The Instigator
Ethen
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Best_debater_NA
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

Anabolic Steroids Should be Legalized for Professional Athletes

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Best_debater_NA
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/5/2014 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 759 times Debate No: 64641
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)

 

Ethen

Pro

First, I would like to point out that the debate says "Professional Athletes." High schoolers taking steroids is a completely different debate than this one.
Anabolic steroids are a substance that boosts your testosterone levels in your body. There are different kinds of steroids that have different effects on your body. Some increase your stamina, others your muscle mass, and so on. These substances are like other kinds of technology we see on the sports field. For example, a shoe that increases running speed, or a swimsuit that increases your aerodynamical position and your ability to freely move all your limbs. These are both examples of technology on the playing field, just like steroids. Taking steroids is just like drinking a protein shake, it increases your athletic ability, and it should be allowed in professional sports.
Best_debater_NA

Con

It is unfair for athletes to take drugs. It is like getting a free 48 hour workout by just taking a pill. You get into professional baseball or any other sport because you practiced hard, and that you are good. Protein shakes are like eating healthy. That's what people have to do to stay fit. In steroids there are many chemicals to boost what ever it boosts. It is just unreasonable to have steroids legal in professional sports.
Debate Round No. 1
Ethen

Pro

I would have to disagree with you there. You are correct that steroids is getting a free 48 hour workout, and that is precisely why it should be legalized. From what I see in your argument, you are saying that it is about having the skill through practice. In a professional sports team, it is all about getting into the championships or the playoffs or whatever the finals are. Sports are not about leveling the playing field. In all sports, everyone is different. There are short people, tall people, light people, heavy people. We are not going to level the field by making everyone 5' 10" and 220 lb. It just isn't going to happen.
Best_debater_NA

Con

You also agree that taking steroids are like getting a free 48 hour workout. If you know that, then how is it fair. Sports are all about building up skill by PRACTICING. It's not the race to see who can take the most pills so they can be stronger, faster, more stamina, etc. If you could take a pill and you'll be better every day, then sports would be a joke.
Debate Round No. 2
Ethen

Pro

Sports are not about the practices. If they were, then they would be televised a lot more. What matters are the games. Those are what everyone wants to see. If a professional athlete took the right amounts of the right kinds of steroids, then his game performance would be better and the team would do better. If I were a coach, I would allow my players to do just that so we could beat the other team.
Best_debater_NA

Con

I really don't think you understand. Steroids have packed chemicals to boost whatever it is boosting dramatically. That means that I could just take steroids and be the best baseball player alive. Taking steroids are like robots playing each other. Would you watch a game with people being perfect by taking pills? Probably not.
Debate Round No. 3
Ethen

Pro

Well, I would certainly like to see a match with people at their maximum potential. It would basically be seeing the best of the best in the match of the century. It would be amazing to watch. The game would not be like watching robots play, either. Considering the fact that sports players have brains that they use on the field, the match would be very different than what you propose.
I'm surprised that you haven't made the argument that 'steroids are dangerous for athletes so they shouldn't use them'. Well, just so you don't use that in this final round, I am going to clear this up. If steroids were legalized, then they would actually be safer. Why? Because it would be done under the guidance of a doctor who can monitor how the athlete is doing with the steroids. The reason it is so dangerous now is because athletes don't know the right amount to take, so they overdose and die.
Thank you for being my first opponent. I really enjoyed this debate.
Best_debater_NA

Con

That was my finish up but i'll just do another debate reason. Steroids can cause abnormal hear rates, high blood pressure, hormone disorders, heart growth,abnormal muscle growth and in some cases male breast growth. This is why they are banned. I loved this argument. Thank you for your time.
Debate Round No. 4
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by whiteflame 2 years ago
whiteflame
RFD (Pt. 1):

There are a number of problems with this debate. To start, Pro runs an entirely defensive case until R3. I don't see any actual arguments for why anabolic steroids should be legalized until that round, and that's a problem since it's his burden of proof in this debate. In order to get anywhere with this, Pro has to show that laws against anabolic steroid usage among professional athletes should be removed.

Con doesn't really help the issue, presenting only the most absolutely basic level of response by arguing that there's some issue of de-emphasizing the importance of practice. This isn't as strong of an argument as it could have been, mainly because working out still remains important after steroid usage. Con's argument seems to assume that steroid usage will replace working out, but that's blatantly false.

Each debater really doesn't build much on these arguments, either. Pro's case eventually gets to a point of stronger and faster athletes are going to be performing better, but he never explains why that's beneficial. Maybe that would increase the viewership, but I never see that argument. Amazing to watch as it might be, I needed to see a link to actual benefits here for someone, and I didn't. Con's case expanded along similar lines, with the claim being made that steroids somehow reduce interest in sports, though as the arguments from each side lack support, they're equally strong, and therefore they wash.
Posted by whiteflame 2 years ago
whiteflame
(Pt. 2)

At long last, the arguments with teeth appear in the final round... which is too late for me to factor them into the debate. Pro is entirely right that black market steroids are less safe and that doctor monitoring would be better, but I disregard arguments that come up in the final round because Pro is effectively banking on giving his opponent as little chance to respond as possible. I'd give Con conduct for that, but he responds in kind, giving a brand new argument in his final round as to the physical harms of steroid usage. Again, I can only disregard it.

But that basically means that both sides have no arguments that support their cases. All Pro has left is defense, and while all of Con's arguments wash, I can't see any benefit to the case. As such, I default and vote Con.
Posted by Ethen 2 years ago
Ethen
I wonder if anyone will vote at some point...
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 2 years ago
whiteflame
EthenBest_debater_NATied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Given in comments.