Good Morning,
My 2nd question regarding bioethics relates to Lance Armstrong, Barry Bonds, and Marc McGuire. They have all suffered the consequences of taking performance enhancing drugs, which are forbidden by the leagues they are a part of. You break the rules, you get in trouble. I accept that. I also accept that sports fans like to see home runs being hit, records being broken, and exciting games. If those were not important to the spectators - little league games would have people in the stands who were not related to (or friends of) the players. But almost nobody who wants to see a sports game just goes to a random little league game. They want to see excitement.
What is your opinion on creating a sports league where doping is, if not mandatory, at least accepted. Pitchers throwing 150 MPH fastballs, which get knocked out of the park - which happens to be 800 feet from the plate. Basketball players doing a slam dunk from half court, and the like.
I understand that in the current system, doping gives them an unfair advantage - but if everyone was doping, or allowed to - that advantage is afforded to everyone, leveling the playing field. If the field is level for all players, as a spectator - would you prefer to watch a no-doping league, or a pro-doping league.
Whether you are for or against, I would like to hear your opinion.
The Doorman