http://suburbanrythm.wordpress.com/2008/02/25/69/ thunder laced with lightning Fri, 04 Jul 2008 23:28:35 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=MU http://suburbanrythm.wordpress.com/2008/02/25/69/#comment-65 Dookie Mookie Thu, 27 Mar 2008 01:09:03 +0000 http://suburbanrythm.wordpress.com/2008/02/25/69/#comment-65 Obama blows, just so you know. This is the guy who thinks that the American marriage is suffering because of economic woes, every WalMart employee should get paid enough to send their kids to college, and that Black people actually need more ways to sue white people. Obama blows, just so you know. This is the guy who thinks that the American marriage is suffering because of economic woes, every WalMart employee should get paid enough to send their kids to college, and that Black people actually need more ways to sue white people.

]]> http://suburbanrythm.wordpress.com/2008/02/25/69/#comment-41 Tommy Fri, 29 Feb 2008 09:54:54 +0000 http://suburbanrythm.wordpress.com/2008/02/25/69/#comment-41 Clemens didn't do it. White people don't cheat. Bonds on the other hand, just ask Scott Linehan... Clemens didn’t do it. White people don’t cheat. Bonds on the other hand, just ask Scott Linehan…

]]> http://suburbanrythm.wordpress.com/2008/02/25/69/#comment-34 The Chiz Wed, 27 Feb 2008 21:33:46 +0000 http://suburbanrythm.wordpress.com/2008/02/25/69/#comment-34 I totally agree. What pisses me off more, however, is that, as it appears to me, the most common "reason" given for stemming the use of steroids in sports is that we "need to protect America's children! They see these athletes using steroids and succeeding, and then they think they need to use steroids, too!" Give me a break. Why are we so bent on this idea that "protecting" children always involves shielding their eyes? This is the world we're living in. Unless steroids are somehow wiped from the world of sports (and the WORLD in general), which we know isn't going to happen, children who aspire to become athletes are going to be faced with the decision to use steroids anyway. Sure, MLB, the NBA, the NFL, the NHL, whatever, all have very good and legitimate reasons to stem the use of steroids in order to keep their sports fair. That's their business. But should Congress be getting involved? Moreover, should Congress be getting involved under the guise of child "protection?" Shouldn't the main reason for Congress intervening be the fact that athletes are breaking the law? Yes, but that doesn't seem to be the case. The most significant issue doesn't appear, to me, at least, to be the infraction of Federal Law. Drug and alcohol abuse, violence, sexuality: these are all aspects of society that aren't going away. Children, and people in general, need to face them and address them appropriately if any changes are going to be made. In any event, these things shouldn't be shielded from the view of children. Congress shouldn't be intervening with the ill-conceived notion that they can somehow eliminate the drug problem and in so doing Save the Kids! In the case of steroids in sports, the so-called War Against Drugs that Congress is waging isn't being fought for the appropriate reasons. It should be fought under the flag of Federal Law. Furthermore, this so-called "protection" they're fighting for isn't even protection at all. Protection is education, acknowledgment of the way things are so that children can make healthy, productive decisions and grow up to become healthy, productive adults. I totally agree. What pisses me off more, however, is that, as it appears to me, the most common “reason” given for stemming the use of steroids in sports is that we “need to protect America’s children! They see these athletes using steroids and succeeding, and then they think they need to use steroids, too!” Give me a break. Why are we so bent on this idea that “protecting” children always involves shielding their eyes? This is the world we’re living in. Unless steroids are somehow wiped from the world of sports (and the WORLD in general), which we know isn’t going to happen, children who aspire to become athletes are going to be faced with the decision to use steroids anyway. Sure, MLB, the NBA, the NFL, the NHL, whatever, all have very good and legitimate reasons to stem the use of steroids in order to keep their sports fair. That’s their business. But should Congress be getting involved? Moreover, should Congress be getting involved under the guise of child “protection?” Shouldn’t the main reason for Congress intervening be the fact that athletes are breaking the law? Yes, but that doesn’t seem to be the case. The most significant issue doesn’t appear, to me, at least, to be the infraction of Federal Law. Drug and alcohol abuse, violence, sexuality: these are all aspects of society that aren’t going away. Children, and people in general, need to face them and address them appropriately if any changes are going to be made. In any event, these things shouldn’t be shielded from the view of children. Congress shouldn’t be intervening with the ill-conceived notion that they can somehow eliminate the drug problem and in so doing Save the Kids! In the case of steroids in sports, the so-called War Against Drugs that Congress is waging isn’t being fought for the appropriate reasons. It should be fought under the flag of Federal Law. Furthermore, this so-called “protection” they’re fighting for isn’t even protection at all. Protection is education, acknowledgment of the way things are so that children can make healthy, productive decisions and grow up to become healthy, productive adults.

]]>