|
There are 3 issues here:
1) First, should his being seen (and documented with a photo) smoking what appears to be pot disqualify him from competing in the 2012 Olympics?
Pac, this is not a matter of Whtnot's judgment or yours or mine. It is a matter to be decided by the various Olympic committees. According to that article, the World Anti-Doping Agency was the organization responsible for introducing the four-year ban on sport’s drug users. Apparently, that includes any drug and not just performance enhancing ones. Pot is a drug and the 2012 Olympics is in less than 4 years so from a purely technical standpoint Phelps may be screwed regardless of how any of us feel about pot smoking. OTOH, WADA's refusal to comment suggests that they may not be inclined to push the issue. A little less surprisingly, the US Olympics Committee also refused to comment, even though they have also pledged to clamp down on drug use. Maybe, these various agencies will look the other way and excuse the photographic evidence as insufficient without corroborating drug tests, particularly given the fact that the drug involved really has nothing to do with the competitive fairness aspect of their current drug policy AND the extreme popularity of the athlete involved.
2) The 2nd issue is, regardless of the letter of the law, SHOULD pot be part of the ban. If just ANY drug is included than why not nicotine or alcohol? This is a recreational drug that has NO performance enhancing properties. In fact, because of the tars involved with smoking it actually decreases an athlete's respiratory efficiency. This guy had been in training for 4 years doing nothing but sleep, eat and train. Then he wins 14 gold medals. Who can really blame him for going out and doing a little, okay apparently a LOT, of celebrating, before he got back down into training for the next Olympics.
3) The third issue is, regardless of whether this means he actually can't compete (because of the law) or whether or not you think it means he should be able to compete (because pot smoking is either sooooo bad or so harmless), it still has very serious implications for Phelps and all those who look up to him. What will this do for all his endorsement deals? He stands to lose as much from the immediate fall-out as he does from whether he'll be able to compete in 4 years. Somewhat related to that purely financial aspect is the more abstract one on what this means to Phelps position as a role-model. A lot of young athletes and others look up to him. For many that image is now tarnished. For others, if nothing happens to him as a result of this, this might serve as a message that pot usage is okay or even something that should be done.
The sad part is that the scandal rag that paid for that photograph and published it may have wrote something like "Oh what a horrible thing that this role model would act in this manner" is just as guilty if not more so, for publicizing the private actions of such an important public role model (who is after all, just human) and all just for a lousy buck. And, as Orange suggested, whether you find potsmoking right, wrong or indifferent it is against the law and is not well regarded by significant parts of society, so at the very least Phelps should have realized that and, with so much to lose, was incredibly stupid to do what he did so publicly (the pics were probably taken by someone at the party that Phelps didn't even know)
Personally, I think pot usage should be legalized, not because I think it is something that should be encouraged but because:
a) I think it is no worse than (and in many ways not as bad as) other recreational activities like drinking alcohol and smoking cigarettes, which are legal.
b) prohibition doesn't work and is just a huge waste of resources. the money spent on law enforcement and incarceration could much better spent on drug education and on law enforcement and rehab for the many more serious drugs.
|
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
Calendar
