Sports, Drugs, and Lance

I'm writing this post because I really think we all need to cut Lance Armstrong some slack. Yes, he used drugs. Yes,  he lied about it. And yes, he won the Tour de France while doped. But I think everyone also needs to bear these things in mind as they continue bashing Lance:

Drug usage is a fact of life in high-profile, high-paying sports. Any sport, pick a sport, if it's professional, top-level sports, then 90% of the the top performers in it are on PED (Performance Enhancing Drugs) of one kind or another. As Durianrider said, unless you're talking about archery or curling, they're likely on drugs. It's just a fact of living in this cynical, all-about-money world. I'm sorry, I wish it wasn't like that, but there it is. As I think he said, he was just part of the "drug-culture" of high-performance cycling. Do I think that means he was right in doing so? No, certainly not. I just think we could all maybe be a little bit more sympathetic to his drug usage, especially given the fact that he (had) testicular cancer as well. At least that sort of gives him something of an excuse for doping... what's everyone else's?

If you were a champion (blank, pick a sport) athlete, and you were aware of drug usage in your sport, and you were aware that essentially all of the top performers in said sport were using drugs, would you decide to sacrifice your career for the sake of integrity? After all, if you don't use drugs, there's no way you can compete with everyone else. (who, likelier than not, do use drugs) I don't know that there are many people who can honestly say that they would've made a choice for integrity. In fact, given what I hear in business, politics, hollywood, and the like,  I know there aren't many people who would've made that choice... , people sacrifice integrity for career momentum all the time, especially now, in difficult economic times.

So please, unless you can say you've never sacrificed integrity for personal advancement, and never would, cut Lance a little slack.

*Note: As soon as I can find the link to Durianrider's video on Lance Armstrong and drug use, I will be posting it*

Gawker Publishes "Gun-pages" list

Following the outcry over the Journal News publishing a mappable list of gun owners in Westchester and Rockland counties, (included among those were several prison guards, who subsequently have been taunted by convicts reciting their home addresses at them.) yesterday (Jan 8, 3:10PM) the Gawker blog published their own, 446 page list of "every licensed gun owner in New York City."

Wow. Maybe this time they'll include more, perhaps private security guards, or private investigators. (In fact, they even say "(And for the record, they are not all assholes. Some of them need guns for legitimate reasons for their jobs, like providing security for assholes.)" so there are the names of people whose careers and lives depend on the usage of firearms listed there. Way to go, Gawker. Maybe you could publish your own writer's home addresses, as well? Hmmm? Maybe let us know your home addresses, Gawker.

I should think that all this is even more scary, and more dangerous, for those who aren't on the list as for those who are....now criminals know which houses and apartments to target.

I heard Chris Plante today say that someone should publish a list of all the women who've gotten abortions, as well, since the liberals are going to publish all of the gun owners. Tit for tat.

Seriously, since many abortions are funded with taxpayer-money, it's not such a bad idea. After all, as Gawker said, it's all in the public domain anyway. (or, by rights, ought to be) Why not?

Miracles

Hello dear readers. I've been reading C.S. Lewis' book, "Miracles", and so far it's made great reading. There were two arguments in there that I thought I might share:

1)  Argument against Naturalism:

"If my mental processes are determined wholly by the motion of atoms in my brain, I have no reason to suppose that any beliefs are ture...and hence I have no reason for supposing my brain to be composed of atoms--- [because] my beliefs have irrational causes"   

-Quote taken from "Miracles" by C.S. Lewis

2) Argument against morality in Naturalism:

" Yet if the "oughts" of Mr. Wells, and, say, Franco are both equally the impulses which Nature has conditioned each to have and both tell us nothing about any objective right or wrong, whence is all the fervour? Do they remember while they  writing thus that when they tell us we "ought" to make a "better world" the words "ought" and "better" must, on their own showing, refer to an irrationally conditioned impulse which cannot be true or false any more than a vomit or a yawn?"

-"Miracles" by C.S. Lewis

Reading this book has so far been worth it, even if only for those two arguments Even though I've known them in form before then, I've never seen them so eloquently put.

Relatively Speaking... and a note on this blog's future format/content.

All right,

Given that I have practically no readership (see post below) the format of this blog is going to be a little casual. (meaning, more personal, and, you can count on not seeing ads, or dry politcal reporting, anytime soon).

A note on the topics I'll be covering: (and a few general disclaimers)

 #1 I will be writing on Philosophy, (esp. as it integrates with Christianity) etc., but tar-babies (I have yet to come up with something better to call them than that) will be blocked. Genuine questions, even critical questions/responses are welcome, but I'm not planning on having a 2-hour posting blitz with every atheist that comes here. Students (c'est moi) have better things to be doing with their time. 

#2 Don't expect ace, up-to-the-minute reporting on every political "event"/gaffe by some major politician. Most political news in this country has become rather one-dimensional, (regardless of which party you're talking about) and I have no wish to imitate them.

Note: Given the title of this post, there was supposed to be a note on relativism (particularly moral) but I'll have to save that for the next post. (Thou shalt not write long, rambling posts is apparently the 1st Commandment of blogging)

 

      

The great nothingness that is... my readership.

This company makes hilarious antithetical counterparts to all of the "motivational posters" for businesses that you often see.  Example: A poster on blogging.

Since I seem to have exactly 0 readers* other than my family, (pretty lame for a political blog),

I thought this was rather hilarious commentary on blogging.  

Nothing's the Best...

Here's a great article from the Cato Institute, arguing that the recession has gotten worse because of Government action, not better, and that a policy of stasis would have been better than some of the policies the government has enacted. (bailouts, backing risky mortgages, etc).

Islamic Global Jihad...

Here's the link to a YouTube video with some sobering and rather scary statistics on international demographics. (If they're true, that is). 

Why liberals continue to deny that Islam is a radical, non-peaceful, religion, intent on conquering the world (Like they almost did circa A.D. 1400)  is beyond me. Multi-culturalism, moral relativism, and multi-lateral foreign policy will be the death of the United States, if more of us don't start waking up, and doing something about it.