DirtyWorks said:
Okay ChrisE,
I read a spirited defense of doping in your comments that boils down to something like consumers want doping.
Then let's start with you and your progeny. C'mon now. What's first? HGH? Testosterone therapy? EPO works wonders. Never mind some of these are controlled substances. The rule of law should never get in the way of consumers and their desire for drugs like HGH, EPO and heroin.
Start doping your kid(s) young so there's no record of mediocre performances to pollute a perfect myth. What are you going to give them first? EPO maybe? When do they get to do their own injections? Are you going to teach them or hire someone to teach them to use controlled substances in clear contravention of law? You repeatedly defend the use in others so it's okay for your kids. Step up. Whatever sport your child excels in will probably cover the positives as long as the kid keeps winning. Doping your kids is cool that way.
You claim there are no specific consequences to any of these actions, so it's OK to start doping your kid(s) early and often. C'mon now, lay out the plan for all of us.
Doping is still okay, right? Or, are you going to pretend the challenge doesn't exist like fatandfast.
Your talk is cheap.
Perhaps I equaled fans not caring players are on dope by inferring they prefer it. My apologies for that, but I would bet if a team could get away with doping and not get caught while winning the superbowl, while other teams are clean, that teams fans would not have a difficult time of it. YMMV on that opinion, but that is OK.
I never said doping "is OK". I said people make choices in their lives, and must live with the consequences. This is in response to the sobbing guy upthread that was railing against doping because the "victims" of it are broke in old age, and hurt. I mean WTF? We have a basic line in the sand here between him and me, and perhaps you, on what defines a victim and who has the choice here along with how people must plan for the repercussions of their choices.
Same thing with youngsters; they are influenced by others who have made choices. This is a society problem; we are not a bunch of pawns where all of a sudden drugs jump into our system one day. Your chicken little routine railing against all things "evil", while the power to make them "unevil" is within ourselves, is the strawman here.
Until we as a society show an aversion to PED use, by our own personnal actions and by not giving our money to watch these performances, then nothing will change. You will be glued to the TV watching cycling next year. You and I are the problem.
Save your list of PED's jammed at me and the "what about the poor kids" card to display your scattershot hysteria. Every time this subject comes up, the responses I have written over 10 years on these forums will show that I am not pro-PED. The reason for this is because I believe people have a right to compete in a sport or even work in a trade without having to resort to illegal or unethical means to be competitive. I have always posted against legalized doping because it is just moving the line in the sand, and people will exceed that to gain an advantage as they do the zero tolerance line. You find a post anywhere that I wrote I am pro-PED. Good luck with that. And, take off your anti-LA fogged up glasses just because I'm not part of the hater crowd. You can see much better without being a reactionary and looking at the posters level of hate for LA instead of reading his words.
Yes, I am a hypocrite by watching the NFL and cycling. I am part of the problem regardless of what I think of PED use. I can admit that, can you?
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram