Resolved: In the United States, steroid usage should be permitted for all sports.
Debate Rounds (3)
I would primarily like to point out that according to the wording of the resolution, in order for the Con to win, I need only prove that steroids should not be allowed in one sport. This said, I will not only prove why steroids should not be allowed in several sports, but I will also show steroids in general should not be allowed.
Contention 1: Athletes who choose not to use steroids will be disadvantaged.
Due to the fact that steroids can have serious side effects such as kdney failure, liver failure, heart risks, depression, risk for infections and many others, the athletes that choose not to use steroids will be disadvantaged which means that athletes will be pressured into using steroids which means they will have a few good years of performance but after that severe health problems will greatly lowers life expectancy. (1)
Contention 2: Athletes should be role models.
If all or most professional athletes are taking steroids, they are having a negative influence on the youth and society in general. Younger athletes will then start taking steroids at younger ages which will result in those teens having severe health problems, even before they make it to the professionals.
First of all there have been no notable athletes that you can think of off of the top of your head that have had shown any undesirable affects of steroids on the playing field. Steroids have contributed to sports nothing but production. Also it is no secret that steroids already are a part of sports, for example in 2002 Ken Caminiti posted an article that said "It is no secret what is happening in baseball, at least half the guys are using steroids. They joke about it with eachother. And the side affects of steroids are very much exaggerated, the death rates of playing college and professional football are 50 to 100 times higher than even the wild exaggerations about steroids. More people have died playing Baseball than using steroids. (1)
Contention 2: Athletes do not have to tell anyone of they are taking steroids
If an athlete takes steroids he is not trying to tell a kid or teenager that idols him that it is OK or that he should do it all that athlete is doing is being human. And to be a human is to be better, or at least try to be better. The whole point of professional sports, or sports at any level, college, high school, etc is for entertainment and isn't it more entertaining to watch a sport that is more entertaining. The definition of a professional athlete is an athlete who is the best in the world at the sport they do and in ounce again in order to make the sport more entertaining athletes should be able to enhance there abilities with the usage of steroids.
In my opponents second contention, he is basically saying that professional athletes arent telling kids or teenagers to take steroids. They aren't DIRECTLY telling these kids to take steroids, but if all or most athletes are taking steroids then children will be incentivized to take steroids because they will feel that it will be their only way to make it to the professionals. My opponent also says in his second contention that sports are for entertainment, and steroids enhances that entertainment. Basically he is advocating that athletes should purposefully destroy their bodies for entertainment. This argument is obviously morally wrong for several different reasons. It is inhumane. According to my opponents logic, dog fighting should be allowed because it is for the entertainment of the viewer.
Cdawg forfeited this round.
Cdawg forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||3||0|
Reasons for voting decision: FF, better arguments