I just read an interesting book called The Champion Maker. It analyses the question of what is fair in athletic competition from a completely different angle. Say a person was bestowed, at the time of conception, with genetic advantages that happened to make him a superior athlete. Is he any more of a "cheater" than someone born with superior genes?
2006-10-02 09:49:40 · 6 answers · asked by kikoman 2 in Sports ➔ Olympics
A person who is a genetically enhanced individual should not suffer the consequence of being banned due to his or her innate ability. Should we look at savants (prodigies) and say, "they shouldn't be allowed to enter colleges at 12 and have masters degrees by the time they're 16" just because the other person was not born with an advanced brain? NO. If you can't train yourself according to their standards dont take part, if you're retarded and lack the ability to think things out dont enroll in a university for crying out loud.
2006-10-02 10:15:01 · answer #1 · answered by ReggaeDude7 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think a genetically enhanced athlete should not be banned, because in professional sports the rules of the game do not prevent it.
2006-10-02 16:58:10 · answer #2 · answered by far5442003 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Take baseball for instance. Over the past hundred years, every thing about the sport has been improved. Bats, balls, gloves, stadiums. The body in this case is nothing more than a tool, why shouldn't you be able to improve that particular piece of equipment in the safety of your doctor's office.
2006-10-02 16:57:13 · answer #3 · answered by Reverend! 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
"I think pro athletes should be forced to use steriods. I think we as fans deserve the best athletes science can create." "I could care less if you die at 40, but u hate live after sports anyway, I'm doin u a favor"- Daniel Tosh comidian lol :)
2006-10-02 20:30:33 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
it don't see how that would change the sports world
2006-10-02 20:21:20 · answer #5 · answered by LAW 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no those are the people we want on our pro leagus
2006-10-02 19:29:37 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