kidding themselves. Rich parents pass their wealth and advantage on to their children. Better schools, a better quality of life than other people, the ability to survive longer on the parents dime so they can take unpaid internships to get better training to get better jobs, everything a rich parent does can set their child up to become richer and more powerful still. As their wealth, and thus power, grows, they influence policy. Soon, they're lobbying to elect politicians and influence public opinion, altering foreign policy. See where this is headed? Effectively, monarchy. Capitalism teaches us that accumulation of wealth is the ultimate goal. Wealth, being variable but finite, must therefore be transferred or kept from someone else in order to get it therefore, it tends to concentrate. And the rich get richer , as they say wealth accumulates and concentrates more and more, until you have fewer and fewer people making policy and controlling land, money, etc. The logical terminus is a single family controlling everything effectively, monarchy. So how is this worse? Because they got there albeit slowly on the idea that profit is of paramount importance. At the very least, some historical monarchs believed that their job was to care for and protect the people. They felt an obligation to them. But a family, or even a dozen families, that effectively control a country because they care only about profit would have no such sense of loyalty. You might easily say Well, capitalism allows for competition. We can get rid of bad companies, or families, by competition, or just not buy their stuff . Well, not really. First, how many people actually know which companies own what, which families control what? Not many. For another, competition becomes impractical after a point try starting an ISP, or a car company, or a petrochemical company. Not buying stuff? That's more valid. The people can collectively rise up and overthrow those with unjust power. Of course, we can do the same in a monarchy it's called revolution.<|ASPECTS|>, fine, better schools, worse, unchecked, jobs, money, powerful, military, kept, concentrates, influence policy, succeed, royalty, peasants, capitalism, elect politicians, persistence, protect the people, buying stuff, wealth and advantage, controlling everything effectively, obligation, wealth, democracy, unpaid, buy, survive longer, altering foreign policy, quality of life, policy, care, stuff, rise, family business, profit, monarchy, accumulation of wealth, america, control, success stories, unjust power, rich get, monarch, power, hard work, competition, training, families, average person, relation, competition becomes impractical, single family, rare exception, lavish lifestyle, revolution, wealth accumulates, monarch will die, richer, controlling land, sense, passing, better, inheritance, rules, influence public opinion, overthrow, valid, families control, rich, protects the people, transferred, importance, loyalty, concentrate, bad companies<|CONCLUSION|>
| Unchecked capitalism in a democracy is worse overall than just having a monarchy
| 7a6f2176-0deb-48b2-a97e-e6ecbd3d8744 |
<|TOPIC|>all literature, art, photography, film and music should be released under Creative Commons licenses<|ARGUMENT|>The creative commons is a more effective means for artists to build and expand their reach and markets than traditional copyright licensing arrangements<|ASPECTS|>reach and markets, effective, creative commons<|CONCLUSION|>
| all literature, art, photography, film and music should be released under Creative Commons licenses
| 08dbc63c-d60d-4fb8-a6bf-52b9f0c61ab7 |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I believe free speech is important, and a generally good thing. However, if you state with an idea, let's say Forks are a blight upon society , and someone disagrees with you, if you immediately jump to free speech as defense of your idea, you are basically admitting that you have no worthwhile arguments. Yes, you are allowed to say that, but if you actually had something to back it up, say sporks are far more versatile, cutting the required utensil manufacturing by a third, reducing global warming 93 , you would say that. Free speech does nothing to back up the validity of your claim, as you are free to be wrong. EDIT I have been convinced that it can be a way of simply saying you do not wish to argue the point further, that you want to let the argument stand where it does. And, to clarify, I am not talking about free speech as a legal concept. Having to prove your speech legal says nothing as to its validity. I mean having to fall back on free speech as an argument does nothing to prove you right. EDIT 2 I now feel that an argument for, or against someone's right to a viewpoint has no bearing on the validity of the viewpoint. But, the person who first feels the need to argue this right, however, likely has no argument.<|ASPECTS|>right to a viewpoint, worthwhile arguments, versatile, concept, global warming, validity, utensil manufacturing, free speech, validity of the viewpoint, good, speech legal, free to be wrong, blight upon society<|CONCLUSION|>
| If you have to defend something as free speech, you're probably wrong
| 03e82e6b-a206-4032-bc81-bb6929a97225 |
<|TOPIC|>Should public health systems fund homeopathy?<|ARGUMENT|>Homeopathic consultations take into account more of the patient's condition than just the symptoms allopathic treatment would focus on. This helps the patient feel they're being treated like a person rather than a disease, so they're more likely to follow advice given. It can also uncover deeper problems that are the root cause of their symptoms.<|ASPECTS|>homeopathic, treated like a person, symptoms, patient 's condition, advice, deeper problems<|CONCLUSION|>
| There are mechanisms by which homeopathic treatments may work for certain conditions.
| 2f1f03d6-d904-426e-9318-4b69fe6d1bdd |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>While I understand concern about the growing surveillance state, the bright side of the digital age is that the surveillance goes both ways. The authorities are watching, but the people are watching back. Recording technology helps make cases against corrupt authority figures, and exonerates those falsely accused. I don't think there's any reasonable expectation of privacy if I'm a participant in the conversation. If you willingly tell me something, it's not something you intended to keep private from me. All recording does is help me remember it and prove it. In that way, it's an equalizer for those whose personal accounts of events might not normally be considered reliable.<|ASPECTS|>authorities, reasonable, private, exonerates, watching back, accused, reliable, watching, prove, expectation of privacy, corrupt authority figures, equalizer, age, surveillance state, remember, accounts of events, surveillance goes<|CONCLUSION|>
| If I am part of a conversation, I should be allowed to record it without informing the others
| 91a58fc5-cd57-4d21-ab20-45d7e3be16e1 |
<|TOPIC|>Should high-income countries take in refugees?<|ARGUMENT|>The parties favored by Muslims in high-income countries have decade-long histories and were part of numerous governments e.g. the SPD in Germany and Labour in the UK. They can hardly be considered as undermining a country's identity.<|ASPECTS|>country 's, identity, undermining, histories<|CONCLUSION|>
| It is not clear how a political preference for established left-wing parties represents a threat to the national identity of high-income countries.
| 778e2cee-7d08-49a0-9ca8-2e42d0140eee |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>With the recent shootings, we have the expected gun control debates raging on Reddit and the consensus on this site is mostly that gun ownership is something that needs to be curtailed. This post is mainly idealistic and not about the data though I understand and have read a lot about this topic from both sides . I believe that the ability to own and carry guns is a right we have as citizens and is part of living in a free country. The trade off, of course, is some of our security but I think it is an important exchange. As soon as we start handing our freedoms to the government for security, we allow ourselves to fall into a dependency and become more and more powerless on our own. Two topics that also fall in line here are NSA spying and the police. Reddit as a whole believes that the police is a corrupt force and should not be trusted to protect us and believes the NSA spying on us is a terrible breach of privacy and should not be allowed. Both full reliance on the police for protection and the NSA being allowed to spy on us gives away some of our freedoms to the government in exchange for security. On the topic of the police, obviously I don't suggest we should have armed militias running around to protect the people, I am just pointing out a logical inconsistency. Let's say I am a victim of a home invasion. If I have a gun, I at least have my life in my own hands and the ability to protect myself and my family. If I have to call and wait on the police, any number of things can happen. Even more extreme, if I were in a place where one of these shootings occurred, if I have a gun, I have the ability to fight back and potentially save lives. There have been many instances of concealed weapons carriers saving the lives of others during armed robberies. Essentially, my view is that, in the long term, it is not worth trading most of our freedoms for some semblance of security NSA . I do not trust the government to protect and provide for me as I trust myself. I do not trust criminals to obey the laws and keep their hands off of guns. Why would I put my life and prosperity in the hands of others? I like this quote and it happens to apply Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.” Ben Franklin Change my view.<|ASPECTS|>important exchange, corrupt force, protect, trust the government, free country, home invasion, concealed weapons carriers, save lives, logical inconsistency, breach of privacy, fight back, freedoms, armed robberies, trust, armed militias, dependency, protect the people, reliance, things, gun ownership, life, powerless, freedom, gun control debates, family, guns, prosperity, trust criminals, protection, happen, right, saving the lives, victim, nsa spying, provide, idealistic, police, security, obey the laws<|CONCLUSION|>
| The trade-off of safety for the freedom of owning a gun is worth it.
| 7a091420-a6f7-43ef-abdc-c6917b7fea72 |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Here on Reddit and anywhere else we hear people claim that X country has free health care and how wonderful it is. There often is a story about some injury or illness that was taken care of for no cost or a nominal copay. All provided free . It's ignorant, misleading or obfuscating to say a country has free health care. Nowhere in the world is health care free. Health care costs money for salaries, equipment, buildings, one time use items, drugs ect. This has to be paid either public or private payers. E.g. the government, your insurance company, your employer, out of pocket. There's no big mystery. So when people say free what they really mean is I'm paying for it and don't realize it. or Someone else is paying for it but I won't acknowledge it. Free to me is myopic. It's also not helpful to claim that countries have free health care. It hides the costs and source of payment. Thinking something is free lowers your expectations. You don't complain as much about services when you get them for free . Some of the stories I hear about Britain's NHS intended to praise it to me sound like shoddy treatment and substandard care. But it was free so it was wonderful. SMH No one would ever say that their government provides free military protection, They drone striked that dude and I didn't have to pay anything Or roads, police, firefighters, teachers, Almost nothing is free in life. <|ASPECTS|>wonderful, source of payment, free health care, free military protection, costs money, myopic, costs, misleading, injury or illness, shoddy treatment, health, health care free, free, hides, services, paying, expectations, mystery, lowers, cost, complain, substandard care, payers, ignorant<|CONCLUSION|>
| "Free health care" doesn't exist and saying countries have it is ignorant or misleading.
| aaee6a65-16f2-48f9-a59d-a12b3ab2d59f |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I'm a family doctor in Ontario, Canada. In her 60s now, my patient has always been warmhearted since I started seeing her 20 years ago. I see her every 2 or 3 weeks or so when I visit the local library, where she works. She also volunteers around town. In Nov. 2018, I first asked my secretary to call her to schedule an appointment to discuss results from her blood test in Oct. 2018. Without breaching her privacy, suffice to say that there's nothing alarming, but some results are unhealthy like a tad high LDL cholesterol, low HDL cholesterol. Yet after at least 7 tries on the telephone by my secretary, she either postpones the appointment, or schedules but then cancels, alleging that she's busy. Whenever I see her at the library, I tenderly remind her, but she doesn't act. Thus I'm baffled. My view is that no convincing reason explains her procrastination and non compliance.<|ASPECTS|>non compliance, warmhearted, volunteers, procrastination, blood test, postpones, cancels, schedules, results, busy, privacy, family doctor, unhealthy<|CONCLUSION|>
| There's no practical reason why my patient would keep postponing my request to see her, about her blood test results.
| 5b2e8c23-3ecd-4b1f-914c-b288d857845d |
<|TOPIC|>the European Union should lift its ban on member states selling arms to China<|ARGUMENT|>Even if it was in Europe's interest to sell arms to China, the damage from upsetting the United States by lifting the arms ban would be much greater. This is partly because America takes the human rights situation in China more seriously, but mostly because the USA has a major commitment to the freedom of Taiwan. If China did attack the island, America would almost certainly intervene. As the US State Department has said in relation to lifting the ban, "We don't want to see a situation where American forces face European technologies."1 Congress has already threatened to restrict technology transfers to Europe if the ban is removed.2 For fear of this, BAE Systems, one of Europe's largest defence firms, has said that it would not sell to China even if the ban was lifted.3 1 Brinkley, Joel, ‘Rice Sounds a Theme in Visit to Beijing Protestant Church’, 2005. 2 Archick, Kristin, et al., ‘European Union’s Arms Embargo on China’, 2005, p34-5. 3 Evans, Michael et al., ‘British arms firms will spurn China if embargo ends’, 2005. <|ASPECTS|>restrict, freedom of taiwan, technology transfers, sell, america, arms embargo, spurn china, damage from upsetting the united states, intervene, embargo, european technologies, human rights situation<|CONCLUSION|>
| Lifting the ban will damage relations with the U.S.
| d59202b4-af8f-461d-ba80-afdf975597cd |
<|TOPIC|>Should Progressive Web Apps Replace Mobile Apps?<|ARGUMENT|>PWA download sites thus do not benefit from organic, daily traffic present within an app store setting.<|ASPECTS|>organic, daily traffic<|CONCLUSION|>
| There is no central location to find PWAs, like app stores.
| f21bfc8a-34e6-482c-bf50-a1ad87184507 |
<|TOPIC|>Do more life challenges make a person resilient?<|ARGUMENT|>Different obstacles challenge different parts of a person's personality. Multiple challenges can thus create a well rounded person who has had to learn to recover from and adapt to all sorts of problems.<|ASPECTS|>multiple challenges, recover, problems, obstacles, adapt<|CONCLUSION|>
| With multiple challenges over time, a person learns from experience.
| 026e75bb-8cf6-4969-a8e8-2f4cb27fee17 |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I should clarify that I don't think income inequality is an issue by itself. Some of the possible causes of extreme income inequality, corruption, for example are an issue. But things like corruption lead to other problems as well, not just income inequality. Obviously, I stand fully against corruption, as do most people. With that clarification out of the way, I wanted to give a brief explanation as to why I don't think income inequality is the problem that many make it out to be. For one, wealth is created, it's not a fixed amount. Secondly, policies which attempt to lower income inequality often end up leaving everyone worse off. My third and final point is just because someone has billions more dollars than me doesn't mean that they stole it from me or anyone else. Unless corruption or exploitation is involved which are entirely different issues , then most likely that person became wealthy by selling a product or service which people find practical. <|ASPECTS|>fixed amount, corruption, wealth is created, stole, wealthy, problems, income inequality, billions more dollars, exploitation<|CONCLUSION|>
| Income inequality is not an issue.
| 5b942446-61f7-4eea-8e55-022c0e8ce589 |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I've been reading every book under the sun about prohibition. No matter what I've read , every book has come to the same conclusion in the end prohibition itself is more harmful than anything we could ever ban. Guns being a matter of debate. Prohibition only ever works if it's the culture , that is to say everyone's cool with it. But even then it results in a highly persecuted underclass . Preserving culture is a common argument I encounter, are there any merits to this? Is the extra fuel given to police forces worth it? Are the jobs created worth it? Do the costs justify the results? I ask these questions because no thought should ever go unchallenged. Obviously my focus is on drugs, as drugs are an easy scapegoat for enactment of prohibition. This discussion is not limited to the prohibition of drugs per se, but the idea of prohibition itself.<|ASPECTS|>prohibition, debate, guns, jobs created, culture, harmful, costs, highly, persecuted underclass, justify, worth, extra, cool, easy scapegoat, thought, prohibition of drugs, fuel, preserving culture, drugs, unchallenged<|CONCLUSION|>
| prohibition is a complete waste.
| 403a30bb-c903-44a7-ad6c-5873c88f4291 |
<|TOPIC|>Should Judges be Elected or Appointed?<|ARGUMENT|>Minority judges in the US are less likely than white judges to dismiss civil rights discrimination cases pg. 344<|ASPECTS|>dismiss, civil rights discrimination cases<|CONCLUSION|>
| Judges from different backgrounds make decisions differently, thus it is important that our judiciary are diversely representative.
| 25cfdee8-c814-4c03-93bb-351dfba5e629 |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>After making a rather messy post, and on the advice of another user, I'm going to make a more focused one instead. I think the State has no business regulating how people live their lives. I am, essentially, a philosophical anarchist in that I believe the State has no moral legitimacy, and thus lacks the right to command people. Trying to leave economics aside the only job of the State is to protect people's rights. It has no business in laws which restrict an individual's freedom, particularly when it comes to voluntary contracts. The best example of this is probably marriage. The State simply doesn't have the right to take away the liberties of a man to marry another man, or two women, or several men and women all together. Economics will always become involved in this, since running a business is a massive part of somebody's life, but I'd like to focus on the social dimension to this. Reading Friedrich Nietzsche greatly influenced me, as he states that the solution to existential problems lies in individuals, not in politics. I still feel that was mismatch, so let me give a point of focus The State has no moral authority. It only needs to stop coercion so things like assault, rape, vandalism, theft and has no right to itself coerce except in the defence of such rights. Laws on marriage, prostitution, treatment of animals, labour unions et cetera, shouldn't exist. The focal point here is that the State has no grounds to regulate voluntary conduct, or promote a set of moral rules I hope that's a bit clearer.<|ASPECTS|>liberties, rights, protect, messy, social dimension, coerce, existential problems, moral rules, mismatch, people 's rights, voluntary contracts, treatment of animals, coercion, regulating, economics, moral authority, moral legitimacy, freedom, laws, marriage, labour, vandalism, right, regulate voluntary conduct, live, right to command people, individual 's, focused, right to take, individuals, lives, prostitution<|CONCLUSION|>
| The State should be reduced in size, and not be involved in people's lives
| 703f9236-4392-441e-9b34-2642e6397f59 |
<|TOPIC|>Should LGBTQ+ Campaigning Use The Narrative That LGBTQ+ People Are 'Born This Way'?<|ARGUMENT|>For individuals with queerphobic families or communities, it is often important to be able to convince them of the validity of their identity in order to be able to live their lives free from fear and discomfort.<|ASPECTS|>identity, discomfort, fear, validity<|CONCLUSION|>
| The 'Born This Way' narrative appeals to individuals and groups who might otherwise be skeptical of, or hostile to, LGBTQ+ rights.
| 51691a90-91f7-4019-a475-a3d332b343a2 |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Definition of High Speed Rail HSR henceforth Ontario's government confesses that Canada is the only G8 country without a high speed rail system and define s high speed rail as a system as a rail system that operates at or above 250 km h on dedicated tracks or at 200 km h on existing tracks. I use their definition. I chose 2028 to limit the timeframe Canada has pussyfooted long enough. Canada's fastest train is VIA Rail's P42 DC whose maximum is 177 km h. But this is irrelevant, as VIA Rail trains never remain at full speed for long, as speed's limited by shoddy railway used by freight trains. Comparators Canadians appear untroubled about HSR, which may explain the lack of funding and will, but this apathy appears irrational as they care about exorbitant airfares which'd be lowered by HSR e.g. Toronto ↔ Montréal ↔ Ville de Québec, and Toronto ↔ Ottawa . I've become too cynical to believe that HSR will happen, when non G8 countries already have HSR beneath Japan's first Shinankansen in 1961 Czechslovakia's ČD operates the Railjet at 230 km h. Portugal's CP operates the Alfa Pendular at 220 km h. Now retired, Japan's first Shinkansen launched in 1964, at 210 km h So this 1964 train already outplayed and outran VIA Rail's 2018 trains. Poland's PKP Intercity operates the ED250 at 200 km h.<|ASPECTS|>limit, speed, apathy appears, g8, pussyfooted, shoddy railway, exorbitant airfares, timeframe, hsr, funding, untroubled<|CONCLUSION|>
| By 2028, Canada will still lack High-speed Rail.
| b90959a5-c602-40dd-aa65-6db557cd7756 |
<|TOPIC|>Students Keep "No Platforming" Contentious Speakers. Should They Stop?<|ARGUMENT|>It should be used much more judiciously than it is, but should not be abandoned altogether. Advocates for positions that are outside the Western democratic consensus speaking at Western universities makes about as much sense as flat Earth theorists lecturing in astronomy class. There is plenty of room for vigorous debate within our intellectual tradition, but advocates for things like white supremacy do not qualify.<|ASPECTS|>vigorous debate, flat earth, judiciously, abandoned, democratic consensus, white supremacy<|CONCLUSION|>
| Universities should function as models for civic and civil discourse. Ideas which fall outside of the norms of proper civil discourse should be excluded from it.
