Performance Enhancing Drugs in Professional Sports. I'm going to hit it theoretically first. I'm sure this argument has been made many times, but our professional athletes are our gladiators, with the exception that our athletes choose to enter the arena. In this case, when I am a spectator and the subjects are basically meat...albeit they've chosen to be meat...what do I care what they've done to their bodies? Let 'em get the glory, money and the girls, they'll burn out quickly. They're adults and they should be able to choose. If they choose to burn fast and brightly, who am I to say that's wrong. We live in a chemical society, but is it really so different than societies of our ancestors? Do you think that if the Romans knew of steroids they wouldn't have pumped it into the veins of their warriors?
But there's the rub. What about the kids who want to be warriors? There's lots of non-moneyed kids that see no future in being anything except a warrior. So what do we do? Invest in high-technology, high-cost, and potentially civil-liberty encroaching testing regimes for all children involved in athletics? Decide that as a culture we will have a chemically-enhanced warrior class? Bitch of a question.
Option 1: Allow the chemically-enhanced warrior class. Freedom of choice. But spend bundles of money on testing the 18 and unders that don't have freedom of choice. The cheaters tend to always outwit the testers...the old proactive vs. reactive argument.
Option 2: Test everyone all the time. Massive cost and massive first amendment issues. Still the cheaters will be ahead of the testers.
Option 3: Do Nothing. Leave it up to the parents and local authorities. Some parents and local authorities will be unscrupulous and not protect the well being of children.
Option 4: You tell me....
Not surprisingly, some people over at Reason Online share some of my opinions. Just read this article. I really wish it delved deeper into testing and underage athletes.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment