Come on, I can't believe this. Show me where an athelete separates his taking of steroids from the consequences and you may have a point. But the fact is that taking them produces consequences. You cannot separate them.
And if you think a person taking steroids will have no negative consequences for other people, then you're living on a different planet.
Then someone goes and cites a college education as having negative consequences???? Come on now... talk about stretching things to try and win an argument - that excuse is made of rubber.
Let's get this back to square 1. Something is ok unless it causes harm to someone else. One of the direct consequences of steroids is to make people violent and irrational. Tell me you'll get that from a college education.
Another consequence of the use of steroids is that if you allow it, you force other people into this dangerous act just so they can compete. Atheletes should be allowed to follow their dream without the pressure of compromise being created by self-destructive opponents. So yes, the competition must rule against it, as it has.
Now, the closest valid comparison could be alchohol. People get enjoyment from alchohol and it occasionally causes people to become violent. (The consequence of drink driving has already been dealt with, with drink driving laws.) Similarly, some people get enjoyment from steroid use. But there's two things that make a big difference.
First, the use of steroids will almost always lead to these negatives. It may not at first, but eventually it will. Alchohol on the other hand only rarely leads to negatives. Considering the number of people who drink alchohol on a regular basis, the negative consequences affect only a fraction of the number or "users".
Second, alchohol has a very long history of social custom. It is usually also a social pastime. Steroids has neither the long history nor the social custom, nor the social pastime benefits.
When weighing such things up, steroids have virtually no benefit and an almost certain antisocial outcome, aside from the fact that the athelete will harm themselves if they keep it up. So, on balance, a society that allows steroid use is allowing a small freedom at a large cost.
And if you think a person taking steroids will have no negative consequences for other people, then you're living on a different planet.
Then someone goes and cites a college education as having negative consequences???? Come on now... talk about stretching things to try and win an argument - that excuse is made of rubber.
Let's get this back to square 1. Something is ok unless it causes harm to someone else. One of the direct consequences of steroids is to make people violent and irrational. Tell me you'll get that from a college education.
Another consequence of the use of steroids is that if you allow it, you force other people into this dangerous act just so they can compete. Atheletes should be allowed to follow their dream without the pressure of compromise being created by self-destructive opponents. So yes, the competition must rule against it, as it has.
Now, the closest valid comparison could be alchohol. People get enjoyment from alchohol and it occasionally causes people to become violent. (The consequence of drink driving has already been dealt with, with drink driving laws.) Similarly, some people get enjoyment from steroid use. But there's two things that make a big difference.
First, the use of steroids will almost always lead to these negatives. It may not at first, but eventually it will. Alchohol on the other hand only rarely leads to negatives. Considering the number of people who drink alchohol on a regular basis, the negative consequences affect only a fraction of the number or "users".
Second, alchohol has a very long history of social custom. It is usually also a social pastime. Steroids has neither the long history nor the social custom, nor the social pastime benefits.
When weighing such things up, steroids have virtually no benefit and an almost certain antisocial outcome, aside from the fact that the athelete will harm themselves if they keep it up. So, on balance, a society that allows steroid use is allowing a small freedom at a large cost.
.png)