| 6aeaf6e0-8092-4efd-8b19-d008b66dcf72 |
<|TOPIC|>Capital Punishment<|ARGUMENT|>If and when discrimination occurs, it should be corrected. Consistent application of the death penalty against murderers of all races, and in cases where the victims were of all races, would abolish the idea that it can be a racist tool. This could be done by making it mandatory in all capital cases.<|ASPECTS|>discrimination, mandatory, death penalty, racist tool<|CONCLUSION|>
| If and when discrimination occurs, it should be corrected. Consistent application of the death pena...
| 713cf742-894d-4b8e-8212-89e8db99c7d4 |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I've been seeing a lot of hate on Scientology lately, and let me preface, I am not a scientologist, I have no interest to become one, and I have no strong feelings on any religion or lack of religion that are important for this . As well, just saying Well its ridiculous because Xenu and aliens and volcanoes and how would e meters ever work and spirits and science fiction author, you've got to be kidding me is not a viable counter argument, its a religion. Its important to people because they believe in it, it doesn't matter how silly it sounds to an individual, it doesn't mean anything in the larger scope. Especially with Beck getting awards, seems like all I see is Well I can't like him anymore now that I know hes a scientologist . I have a vague knowledge of some of the more unlawful things the group does, but this seems about on par with bad things other groups do. We know theres Islamic terrorism, we know that there are militant Christians that do terrible things, and while there are probably some bad members in Scientology, they don't really seem that bad. They've donated to loads of charities, and generally Scientology organizitons are pretty good about helping out their community and many members, such as Beck, are simply second generation Scientologists. Its been in their lives but its never dominated their lives. They were never brainwashed into believing in it, they just want to. EDIT I appreciate all the detailed comments. And I'd say im about half changed. More or less, I think I just have a different view, but not entirely flipped. I really do think theres a divide in Scientology. A seedy underground part of it filled with people who got a lot of power and money from the organization and now are running rampant with it, and the more modest part. I still don't think celebrities in it are worse people. In fact, I think the average joe in it is still a fine and dandy guy. I think that a majority of Scientologists are as good of people as anyone else. Though there is and I think most of the worst events more than a decade in the past kind of a dark part of the organization whos views aren't intentionally evil, just kind of stupid enough where it ends up being fairly terrible to their own members on occasion.<|ASPECTS|>different view, underground, bad things, want, believing, donated, scientologist, scientology, brainwashed, second generation, fine and dandy guy, hate, lack, intentionally evil, militant christians, dominated their lives, unlawful, islamic terrorism, organizitons, celebrities, worse people, charities, believe, power and money, terrible, half, bad members, flipped, helping out their community, divide, religion, changed, detailed comments, good of people<|CONCLUSION|>
| Scientology is not that bad, and is on par with any other religion more or less
| 24cc6e1a-de6d-41a8-a5c3-196527f6f5e4 |
<|TOPIC|>Should schools have more security?<|ARGUMENT|>Paying for all those guards, CCTV, biometrics, etc., would cost billions and prove to be completely ineffective. Enacting sane and sensible gun control legislation would be better.<|ASPECTS|>cost billions, gun control legislation, ineffective<|CONCLUSION|>
| Suggesting that schools should have more security, mainly to prevent shootings, is only a tactic to avoid gun reforms.
| 94e550db-52fb-4345-9b6d-e249afa5a2b9 |
<|TOPIC|>Are gender and sex the same thing?<|ARGUMENT|>According to the Williams Institute, in 2016 approximately 0.6 percent of adults in the United States identified as transgender. This translates to just over 1.3 million adults.<|ASPECTS|>transgender, adults<|CONCLUSION|>
| Not everyone's gender identity, expression or behavior conforms to that typically associated with the sex to which they were assigned at birth.
| acbb7bcf-95f8-41f8-947f-430f66697c79 |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>ANSWERED I HAVE CHANGED MY VIEW. FEEL FREE TO READ THE COMMENTS TO SEE WHY Take my data, idgaf. I've never posted my address or anything like that, I know basic e safety. So what's the deal? Hell, they could be tracking my transactions, all they would know is that I like video games, so what. If they read every word I have written online, people would only ever know my political stance and which sites I frequent. Targeted ads benefit me anyway. I don't want to know about washing machines, I'd much rather see ads for new releases or gadgets or something. So let's say someone has my address and knows my taste in music. What the hell are they going to do with that information. Sell it, sure, but that doesn't harm me. Nobody's gonna send a hitman. There's definitely a 'if you have nothing to hide' mentality to justify it, which isn't quite true, but also Yeah. If you can find out where the terrorists live good for you. If you want to know where some guy on Reddit lives there's no reason. I'm not disregarding that personal data can do some damage if you say too much or do have something to hide, so to speak. And maybe people value privacy. But if a lack of privacy can only touch you with targeted ads, I don't know what the fuss is about. Please do prove me wrong, I always like to understand topics better. Edit someone got a delta for saying that personal data can enable people especially employees to discriminate. Also, now that I think about it, selective censorship could occur. The question is still open though despite illegal and obviously immoral practices, is personal data any threat?<|ASPECTS|>video games, , hide, harm, washing machines, targeted ads, understand topics, threat, lack, hitman, basic e safety, gadgets, privacy, personal data, immoral, tracking my transactions, damage, new, discriminate, like, terrorists live good, ads, benefit, taste in music, value privacy, lives, changed, selective censorship, political stance<|CONCLUSION|>
| Companies having my personal data is not a big deal
| 13495015-d174-447d-8bbb-79732100f42f |
<|TOPIC|>Cruel and Unusual: Should Capital Punishment Hurt?<|ARGUMENT|>It seems that the additional step in making the execution painful would not be a particularly difficult task for the current executioners.<|ASPECTS|>execution<|CONCLUSION|>
| A small number of executions does not require employing new people. Current executioners or correction officers can fulfill that task.
| e20cc97c-6efe-4e3a-bd36-17421b869239 |
<|TOPIC|>Google is treasonous for having an AI research lab in China Peter Thiel's claim<|ARGUMENT|>Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin has stated that he met with Pichai to discuss the Google's work in China. After the meeting, Mnuchin said he has no security concerns about Google's work in the country.<|ASPECTS|>security concerns<|CONCLUSION|>
| Google has stated that its artificial intelligence tools can not be used for deadly weapons.
| 51a54b2c-a66e-43a0-baa5-aad7820685b2 |
<|TOPIC|>Should short-term apartment leasing services such as Airbnb be prohibited in New York City?<|ARGUMENT|>Financial penalties should be reserved for things like tax evasion or parking illegally in a clear zone thereby blocking traffic, causing congestion and making it difficult to live in the city.<|ASPECTS|>financial penalties, congestion, illegally, tax evasion, zone, blocking traffic<|CONCLUSION|>
| The purpose of fines is to compensate the community for the harm suffered. In this case, there is no harm suffered by listings.
| 646c1ec9-d35a-4286-99cd-45bd84ee165d |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>EDIT I think I'm giving the impression I'm miserable and have no friends Just as a disclaimer, I do have a good social life and plenty of friends, it's just felt like things would have been a lot easier and different had I drunk like others my age. I'd really like this to be proven wrong and have come here for help. Growing up I was never really exposed to alcohol and because of a family related event I'd rather not get into during jr year of high school I never wanted to go near a drink in my life. Although I've tried a few here and there since starting college, I still stick to my decision overall. I make this point because growing up in high school I have lost many friends because I refused to drink. They would get insulted and upset when they found out and soon they would stop inviting me to events and talking to me less until our friendship degraded to small talk in school. The few parties I went to were miserable being the only sober one and by the end of the year the only friends I had in school was a group that went lighter on drinking and didn't mind me hanging out when they weren't drinking. If it wasn't for my long distance friends I think I'd have gone mad by graduation. When college rolled around I tried turning a new leaf and gave drinking a chance. The second night there I was invited to a party with some people I met and tried to drink but couldn't even get a single beer down thanks to my lack of experience. The group I was with basically had a are you kidding me reaction and by next week none of them were talking to me. Soon I was back to hating alcohol and didn't want any no matter how many parties I went to. As the semester went on every time it felt like I was warming up with someone or a new group of people the deal breaker was always when they invited me to get hammered with them I either declined or showed up and didn't drink and afterwards we'd always drift apart. By the end of the semester I'd only made about 3 friends, my room mate and some people I'd chat with in class. I was in a few clubs too which was fun but the same thing happened, outside of the club no one would hang out unless drinking was involved. I wish I was exaggerating this but it felt like EVERYONE drank I've since transferred to a new school better for my desired career and it's not as bad here. My good friend since middle school goes here and we've been getting along. He has a liver condition and can't drink either so it was much easier fitting into his group of friends. Before you tell me he can do it so can I, just know that I have social anxiety and he doesn't. The SA combined with not wanting to drink makes my whole situation even worse. Even with the new friends I'm making it's the same thing. They want to hang out with me but only if we drink and it's stressing me out just like last time. I know very well that it's possible to make friends and socialize without drinking and I'm not claiming my life is a social mess. It just feels like those have all been miracles and about 99 of the schools population has been checked off as potential friends. Right now I see life without drinking as hardcore mode on your social life, please change my view 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|>, degraded, turning, reaction, along, everyone, hardcore mode, small talk, remind, friends, situation, hating alcohol, popular topics, lack, schools population, new leaf, warming, mad, decision overall, drinking, experience, deal, refused, drinking a chance, socialize without, concerns, family, easier, sober, effective, downvotes, insulted and upset, happy cmving, desired career, liver condition, stressing me, friendship, social mess, hang, social anxiety, chat, help, potential friends, change, message us, downvote, life without, social life, drift apart, proven wrong, exposed to alcohol, graduation, questions, miserable, different, long, lost many friends<|CONCLUSION|>
| It is ridiculously harder to socialize in life if you don't drink alcohol
| 272a7fa2-e6b6-4201-bc8f-855849acdfe2 |
<|TOPIC|>Capital Punishment<|ARGUMENT|>Some criminals are beyond rehabilitation; it may be that capital punishment should be reserved for serial killers, terrorists, murderers of policemen and so on.<|ASPECTS|>capital punishment, serial killers<|CONCLUSION|>
| Some criminals are beyond rehabilitation; it may be that capital punishment should be reserved for ...
| b81b33db-7ae0-4c83-abbe-e734f5b19b24 |
<|TOPIC|>Do all or most White Americans experience privilege?<|ARGUMENT|>There is a presumption towards Black Americans that they are criminals This is especially applicable towards young black men<|ASPECTS|>criminals<|CONCLUSION|>
| There are also presumptions of guilt towards individuals of other races.
| fe3bf9ae-d250-43b1-af7c-617a5268fa13 |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I have a hard time taking people seriously who claim that homosexuals, women and black people are actually the ones who are the favored group in america. by pretty much any standard you can name, being a white straight male gives you every kind of advantage you could ask for. but these same very lucky people are claiming that in some bizarro fashion they are actually the ones that are being discriminated against and being victimized. I am seriously confused how anyone could be so out of touch with reality. thank you and God bless.<|ASPECTS|>, favored group, god bless, touch with reality, advantage, discriminated, victimized<|CONCLUSION|>
| Being born a white straight man is actually a pretty good deal.
| fe1d91e0-b576-41b9-9627-f8d6580cd533 |
<|TOPIC|>Should Felons be Allowed to Vote?<|ARGUMENT|>The practice of sodomy was outlawed throughout for many years and still is in some places. The governments of most developed nations have since realised that this was an immoral law and removed it even offering retrospective pardons in some cases. In this case, disobeying the original law was not necessarily wrong.<|ASPECTS|>immoral law, original law, disobeying, sodomy, outlawed<|CONCLUSION|>
| Following the law and obeying governmental authority are not inherently in the best interest of society.
| c9f5d4f7-f91d-45ee-9510-164f13b8b008 |
<|TOPIC|>Should Turkey be part of the European Union?<|ARGUMENT|>Different political interests have succeeded in having significant influence over the Turkish judicial system in recent decades ICJ, pg10<|ASPECTS|>political interests, system, influence<|CONCLUSION|>
| Turkey's judicial system is undermined and incompatible with EU standards.
| 9813f25c-3398-4597-96f8-9af849eaf1cf |
<|TOPIC|>Is Morality Objective?<|ARGUMENT|>There are scientific facts and phenomena that we know objectively exist, but we do not yet have the tools to measure or test. The current lack of human capacity does not change the objectivity of the facts.<|ASPECTS|>lack, human capacity, scientific facts and phenomena, objectivity of<|CONCLUSION|>
| The fact that morality is not empirically testable does not necessarily make it non-objective. For example, the facts of mathematics are not empirically testable, but they are still objective.
| 007a149c-9687-48f4-bb7e-55c7605f45bf |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>This isn't to say that Bebop should be without comic relief, I relish the gallows humor that the main cast gets up to, but Ed's comedy is such a shock to the system that I find it hard to view episodes she's in as anything but disjointed at the least and insufferable at most. The neo noir setting is the driving force of the show IMO, and the three main characters reflect that perfectly, but you just can't round out a cast of a Disgruntled Loner, a Femme Fatale, and a Down and Out Ex Cop with a Deranged Happy Go Lucky Hacker Kid and expect a consistent tone. It's just too upbeat and sugary whenever she's onscreen, and the rest of the show suffers for it. It's sad, because the writers obviously have proved that they can do weird, crazy characters and not sacrifice the mood, like Punch and Judy and Pierrot le Fou, but Ed was ultimately a misstep that costs the show in the long run.<|ASPECTS|>suffers, upbeat, consistent tone, costs, insufferable, disjointed, crazy characters, weird, sugary, neo, gallows humor, comic relief, sacrifice the mood<|CONCLUSION|>
| Ed is annoying, uninteresting, and ruins the noir feel of Cowboy Bebop
| db2b2211-267a-4cc7-a752-4225eaab9120 |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I used to think evils were only committed due to ignorance, apathetic selfishness, or for the greater good, but I often see people being not just passively rude or insulting to others, and not just causing hurt in the course of serving their own wishes, but literally going out of their way to be rude and insulting to others and try to hurt their feelings. Selfish apathy could drive you to be very inconsiderate of others, but I don't see how it would make people make fun of others for being ill or handicapped, hurl insults at strangers in the street, literally spit at people they deem to be lower than themselves, etc. I could begin to understand it if it was done for reasons of sadism and enjoying watching others suffer, but many of these people will be angered and not the least bit humoured by signs that their victim is suffering, so they don't even seem to get enjoyment out of it. I cannot for the life of me understand why people do this. I know people I would consider to be truly good people, and more people I would consider to be decent, and I have never once seen any of them act this way, but it seems to me that an alarmingly large amount of people will do this. They do not seem to be causing pain for selfish reasons, they really seem to just prefer that others are suffering. I would love to believe differently. I am trying to get a healthier view of humanity to be less frustrated and sad but then I get reminded when somebody makes fun of me in the street for struggling to walk am currently retraining after severe illness robbed me of almost all of my strength and it just becomes hard to believe in the goodness of humanity.<|ASPECTS|>frustrated, handicapped, pain, goodness of humanity, believe differently, selfish apathy, decent, understand, illness, sadism, ignorance, apathetic selfishness, causing, ill, inconsiderate of others, good people, strength, sad, healthier, evils, hurt their feelings, suffering, enjoyment, humanity, rude, selfish, causing hurt<|CONCLUSION|>
| Selfless evil is not just real but very common
| 78d66385-e132-44ac-be5c-27d76a9147a2 |
<|TOPIC|>Should people have the right and means to end their lives?<|ARGUMENT|>Bringing this decision into public knowledge, gives society and family the ability to turn-around the decision. In the end, suicide levels might be reduced.<|ASPECTS|>turn-around the decision, suicide levels<|CONCLUSION|>
| Having a right to die brings about benefits for individuals as well as their families.
| 920cfff9-c103-4553-9352-dab16b59f19f |
<|TOPIC|>Is social media helping or harming human relationship?<|ARGUMENT|>We're addicted to social media. It's like tasting sugar, and losing your taste for natural fruit. We get a rush from the heighten "social" interaction, and lose interest in real social relationships.<|ASPECTS|>natural fruit, addicted to social media, social, social relationships, tasting sugar, taste<|CONCLUSION|>
| Our face to face relationships suffer because of social media.
| de6b0b1f-a31e-4df3-9176-15a0249c8690 |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>This is a fairly new idea that I've formed over a month or so, so I'm guessing it has some deep flaws. Maybe it's a minor one, maybe it's a major one, and it seems like this is a good place to ask. I'm also new to this subreddit, so do tell me if I'm violating any written or implicit rules. It is not my intention to violate them, and I read the rules but I'm not 100 confident I'm doing this right. My view I think rights and freedoms are a concept that's abused when people want something. Every single freedom or right by nature, must limit someone else's freedom or right. Let's take one of the most widely accepted right, right to life. This right would mean that we're limiting people's freedom to kill others. Now, I think in this case it is justified I'm a utilitarian, if that helps understanding my position , since being able to live without a constant threat of death is more important than being able to kill other people without consequences. There's also right to own slaves which I disagree with , which limits the freedom of slaves. On the other hand, freedom of slaves limit the right to own slaves. For more controversial freedom right, legalizing same sex marriage or banning the ban on it means more rights freedoms for gay couples, but it also means people who believe homosexuality to be morally wrong can't legally deny service. I think these examples support my idea well, but I can't prove a positive through examples, since there always may be other cases I have not yet considered that can prove my idea wrong. Thank you for reading, and for your insightful comments. EDIT1 I officially retract freedom to kill argument, since pretty much no society has ever granted such a right to general population. Even for supporters of inalienable rights, I think it's reasonable to assume they don't endorse murder as an inalienable right. <|ASPECTS|>wrong, freedom to kill argument, minor, consequences, general population, written, right to life, limit, kill others, limiting, accepted right, violating, freedom of slaves, right to own slaves, deep flaws, freedom, abused, endorse, 's, deny service, insightful comments, right, morally wrong, inalienable right, freedom right, kill other people, rights freedoms, rights and freedoms, threat of death, violate, utilitarian, inalienable rights, rules<|CONCLUSION|>
| Rights/freedoms by nature limit rights/freedoms of others.
| 4a76fa1e-7835-46fb-b107-cd541b4ba7c2 |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>These two sources sum up my arguments pretty well We can impeach him right now, video Impeach Donald Trump Now Here's some of the important stuff He violates the emoluments clause pretty much every day. Which is unconstitutional and an impeachable offense. Examples “For example, the Trump Organization has licensing deals with two Trump Towers in Istanbul, and has received up to 10 million from developers since 2014. 1 President Trump admitted recently that “I have a little conflict of interest, because I have a major, major building in Istanbul.” 2 ” “A recent legal analysis by Prof. Laurence Tribe of Harvard Law School, Ambassador ret. Norman Eisen former chief ethics counsel to President Barack Obama , and Professor Richard Painter former chief ethics counsel to President George W. Bush concluded that Mr. Trump would be violating the foreign emoluments ban from the moment he took office, due to “a steady stream of monetary and other benefits from foreign powers and their agents” deriving from his existing business arrangements. 5 As a result, since he did not divest his business operations before inauguration, he has been violating the Foreign Emoluments Clause since the moment he took office. 6 ” Examples of existing business arrangements that constitute violations of the Foreign Emoluments Clause include Trump’s business partner in Trump Tower Century City Manila, Philippines is Century Properties. Trump is not the developer he has a brand licensing contract. The head of Century Properties is Jose Antonio, who was just named special envoy to the United States by the president of the Philippines. 7 Payments from a company owned by a foreign government official are foreign emoluments. China’s state owned Industrial and Commercial Bank of China is the largest tenant in Trump Tower. It is also a major lender to Trump. 8 Both its regular rent payments, and its ongoing extension of credit, are foreign emoluments. Foreign diplomats have already begun shifting their D.C. hotel and event reservations to Trump International Hotel, to curry favor or at least avoid insulting the president. 9 Indeed, the Embassy of Kuwait was reportedly pressured by the Trump Organization to change an existing reservation and reschedule the event at the Trump International. 10 Payments by foreign diplomats for lodging, meeting space, or food at the hotel are foreign emoluments. Violating the stock act as well? The STOCK Act is one of the few federal ethics statutes that specifically includes the President. Among other provisions, it prohibits the President from 1 using nonpublic information for private profit, and from 2 intentionally influencing an employment decision or practice of a private entity solely on the basis of partisan political affiliation. 17 This explains why he can be impeached. Now here's why he should be Incompetent Not qualified this is obvious Do we really want the most powerful man in the world to be a dumbass? Mike Pence can also be impeached Russian ties , so the argument that Trump will have an equally bad replacement, fails. Then we would have Paul Ryan as president, which is not ideal, but it's better than two crooks. Criminals whether or not a court has convicted them should not be president. EDIT So far, not many arguments are actually arguing against what I'm advocating for, they're just sort of trimming the edges. I'm open minded about changing my view, but I haven't seen any persuasive arguments at all. <|ASPECTS|>lender, stock act, private profit, trimming the edges, crooks, dumbass, licensing deals, credit, view, benefits, monetary, conflict of interest, bad replacement, persuasive arguments, payments, powerful man, violates, impeached, emoluments clause, reschedule, major, impeach, partisan political affiliation, violating, reservation, two, divest, operations, business arrangements, curry favor, convicted, incompetent, foreign emoluments clause, unconstitutional, insulting the president, brand licensing contract, rent payments, nonpublic information, criminals, president, employment decision, changing, better, impeachable offense, foreign emoluments, avoid, russian ties, reservations, ethics statutes<|CONCLUSION|>
| Donald Trump can and should be impeached.
| 84982535-419a-40c9-a516-5425148ef656 |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>The reason I say most of us is that I want to exclude those who live in food deserts and don’t have other options. For most of us this is not an issue and veganism can easily be achieved. Economy More than half of Scottish farms would have worked at a loss last year without subsidies The industry is not self sustaining, and is reliant on subsidies to function at this level. It is estimated that a Big Mac would cost 11 in America if you didn’t take meat subsidies into account. Going vegan means we can eat healthier as well as have more money to invest in different sectors. As I believe that animal products lead to a variety of diseases, going vegan would result in less hospital visits, surgeries and medication. These things cost us billions every year and can a lot of the time be avoided if we’re careful with what we’re consuming. Poor countries are selling their crops as feed for the livestock that is to be consumed by the rich. If we all went vegan, we’d already have enough plant based food for the global population Also, see Michael Gove’s aim to alter agricultural subsidies Environment The transportation of feed from country to country contributes massively to food miles and that isn’t even the final product. Although buying fruit from foreign countries isn’t eco friendly, it doesn’t hold a candle to the environmental impact of meat. The water use and emissions for meat, dairy and eggs are common knowledge The animal agriculture industry is worse than the transportation industry for emissions, and while beef is evidently the main culprit, it is definitely not alone. Morality Every single industry that uses animal products inflict pain on to the animals they are using. the gassing of pigs calves are boltgunned in the head as a result of their gender not being economically beneficial for the dairy industry, and chicks are macerated for the same reason This happens with free range animals, this happens in your country and even your local farm likely sends animals to the same slaughterhouse as the factories. Besides these particular atrocities, the idea of a miracle farm which would not be economically viable still uses animals as products. There is still pain, they are still stripped of their rights. Whether the farmer loves them or not is irrelevant, as what they do to them does not reflect love. I am not personally bashing farmers as the vast majority of them do not have the luxury of changing career paths at the drop of a hat. Health Antibiotics, faeces, pus, blood, mercury, microplastics, high amounts of sodium, cholesterol. Any animal product will have at least one of those in them and they all have negative health consequences I can’t say this for the pus and blood as I have no data, but I think the fact that it is pus and blood is enough for me to avoid it . Milk has casein, which when digested creates casomorphin. This is an opioid that makes all mammals crave be addicted to their mother’s milk so they return. When we drink milk and cheese, we feed a literal addiction. We do not have the same length small intestine as obligate carnivores and therefore cannot adequately process it. It can therefore putrify and result in colorectal cancer The Dieticians Association of Australia “With good planning, you can get all of the nutrients you need from a vegan diet to be healthy.” There is nothing naturally found in animal products that we need to survive or be perfectly healthy that is not present in plant based options. Many would say B12, but that is naturally found in soil and we don’t have the same levels now due to sterilisation, however it is present in a vegan diet through supplementation. If you think that supplementation is unhealthy, then you should know that we get B12 through meat as the livestock is injected with supplements. Change my mind<|ASPECTS|>, transportation, survive, rights, plant based food, pain, morality, b12 through meat, economically viable, money, opioid, meat, time be avoided, cholesterol, macerated, boltgunned, feed, meat subsidies, career paths, self sustaining, adequately, naturally found, food deserts, nutrients, negative, process, health, agricultural subsidies, less hospital visits, diseases, subsidies, economically beneficial, ’, cost 11, eco friendly, loss, putrify, atrocities, environmental impact, eat, water use, emissions, billions, options, farmers, stripped, food miles, exclude, literal addiction, healthier, unhealthy, colorectal cancer, healthy, selling, change, cost, casomorphin, changing, consumed, luxury, miracle farm, farmer, consuming, health consequences, loves, rich, poor, addicted, length small intestine, animals, vegan diet, b12, veganism, healthy., love<|CONCLUSION|>
| For economic, moral, environmental and health reasons, almost all of us should aim to go vegan
| 5ab4019f-6b7b-4719-b1fa-6c03f51087f4 |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Race does not exist in the way that we have thought of it since the early modern era. It's pseudo science, a social alchemy we came up with to classify humans scientifically . We're all essentially the same genetically and difference in appearance skin tone, eye shape, etc. are just that, superficial differences. I'm not saying this to get upboats, come off as smart and tolerant, or otherwise get a pat on the back. Its just a fact. If the world were really classified into categories as broad as asians or africans blacks then there would not be so many incidents of ethnic cleansing in the continents. If one were to try to classify swaths of people then culture is a better way to go about it. I probably would have far more in common with any black person in America then any Russian doppelganger I may have despite physical appearance. I don't think I have any obligation to buy into it anyways. I get shit for not believing in affirmative action, not liking that I have to mark my race on forms, etc. I'm accused of just treating people like they're white among other things. First off, how does one treat someone like they're white? Explain that and maybe I'll respond. I'm accused of just being secretly racist, which I don't know how to disprove. Just as I don't know how to disprove that I secretly believe that 9 11 was an inside job. It seems the person already has this idea of who I am and can't convince them otherwise.<|ASPECTS|>, inside job, eye shape, white, physical appearance, affirmative action, social alchemy, genetically, treat someone, idea of, difference in appearance, black, respond, pseudo science, scientifically, race, obligation, buy, mark my race, ethnic cleansing, treating people, tone, superficial differences, humans, racist, secretly, culture, smart and tolerant<|CONCLUSION|>
| Race doesn't exist, and I am not obligated to act as if it does
| 42ad2919-5835-404f-9be9-aa3630f6a771 |
<|TOPIC|>Is Morality Objective?<|ARGUMENT|>PD, or more specifically PD|k where k is our background knowledge, is raised significantly by other arguments for God's existence, as well as historical and anecdotal evidence.<|ASPECTS|>historical, anecdotal evidence, god 's existence<|CONCLUSION|>
| It's not obvious that PD << P¬D, at least to an extent relevant to this discussion.
| 2c588a71-e669-4a38-b0c8-6f63a2d22e3b |
<|TOPIC|>Did the US have to use nuclear weapons to achieve Japan's unconditional surrender?<|ARGUMENT|>In short, yes. Here's an interesting factoid: Half a million Purple Heart medals were produced for the Pentagon in anticipation of Operation Downfall q.v. - the conventional invasion of Japan planned for the autumn of 1945. That inventory is still servicing awards related to the current actions in Iraq and Afghanistan.historynewsnetwork.org<|ASPECTS|>servicing awards, invasion<|CONCLUSION|>
| Because an invasion of Japan would have resulted in many allied casualties, an early Japanese surrender was necessary.
| 0e0e7750-3ee0-48fe-b25b-eb7f00debecb |
<|TOPIC|>Hydroelectric dams<|ARGUMENT|>Sixty per cent of the length of the world's large river systems are at least moderately or severely fragmented by dams. In this context, there is not much more room for expanding hydroelectric power, particularly if we value keeping a portion of the world's rivers free of dams. This means that dam hydroelectricity cannot expand very much, and so should not be seen as a major part of new energy plans and solutions to global warming.4<|ASPECTS|>expanding hydroelectric power, global warming, rivers, expand, free of dams, room, fragmented<|CONCLUSION|>
| The world's rivers are covered with dams; room for expansion is limited.
