The Instigator
Pejosu123
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Hardcore.Pwnography
Pro (for)
Winning
8 Points

Steroid legalization in MLB

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 2 votes the winner is...
Hardcore.Pwnography
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/23/2012 Category: Sports
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,429 times Debate No: 23102
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

Pejosu123

Con

Lately, Some people have been saying, "steroids would make baseball more interesting" I've heard that a lot. I just simply think that they would make America's Pastime LESS interesting than ever. Pitchers would be pitching 115 MPH regularly. Hitters would have a lot of trouble hitting. And when they do make contact, it would be nothing but HRs
Hardcore.Pwnography

Pro

Sure, I accept.
As PRO, I will be arguing for the legalization of steroids in the MLB
As CON, my opponent must be arguing against the legalization of steroids in the MLB

MLB is Major Leage Baseball.
Legalization, by which I mean players are allowed to use steroids without consequence in game.

I'll give it to the instigator to present his opening arguments as to why steroid legalization in the MLB is a bad thing.

To you, CON.
Debate Round No. 1
Pejosu123

Con

I don't believe that steroids should be legalized, no matter how many people say they should be. When I think of steroids, I think of a horrible, life-threatening drug. If anything, I believe the amounts of tests should be increased. Also, the penalties for testing positive should be much more enforced as well as serious. Now, as for all of you out there who still think they should be legal, just imagine yourself as an MLB player, How bad would you feel if you tested positive and were suspended? I know I wouldn't be that thrilled.
Hardcore.Pwnography

Pro

First I'll start with a complete refutation of my opponent's points:

I don't believe that steroids should be legalized, no matter how many people say they should be. When I think of steroids, I think of a horrible, life-threatening drug.

It seems that what you're trying to say here is that steroids are health hazarads. I agree. However, there is still the option of not taking steroids. The resolution is merely the legalization of steroids in major league baseball, and players could choose to not take steroids, or take them, if they desire, but that is their choice. It is the same with cigarettes. You can choose to smoke ore not smoke. It is life-threatening as well. Ultimately, it is up to the player if they want to risk their health for steroids. It is the freedom of choice.

If anything, I believe the amounts of tests should be increased. Also, the penalties for testing positive should be much more enforced as well as serious. Now, as for all of you out there who still think they should be legal, just imagine yourself as an MLB player, How bad would you feel if you tested positive and were suspended? I know I wouldn't be that thrilled.


Now, this point is all about being suspended for steroids. However, CON fails to recognize that if they were legal, then no one would be suspended for taking steroids, as it would be perfectly legitimate. Therefore, this point falls.

My Points

1.

Now, I feel like CON is going to say that it is unfair to others if you take steroids, as it gives an advantage, which is the main reason it is banned today. However, everyone will have access to steroids, as it is legal. If everyone are able to take steroids, no one will have an advantage over anyone else. Therefore, steroids should be lega.


2.

With steroids, MLB would be so much more intersting. Faster sprinting, harder bats, better catches. This would attract many more fans, and in turn raise revenues. Many teams, like the Blue Jays, are dying off, with not enough fans to support them. If players could use steroids, they would attract more fans, and thus save the jobs of many.

Conclusion

All of CON's points were refuted fully.
My points are as of yet uncontested.

Vote PRO
Debate Round No. 2
Pejosu123

Con

In your heart of hearts, you know steroid abuse can't be good. And your heart is telling you the truth. Even when used to treat medical conditions, anabolic steroids have all kinds of common side effects. have you ever heard of a player named Ken Caminiti? You could hear his story, but, unfortunatly, he died years ago because of steroid use.

"Ken Caminiti came forward about his steroid use and detailed the damage the drug has done to his body. Caminiti admitted that his body had mostly stopped producing testosterone and that his testicles have gotten much smaller. As a matter of fact, his body only had 20% of the normal level of testosterone." http://www.streetdirectory.com...

Now, I bet all of you guys out there about to vote wouldn't like that, would you?

VOTE CON!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hardcore.Pwnography

Pro

Okay, it looks like my opponent has dropped all my points.

Yes, yes, we all know about people who die of drugs. But who's fault is that? I already stated that it is a choice. Whether or not you make it illegal, players will still take steroids, it is inevitable. It's like how people take illicit drugs. These people know the consequence of the drug, yet they still take it. It's their choice that they want to harm their health.

Debate Round No. 3
Pejosu123

Con

Pejosu123 forfeited this round.
Hardcore.Pwnography

Pro

Extend arguments, please vote for PRO
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by airmax1227 5 years ago
airmax1227
Pejosu123Hardcore.PwnographyTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con drops all of Pro's arguments in his final round.. instead opting to appeal on some emotional level.. He then FF's the final round... Args and conduct to Pro.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
Pejosu123Hardcore.PwnographyTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: dropped all arguments plus FF, easy vote.