Any competitive sport has athletes using illegal performance enhancement substances to gain some form of competitive advantage. Many have considered some of these substances to have adverse harmful effects on the health of the individual. Additionally, the use of these substances changes what some see as a level playing field of competition.
Recently, just following news that Barry Bonds has tested positive for these illegal substances, Alex Rodriguez or A-Rod, another baseball player, has admitted and been tested positive for using these substances as well. While many are not shocked (most people thought they were using all along), there does seem to be an interesting parallel to other aspects of capitalism and libertarian philosophy that I would like to apply here.
In a business situation, many republicans and libertarians have desired to have more of a laissez-faire approach where the government stays out of their business allowing the market to solve its own problems. Recently many in this blog have expressed opinions with respect to Federal Bailouts, executive pay caps and so on, and the general consensus is that part of the capitalist economy in which we live allows for people to succeed or fail due to the effects of competition. Competition isn't always fair. And, one of the benefits to competition is that is drives the performance and production levels up.
However when it comes to sports, many are quick to see the federal government pounce on and crush the careers of competitive professional athletes for what some could view as a product of capitalistic competition. Is it the place of the federal government to step in and test for performance enhancement drugs with the players, and are the use of these drugs even wrong? Of course, LDS people generally take to the creed of the word of wisdom that we are not to take such potentially harmful things into our bodies. However, if all those Arnold Freeberg paintings of Nephi and Moroni being so ripped and cut that they would beat down anyone that came in their way are a true likeness, then all these athlete's are doing are trying to be like the prophets of old.
In the spirit of competition that so many in this blog strive to uphold, is there a place for performance enhancing drugs in professional athletic competitions? If not, then who is supposed to enforce the "breaking of the rules"?
I have to tell you all as some who has competed in sports at more then an amateur level, the reality is that pretty much every pro athlete has used some forum of performance enhancement. Like it or not its just the way it is. The science of cheaters is so far ahead of those trying to catch them that I don't ever see them catching up. Those trying to keep it fair don't even know what they should be testing for so how would they ever catch it.
ReplyDeleteThis being said I think a good does of reality is what we the watching public need. Once we realize the truth we can say "OK your going to do this then go ahead and do it but we wont help bail you our when it screws your body up." I have often thought that if we are more real with it then we could create a "all natural" league and an "enhanced" league and allow people and the market to decide which is more interesting to watch and then reward the winner with their money.
Isn't Gatorade or Motor Tabs, or any other sports drink also a performance enhancement? Aren't Red Bull and Monster drinks performance enhancements? If the athletes are to be "all natural" would they not be allowed to take these substances as well?
ReplyDeleteThat would be up for debate but yea by the letter of the law your right.
ReplyDeleteThis post was retarded.
ReplyDeleteWhy?
ReplyDeleteBecause GWH is interested in one thing and one thing only.....Obama the "anti-Christ"
ReplyDeleteIt's retarded because you try to make a logical argument out of athletes, friburg, and following the example of the prophets. If it was an attempt at humor, it failed.
ReplyDeleteI don't really think that Barry Bonds is trying to look like a painting of Moroni. Give me some credit 'Captain Critical'. It's called sarcasm, look it up sometime.
ReplyDeleteIn case you were curious, I withdrew my posting from consideration for the Pulitzer. You are right, it just wasn't good enough.
Oh I don't know that that would have disqualified it from getting the pulitzer.
ReplyDelete