| c7211446-7e22-4704-8fa0-aac20ae7163c |
<|TOPIC|>Does God Allow Evil: Is the Existence of God Compatible with the Existence of Evil?<|ARGUMENT|>A person who hears about a being so powerful that he can satisfy conditions that cannot be satisfied could have emotional, intellectual, and/or behavioral reactions that are meaningful experiences to that person. Even absurdity can invoke meaningful states of hope, awe, confusion, or wonder that motivate action.<|ASPECTS|>behavioral reactions, meaningful experiences, meaningful states<|CONCLUSION|>
| That a being can satisfy conditions that cannot be satisfied may be neither meaningless nor irrelevant to the being or to other beings. It would be both meaningful and relevant that a being could be so powerful that it was not constrained by logic.
| c25ab9ca-d50b-4449-b96c-e90b452b0f5f |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>A quick note before I begin Please note that at the time of this post I will be going to sleep and then I begin classes the next day so please do not get offended assume I have ignored your question if I do not answer soon. I will respond to questions comments as soon as I can But now on to the topic at hand To define, for those who need it a Double Jeopardy trying an individual for the same crime more than once I will begin by emphasizing that certain circumstances I refer to a fairly narrow set of circumstances. They include but are not limited to Cases involving the death of a minor or minors person s under the age of 18 I find this to be grounds for possible double jeopardy since when there are laws that protect minors statutory rape laws and laws 'targeting' minors drug alcohol rental laws , there should be laws requiring additional investigations. Cases in which the suspect has a record of the same or very similar charges even if acquitted . I do not think once a criminal, always a criminal. However I do think that a previous record can be a potential indicator. Note that same or very similar would be specifically defined in a law. For example, petty theft would NOT be same or very similar to auto theft. However accusations of same degree murder would be same or very similar. I cannot write regarding a comparison of EVERY law so feel free to ask how I would define a comparison. Cases in which additional evidence is found after the acquittal This one is the most important reason of them all, in my opinion. There exists a legal principle in which, after a person is found guilty, if new evidence arises that would have acquitted the suspect then the suspect is released. I do not quite understand why the opposite cannot be true. Imagine if you will this hypothetical scenario Person A is charged with the murder of Person B for discussion sake their age, gender, race, etc, do not matter . Person A is found 'not guilty' by a jury of his or her peers. 6 weeks later new evidence arises which puts Person A at the crime scene. But now, Person A cannot be charged again with the murder of Person B. If the legal principle is innocent until proven guilty then there should be some way to further enforce it. Keep in mind a not guilty verdict is not necessarily saying the person is innocent only that their guilt is not beyond reasonable doubt. Yet if evidence which, if it were there, would have made guilt beyond a reasonable doubt then such evidence should end up counting for something. I would like to add a few important clarifications to prevent misunderstanding of my views. The idea would NOT allow continuously trying to convict the same charge. As in perhaps remove double jeopardy but prevent triple jeopardy. This would NOT apply to infractions and possibly not even to misdemeanors but ONLY to felonies. Even then, not necessarily all felonies would qualify. In order to allow for a double jeopardy case to go to court, the appeal for it would first be required to be presented to three judges which must UNANIMOUSLY agree to be allowed to be heard. All three judges would be from the state in which the crime was committed. Each such case will only be permitted to be appealed ONCE. The approval or rejection of allowing the case to be heard a second time would be required to be given within 3 weeks of the appeal hearing. A possible but not required addendum is that one of the three panel judges will be the judge of the case. There would be some time period on this. I do not have a specific period in mind but if pressed I would say that the maximum time window to present the appeal would be two years. This concludes my present thoughts regarding my view on the permission of double jeopardy under a few circumstances. I look forward to hearing your views.<|ASPECTS|>legal principle, degree murder, death, record, crime, petty theft, previous, age, judge of the case, specifically defined, convict, rejection, potential indicator, guilty, time period, double jeopardy case, appealed, felonies, race, classes, criminal, views, acquitted, investigations, alcohol rental, prevent, comparison, suspect, evidence, rape, charged, double jeopardy, additional, law, ignored, continuously, circumstances, similar, misunderstanding, murder, remove, double, charge, gender, infractions, crime scene, misdemeanors, new evidence, auto theft, triple jeopardy, similar charges, guilt, time window, approval, opposite, innocent<|CONCLUSION|>
| I believe that under certain circumstances, double jeopardy should be acceptable.
| 59cecefc-3752-4de6-b537-9c4b40f5b317 |
<|TOPIC|>Should some teachers be armed?<|ARGUMENT|>Guns in the home are owned and operated by their parents, who children know they can trust generally.<|ASPECTS|>guns, owned and operated, trust<|CONCLUSION|>
| Being comfortable with guns in school is not comparable to being comfortable with guns in your home.
| 506a365a-36d8-4690-bddc-5079584eb247 |
<|TOPIC|>Global overpopulation is a myth.<|ARGUMENT|>Because of the interconnection of the modern age, overpopulation in one part of the world i.e. Africa can have a serious impact even on parts of the world that are under populated i.e. Europe. We've already begun to see this with the migrant crisis.<|ASPECTS|>impact, overpopulation, serious, migrant crisis<|CONCLUSION|>
| There is actually no global overpopulation, just an uneven distribution of populations and resources.
| 5b81abb4-cc01-4d22-b05c-139834f95819 |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>While I myself am no linguist by any means, I do get a little annoyed when people commit grammatical sacrelige. I usually keep these thoughts to myself. Other times, when somebody with less than perfect language speaks their mind, naysayers quickly draw their swords and lynch the perpetrator regardless of the contents of their argument, valid or not. So people with potentially insightful opinions who are sadly lacking in communication skills are shut down. I think that's a little silly. Besides, isn't a little rule breaking integral to language evolving? Surely in the hay days of early language people got tired of using two words to say something and instead decided to combine the words giving birth to the contraction Again, no linguist, just a thought and a little theory.<|ASPECTS|>annoyed, thoughts, silly, lynch, communication skills, naysayers, insightful opinions, rule breaking, language evolving, grammatical sacrelige<|CONCLUSION|>
| I think grammar/spelling errors aren't that important as long as the message gets across.
| b5bdcfc4-7ff4-43c7-b8b2-ea59691abf9f |
<|TOPIC|>Geothermal energy<|ARGUMENT|>"Geothermal resources may outlast the sun. There is enough thermal nuclear energy in our Earth to fuel the engines of civilization for billions of years.Beneath our feet we have more usable geothermal energy resources than oil, coal, gas, and mineable nuclear fuels combined."<|ASPECTS|>resources, engines of civilization, usable, fuel, geothermal energy resources, outlast the sun, thermal nuclear energy<|CONCLUSION|>
| Geothermal is one of the most abundant sources of energy
| 5f4d8cc2-f4a7-47b8-99ca-6f13c7f9cca9 |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Just like the title says, I think the United States and the world in general would be a better place if the ultra rich were required by law to utilize a percentage of their assets for public good. In the 1920's the upper crust was taxed up to 90 or so, and if they're unwilling to give their money to the inefficient government, why not make them spend it more efficiently themselves for services that benefit the masses directly? and not benefiting the masses by providing them with a shiny new thing that they can BUY, there shouldn't be any profiteering by the rich in this scenario . I am talking about a non trivial percentage of their wealth too, enough for them to remain catastrophically rich afterwards, but say 50 60 . Followup, is there any incentive that could compel the rich to do this? Edit syntax Edit 2 Cheers to everybody chipping in, you've all given me a lot to think about. I think for the moment u in cavediver has got me reconsidering the implications of my initial idea that I could consider my view changed. So I guess we can shut this baby down.<|ASPECTS|>incentive, ultra rich, compel, view changed, cheers, implications, inefficient government, profiteering by the rich, taxed, rich, shut this baby, public good, wealth, benefiting the masses, catastrophically rich, benefit the masses<|CONCLUSION|>
| The Ultrawealthy should be compelled by law to spend part significant parts of their money on public works.
| 6419545f-2297-4db0-ad6c-911beffd1295 |
<|TOPIC|>Was Barack Obama a good President?<|ARGUMENT|>The regulatory expansion introduced by the Dodd-Frank Act has disproportionately impacted smaller banks, thereby facilitating big banks to consolidate their market share.<|ASPECTS|>market share, regulatory expansion, impacted<|CONCLUSION|>
| Critics claim that the Dodd Frank Act is bad for the economy.
| 2c87b1b3-e612-418c-8c6c-f3332e5ba35d |
<|TOPIC|>Should Infant Circumcision Be Banned?<|ARGUMENT|>Altering the body and altering the mind of a child, based on a religious doctrine, can be seen by some as morally equivalent. If we condone one, we should also condone the other.<|ASPECTS|>mind, condone, morally equivalent<|CONCLUSION|>
| All parents pass on their beliefs to their children psychologically, whether intentionally or not. Circumcision is a minor matter in comparison.
| f391c1f6-a50e-4dc9-9225-fcdf490f97be |
<|TOPIC|>Should we worship a god that sends people to hell?<|ARGUMENT|>It is better for a world with more good than evil to exist than it is for that world not to exist. Therefore, a benevolent God would create any world with more good than evil.<|ASPECTS|>benevolent god, good than evil<|CONCLUSION|>
| A benevolent God might create not just one good world but all possible worlds that contain more good than evil.
