dagblog - Comments for "Lance Armstrong: The guy who lied about cheating"

But, DoubleA, don't you

jollyroger — Sun, 17 Jun 2012 05:37:13 +0000

In reply to Your comment inspired me--I'd

But, DoubleA, don't you remember "Better Living Through Chemistry"?

Your comment inspired me--I'd

artappraiser — Sat, 16 Jun 2012 21:11:07 +0000

In reply to One thing that I believe is

Your comment inspired me--I'd like to do a Godwin and say the whole movement toward robo-atheletes strikes me as real Third Reich sicko stuff, and worse, because it's all for basically for entertainment purposes. What would Jesse Owens say? Better yet, what would the Greek Gods say? I don't know how to fix it, as it's mainly the audience freely chosing their entertainment causing it, but it's still sicko.

One thing that I believe is

broomeuvu — Sat, 16 Jun 2012 21:04:26 +0000

In reply to What to do about the

One thing that I believe is problematic with this discussion is that marijuana, heroine, and steroids are categorized without distinctions. The federal schedule of controlled substances has a criteria for various substances and why they are controlled. The issue isn't whether or not drugs altogether should be illegal. Although, I admit that I have challenged the notion that the whole war on drugs is beneficial to society as a whole. The issue is whether or not professional athletes under the supervision of a doctor should or should not openly chemically enhance themselves. Blood doping is illegal in sports, but it is the person's own blood that has been modified. So one really cannot make the "artificial" chemical argument. Bio-identical hormones are used regularly for endocrinological therapy due to various symptoms of "inconvenience" rather than medical need.

The point is, our public policies are showing that the rationale for illegal steroids and perhaps other banned substances is counter-productive to the "goals" of free market professional sports. 300 lbs., ripped, football players that can run a 40 yd. at the speed of sound sells. The chubby slow lumbering linemen of the 1950s would not make it in today's NFL.

We know it is happening, have known for a long time, we have turned our heads to "believe in our champions," but now we must make some sort of moral example out of one or two of them just to maintain our sense of morality. We want to maintain the illusion that we do not approve, but we love to see the athlete soar, bust records, and meet our ideal-type of the perfect physical specimen. It is society that is duplicitous about its values. Not that athletes who are drawn by their passion to win, but rewarded well by multi-million dollar contracts.

I think this is a worthy discourse to have seriously.

What to do about the

jollyroger — Sat, 16 Jun 2012 07:06:29 +0000

In reply to The "what about the children"

What to do about the children? confiscate their drugs a.d donate them to the o Old Hippies' Home, where DD and I will undertake their disposal. This will be right up my alley, as I am well along in an anti-marijuana crusade. I diligently incinerate any with which I come into contact, also known by the t-shirts we give out which are tie died (what else?), with Jerry Garcia's face and the message "smoke it til it's gone" No need to thank me, the good work is it's own reward...

The "what about the children"

broomeuvu — Sat, 16 Jun 2012 06:46:45 +0000

In reply to Lance Armstrong: The guy who lied about cheating

The "what about the children" argument falls flat because kids are already doping in Jr. High, but at the hands of adults. I think transparency and education is the key. We need openness so that we can say, "See? That is a doper and that isn't." The enforcement is sketchy in some sports and nearly impossible in others. 21 Years old would be legal age like other legal drugs save caffeine. Sport doping is just a part of the greater war on drugs that is on the whole costing more lives and money than its worth.

Legal doesn't make it moral. Alcohol and fornication are both legal, but some abstain on moral principle. Asserting that the war on drugs is for the greater good of society is naive. More cops and civilians die in the war on drugs than any other enforcement activity; Maybe domestic violence rivals it. Nonetheless, the war on drugs is as unwinable as Vietnam, it seems.

Educate, medically supervise, and teach your children your moral values. Those are the best strategies.

Transparency is also a model

jollyroger — Fri, 15 Jun 2012 20:52:26 +0000

In reply to I wasn't really trying to

Transparency is also a model to be advanced.

Let us reflect that no less

jollyroger — Fri, 15 Jun 2012 20:48:14 +0000

In reply to Lance Armstrong: The guy who lied about cheating

Let us reflect that no less an oracle than the sainted Jack himself urged us to enhance our performance, not excluding intellectual endeavors, thus, "Move quicker,Think faster, Love sooner..."

I wasn't really trying to

Elusive Trope — Fri, 15 Jun 2012 20:34:38 +0000

In reply to As in Jeopardy, your comment

I wasn't really trying to justify the law with what will we tell the kids, as much as just point out that this was one of the social consequences. The original comment was - hey these professional athletes can pay for the physicians to monitor them so lets just legalize it- as if this was the only consideration. For some, the impact of having professional athletes using PEDs when they are a huge role model for some kids who aspire to be like them is big enough to justify maintaining it illegalness. For others such a justification is weak. But there would be some increased impact on youth athletes if professional organizations like the NBA, NFL and MLB legitimized the use of PEDs.

More to the point, where can

jollyroger — Fri, 15 Jun 2012 20:00:30 +0000

In reply to Enhanced performance is

More to the point, where can I get some? Pass me that spike, Lance...

Enhanced performance is

jollyroger — Fri, 15 Jun 2012 19:51:35 +0000

In reply to Lance Armstrong: The guy who lied about cheating

Enhanced performance is better than inferior performance.