| fab7d821-7b34-4ee4-8b9d-2c567d6b6a07 |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>So I’ve tried to segment my views into a few categories so that each can be approached more directly. 1 is sort of a contingency condition for child support, with 2 4 being my feelings more specifically about child support allotment and usages. I do not currently pay or receive child support, but I do have a child and am married. These are only observations from friends who either pay or receive child support, and my feeling on the overarching situation. 1 I believe that both parties should be able to back out of a pregnancy, given sufficient notice. If the mother wishes to abort, obviously she can overrule the father in that situation, but if she wishes to put up for adoption and deliver, the father should be able to claim custody and in doing so removes the mother from child support requirements. In the inverse if the father doesn’t want to keep the child, and in sufficient time notifies the mother, he should be able to relinquish custody and thereby child support payments. A potential argument of this stance is that, should the child starve or otherwise go without being provided for. My view on that is that it should be no different than if a parent were otherwise unavailable, either due to disappearance or death. If a single parent is unable to provide for a child, the child will likely be taken by the state. 2 Child support should be determined by custody and income, with an upper and lower limit. If custody is 50 50, and both parents make the same amount of money, no child support should be exchanged. As those numbers skew, so should the child support figure. Additionally, there should be an upper and lower limit to child support. For example, if one parent is making 10m year and the other parent makes works at Taco Bell, the child should not be expected to live like a millionaire with the parent working at Taco Bell. However in the case of marriage I believe alimony, which is a separate topic, should assist in covering the gap if there is a sudden lifestyle adjustment due to the divorce, and can see the argument being applied to children from a marriage accustomed to a certain lifestyle as well. This is also dependent upon the next stance. 3 Child support should be legally required for the use of the child only, and it should be considered at least misdemeanor theft to use it in any other way, depending on the total income. To continue the income disparity above, 10M year vs minimum wage, the child support should not be able to be used on things for the parent. I think there’s things that are gray areas, such as housing, in which an argument can be made that the parents housing benefits the child, and while I can see this being abused I believe it’s better than the alternative. I’m specifically against things like using it for frivolities like a Ferrari, or a vacation for the parent only. 4 Child support should have a continually adjusted computation, maybe each tax year or something like that, for incomes that could vary wildly. Examples of this is something like actors or athletes in which they may have a substantial income but for a short period of time. Making 10m year for 5 years, with the real chance of a career ending injury, is different than being a CEO making 10M year for the foreseeable future.<|ASPECTS|>death, continually adjusted computation, upper and lower limit, claim custody, disappearance, next stance, money, taken by the state, legally required, directly, misdemeanor theft, lifestyle, dependent, notice, lifestyle adjustment, frivolities, usages, child support, overrule the father, observations, incomes, child support figure, approached, contingency condition, income disparity, custody and income, gray areas, benefits the child, child support payments, career ending injury, live like a millionaire, abused, substantial, overarching situation, child support allotment, child starve, pay, child support requirements, back, income, better, vacation, segment my views, unavailable, unable, relinquish custody, vary, alternative<|CONCLUSION|>
| Child support should be based on income and custody, and usage outside of supporting the child should be a crime
| 4363e243-6dfc-465c-8fb7-5d1e63105136 |
<|TOPIC|>Free Speech on the Internet: Should Internet Companies Deny Service to White Supremacists?<|ARGUMENT|>The Daily Stormer's accessibility may be variable, but the salient point is that white supremacists are continuing to find ways to interact. For as long as they have any platform, anywhere on the Internet, their views cannot be successfully and consistently censored. It might even be impossible to truly censor any viewpoint from the public sphere once published online.<|ASPECTS|>censored, interact, censor, white supremacists, accessibility, viewpoint, views<|CONCLUSION|>
| The Daily Stormer can still be made accessible on the Dark Web and on mirror websites. If those of Alt-Right persuasion wish to find a platform, they will do so, and their followers will be shortly behind.
| b857186a-e207-4eec-b018-b6692c1bb165 |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>Hello, first I would like to preface that I'm not here to be an asshole about transgender issues, I really hope I don't come off that way in the post. But this issue has been bugging me for a long time. I've mulled about it and still cannot wrap my head around it, so I've come to see some other points of view regarding this. I'm especially interested in scientific explanations. I actually had a phase in high school where I wondered if I was transgender, and I did a ton of research about it. However with the recent waves of internet social justice, I've gotten extremely confused about the trend of pronouns and transgender issues and identities. x200B I'll explain my point of view after my initial research into transgender issues in high school, I came to the conclusion that there are some who are transexual, and some who are transgender. There are also some others such as agender, but this discussion will not cover beyond those two. Both fall into the umbrella of transgender. Transexuals are trans individuals who want to change their bodies physically to fit their mental identities. This is perfectly understandable, and I have a friend who went through this. It was quite saddening to see how depressed she got over her body, which she could not control. She ended up using medication to transition to a female body. This type of trans identity I can understand and also can see why it requires a label. x200B However, I cannot understand why some people call themselves transgender when they do not want to change their bodies. This does not include those who WANT to change their bodies, but cannot due to monetary issues or just fear of the surgery etc. I am referring to those that have no desire to. For example, they were born biologically female, present themselves as female, and have a relatively feminine personality. However, they prefer to call themselves he , and will enforce it somewhat aggressively. It almost feels like an arbitrary trend with no real scientific backing, similar to when people called themselves wolf kin etc. On one hand I don't want to be rude to the person and purposely misgender them, but on the other hand I feel like I'm part of a farce, and calling someone claiming to be a wolf kin a wolf or something. Sorry for the ridiculous comparison, I can't think of a better one atm. x200B There is also the case of self identified transgender individuals born female, who dress masculine, and have a masculine personality but do not want to transition their bodies. However, I can't seem to distinguish this from being a tomboy . If they do not want to change their body to that of a man and are ok with a female body, why do they consider themselves transgender? I understand that transgender also refers to beyond gender or in other words, beyond the gender binary and acting and feeling in ways that are not traditionally their biological gender. But is that not re enforcing gender roles about what a gender should be? Why must a woman be considered trans just because she does things or thinks in ways that are traditionally what men do? Why can this not just be considered as a female who is not held back by gender expectations and acts freely according to who she truly is? x200B One argument is that one simply feels that they are a certain gender internally, but is it really this arbitrary, especially when you do not want to change physically? How is this feeling different from how I felt different from other girls in high school? I had a very traditionally male way of thinking and acting. But in the end I was ok with my body, and was willing to do things that are outside of gender norms, such as wearing male clothing and having masculine hobbies. x200B Hopefully my stream of consciousness type writing can be understood to some extent, I'm interested in hearing different opinions on this topic. I appreciate if you took the time to read all the way here. x200B<|ASPECTS|>feminine personality, depressed, consciousness type, stream, gender expectations, scientific explanations, saddening, asshole, trans, research, gender binary, acting, identities, masculine personality, acts freely, agender, social justice, transition their bodies, change their bodies, transgender issues, arbitrary trend, body, gender norms, different opinions, change physically, female, thinking, monetary issues, biological gender, desire, medication, female body, time to read, transition, felt different, fear of the surgery, tomboy, transgender, gender roles, gender, change their body, scientific backing, trans identity, ok, gender internally, transexual, label, bugging, mental identities, wolf, rude, feeling different, better, masculine hobbies, misgender, traditionally male way, arbitrary, transexuals<|CONCLUSION|>
| transgender has become an arbitrary term that can enforce gender roles when the individual does not want to transition their body physically
| b4beedfc-c0ab-42fb-b7b0-c60795fedb47 |
<|TOPIC|>Is Antifa good or bad?<|ARGUMENT|>Eco also describes this machismo as a disdain for nonstandard sexual habits, like that of Dave Rubin who is himself a homosexual male who is flagged by Antifa as being a fascist<|ASPECTS|>nonstandard sexual habits, machismo<|CONCLUSION|>
| 12. Machismo. The fact this tenant only allows for men to be fascists is sexist. Sexism would violate #5 it becomes self-defeating logic.
| a2399be1-efb2-426b-a22e-e2408add07ab |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>This is assuming the perpetrator is responsible for the crime, not framed or anything, and that they only wanted to kill for monetary gain, psychopathic desire or personal hatred. x200B From what I've seen the global trend seems to be heading to more lenient punishments from crime such as intentional murder to only garner 10 20 years of jail and for unintentional but negligent manslaughter to garner around 5 years, max in most developed, progressive countries and is slowly becoming the standard for the rest of the world, given a few decades or a century. x200B now i know that most First World countries that have these types of laws generally have very few murders, but it is still murder and it should be punished accordingly. x200B It just seems unfair that when a person takes a life of another person, they still have the chance to live a life although not as good, compared to non Murderers that the victim couldn't have. They should be punished with life imprisonment for retribution, w parole only after 40 years. This should be the base standard, not the maximum punishment. x200B x200B<|ASPECTS|>negligent manslaughter, another, retribution, murders, chance to live a life, intentional murder, maximum, monetary gain, psychopathic desire, punishment, life imprisonment, murder, parole, life, punished, lenient punishments, personal hatred, base standard<|CONCLUSION|>
| I think intentional murder with the intent to cause harm to another human, not for self-defense but just a desire to kill should garner a life imprisonment sentence.
| 3851a898-5209-4e19-9582-bcda1272d28c |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>The main point of my argument is that as personal profit is the goal of capitalism, those who profit the most will consequently control more. Those who control more, based on the success of their initiative in business, now decide where the money goes worker pay, production, etc. In this way a minority those who were successful in entrepreneurship control the economy more than any common worker, thus, centralization of the economy occurs, despite it being non governmental. Economy referring not only to money but resources as well. This, I propose is communism in disguise, as the 1 own most of the economy. Edit Communism a totalitarian system of government in which a single authoritarian party controls state owned means of production. The only part I dislike in this definition is government, as I think it is a limited view of communism. Capitalism an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.<|ASPECTS|>controlled, production, view, money, government, centralization, personal profit, control the economy, authoritarian party, capitalism, resources, economy, non, profit, economic and political system, control, totalitarian system of government, money goes, controls, pay, entrepreneurship, communism, private owners, state owned means of production<|CONCLUSION|>
| Pure Capitalism results in concealed Communism
| 76a8078e-96cb-4f56-8857-f947e9e64f16 |
<|TOPIC|>Has Social Media Been Good For Humanity?<|ARGUMENT|>Humans tend to overuse social media to fight boredom and loneliness instead of finding something educational and/or fulfilling.<|ASPECTS|>overuse social media<|CONCLUSION|>
| Humans spend too long on social media, at the expense of other more valuable activities.
| 9df69825-53aa-43f0-b772-54c1b84803a4 |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I cannot say that the Armed Forces is an example of Communism, as Communism calls for the elimination of classes, within the Armed Forces there is a class system in place of Enlisted Officers. Communism, according to Marx, also calls for a revolution against the owners of the means of production the bourgeoisie which is not the point I wish to make. Most would agree that the Active Duty Armed Forces are a necessity in promoting national defense. The Armed Forces are overseen by the government, which measures their success on how well trained Service Members are at being ready to defend secure whatever goal is set by the government. In order to meet this goal, the government has created an environment pledging for Service Members to support one another no matter what. No one gets left behind. those in the Army, think about the Soldier's Creed. Also, wasn't the Army slogan 'Army of One' a few years ago? Additionally, every Service Member, including their families, gets government provided housing, health care, and even government clothing food. Oh, discounted or free college tuition. What I find interesting is the fact that the Armed Forces moves in the direction that everyone is supposed to share in the wealth that they create. However, the phrase From each according to their ability, to each according to their need, really starts to hit home when you look at individual cases of Service Members. An E4 shows great ability in completing their job compared to other E4s Awesome, all E4s will get paid the same amount. The amount of tax dollars spent on an E4 who is healthy, single, without any dependents will be less compared to the E4 who has 30 disability, on their second marriage with four dependents. As long as all these E4 examples are doing the bare minimum, which is oftentimes the standard in the Armed Forces, they will not get fired or demoted. What is the motivation for an E4 to work harder if all his basic living needs are met? Well he would get a promotion, therefore a higher wage. True but with that promotion comes more responsibility of tasks responsibility of other's actions which can reinforce the whole bare minimum standard being met all over again. There are many other examples I could look to, but my main view is this Any branch of the Armed Forces creates the environment of socialism for their Service members.<|ASPECTS|>success, basic living needs, ability, completing their job, health care, national defense, members, promotion, necessity, elimination of classes, one, disability, higher wage, class system, free college tuition, wealth, promoting, bare, service members, socialism, standard, government provided housing, tax dollars, fired, environment, bourgeoisie, left behind, healthy, revolution, demoted, government clothing food, individual cases, soldier 's creed, communism, work harder, defend, responsibility of tasks responsibility, support one, discounted<|CONCLUSION|>
| The American Armed Forces are the closest example to a Socialist institution in the US.
| 58caf638-bda2-4b81-88be-53058276a066 |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>In theory, tipping is supposed to be a reward of sorts to acknowledge exceptional service. Well actually, originally it was a pre meal service bribe, but that's by the bye . However, because the world is kind of a shitty place, servers are allowed to be paid below minimum wage. Tipping at restaurants isn't really optional, it's just a requirement to make sure wait staff actually make enough money to pay for more than just the gas it takes to get to work. Terrible system, but whatever. People who work at fast food restaurants make at least minimum wage. There is really no reason that the card reader should be prompting me for a tip, it's just obnoxious. The actual work that goes into making my microwaved burger is like at most 5 minutes of effort, shared among a bunch of different people. Who am I tipping, anyway? What kind of extra value could I possibly be rewarding? The cashier interacts with you for like 15 seconds and then moves on to the next person in line. It feels a lot less like tipping a waiter or waitress than it does tipping the teller at a grocery store. I find it irritatingly opportunistic and it drives me away from the places that do it.<|ASPECTS|>optional, minimum wage, money, gas, tipping, rewarding, pre, effort, extra value, bribe, shitty place, terrible system, irritatingly, reward, service, obnoxious, interacts, less, pay, exceptional service, servers, opportunistic<|CONCLUSION|>
| Fast food restaurants that ask for tips are just piggy-backing obnoxiously on the already-horrible mess of tipping culture with no actual justification
| 89aba2f8-4679-46ed-9e37-ef8db0055d32 |
<|TOPIC|>Should Bullfighting be Banned?<|ARGUMENT|>Parts of the Spanish pro-bullfighting lobby are working to have it listed it on Spain's intangible heritage list with UNESCO<|ASPECTS|>intangible heritage list<|CONCLUSION|>
| The historical experience of bullfighting has lent itself to become a source of modern day identity.
| 2f8f37e3-4acb-435d-a913-f90652ac3410 |
<|TOPIC|>Does science justify atheism?<|ARGUMENT|>Religious beliefs/interpretations have been responsible for the strengthening of communities and social bonds, reducing the levels of division within in-groups/those with similar beliefs. These common ideals and values have knit people together for centuries.<|ASPECTS|>people together, social bonds<|CONCLUSION|>
| Religion serves as a meeting ground for people to come together, network and create long lasting relationships.
| 8f3c8d88-a5a3-4632-b375-1d0fda625abb |
<|TOPIC|>Should religion be allowed in the public spaces?<|ARGUMENT|>People who grew up and were mistreated in strictly religious families might be reminded of bad things when they are confronted with religious symbols.<|ASPECTS|>bad things, religious symbols<|CONCLUSION|>
| Some religious artefacts can offend or harm people that encounter them.
| ecc8b23c-dd33-4e93-a321-aa0dccb01724 |
<|TOPIC|>Who Will Win the Game of Thrones?<|ARGUMENT|>Jaime does have many good points about him to give him consideration. The Lannisters' reign may completely end or it may transform into a more humanitarian role, with Jaime leading the change needed to sit on the throne.<|ASPECTS|>humanitarian role, good points<|CONCLUSION|>
| After killing Aerys II he sat on the Iron Throne before vacating it to Ned Stark. This could be foreshadowing.
| 5b2205b8-bf1c-43fd-90dc-410308d839de |
<|TOPIC|>McCain vs. Obama<|ARGUMENT|>"Ever the maverick, McCain selected Palin because her record mirrors his own in courageously standing up to corrupt special interests regardless of party and cutting government waste. She has the instincts, temperament and backbone to help restore the Republican Party to its conservative principles and the country as a whole to those foundational ideals of individual freedom, equal justice and government that truly is of law, not of men."<|ASPECTS|>corrupt special interests, government waste, cutting, law, individual freedom, government, temperament, equal justice<|CONCLUSION|>
| McCain was wise select Sarah Palin as his running mate
| 4a99d799-2eb8-426c-86b9-c1d4761ef873 |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I've always liked Spielberg's films E.T., Saving Private Ryan, the Indiana Jones films so I'm not saying this as someone who hates the man or his work, but watching The Post made me really wonder where all his talent has gone. The film, which surrounds the release of the Pentagon Papers and their subsequent publishing by the Washington Post, is not about Daniel Ellison the guy who actually leaked the Pentagon Papers and is instead a 2 hour jerkoff session about Meryl Streep delivering monologues while sitting in chairs and how amazing the Washington Post is and how fortunate we are that such a fine, upstanding institution is looking out for America. Not to mention this same paper has publicly advocated for entering every single war the United States has been involved in since at least WWII. It's propaganda by a media that rightfully has it out for Trump, but it's lazy and engages in very little critical thought or analysis.<|ASPECTS|>analysis, hates the man, lazy, talent, critical thought, america, war, entering, propaganda, upstanding institution<|CONCLUSION|>
| Steven Spielberg's The Post is a piece of Hollywood-funded propaganda
| 1eabb09f-53b7-4eb4-b8fe-c8919aa519c1 |
<|TOPIC|>Working Mothers Should Stay At Home<|ARGUMENT|>As early childhood is the most formative period of development for a child it is important that a mother has as much time to devote to her children as possible. By staying at home mothers could ensure that the next generation had the best start in life, hopefully averting future problems and providing a benefit to society as a whole.<|ASPECTS|>time to devote, early, start in life, benefit to society, future problems, formative period, development<|CONCLUSION|>
| As early childhood is the most formative period of development for a child it is important that a mo...
| 6125edd0-1cef-4875-91b5-ee03b4274b3e |
<|TOPIC|>NA<|ARGUMENT|>I really don't see a problem with it and the morals about those topics fall into the same time logic as people who says homosexual individuals shouldn't be allowed to marry. The only real problem is that they shouldn't be allowed to have biological children with each other, but just like homosexual couples they can just adopt children or have children with only one of them being the father mother forgot the term that describes that . If they are okay with that, why shouldn't they be able to be in a relationship? Besides that who are we to judge others about that? If you love your sister, or your cousin, why shouldn't you be allowed to be happy with each other? I think hope people will have more freedom about love and are not looked down upon by society in the future, because of decisions about only their own life, that harm nobody else. I feel that there are quite some parallels to gay marriage being more accepted while it was absolutely looked down upon completly forbidden just some years ago. And as a disclaimer, I don't have siblings, so it's no personal issue.<|ASPECTS|>morals, relationship, harm nobody, logic, biological children, homosexual individuals, gay marriage, happy with each, freedom about love, siblings, accepted, adopt children, father mother, judge others, personal issue, forbidden<|CONCLUSION|>
| I think siblings who love each other should be allowed to marry if they want to,
| fb4311e2-81d8-44aa-87c3-3f10a3c8f786 |
<|TOPIC|>Do journalists have a moral obligation to display violent images?<|ARGUMENT|>The very purpose of street or documentary photography is to capture candid moments of human behaviour. In a difficult or sensitive situation, stopping to ask permission could remove the 'realness' of the situation, as subjects know they are being documented, and so any value in the photograph is lost.<|ASPECTS|>human behaviour, value<|CONCLUSION|>
| Journalists often publish images of people without their permission in difficult or sensitive situations.
| 5cd672e0-01d3-41d0-9f4f-27730dca6b04 |
<|TOPIC|>The Existence of God<|ARGUMENT|>Assuming the stone was obsidian, you can then trace the steps of it's existence back. Obsidian comes about from molten silica, and you can continue the step-wise path all the way back to Planck time At which point our methods of observing the universe crease to have any meaning.<|ASPECTS|>steps, step-wise, existence, silica<|CONCLUSION|>
| This is not strictly correct. You can have causes without beginnings. One can cause a rock to move. This does not presuppose the rock 'beginning' simply that it exists at the time of intervention.
| d87b2387-534a-4fa6-9ae4-0fd0e42fa833 |