Con to the question "Should Performance Enhancing Drugs (Such as Steroids) Be Accepted in Sports?"
"There are legions of moral relativists out there who will argue that society is awash in drugs and that mounting the high horse about their use in sport is pointless and naive. This ignores the damage they do on so many fronts.
Let's confine the discussion to anabolic steroids. First, they attack the event itself, rendering it a lopsided contest between cheats and non-cheats. You have only to listen to one clean athlete describing how hard it is to defeat a steroid-abusing rival to know that bitterness follows the honest ones to the grave.
Off the field of play, these potions con the spectator, leave false marks in history and defraud the companies that insist on giving modern sportsmen and women such ridiculous amounts of money.
Last, but by no means least, they assault the internal organs of the users - and not always through free will. Eastern Europe is full of unfortunate freaks who were used as pawns in the Cold War. Their lives cannot be bent back into shape.
If you condone pharmaceutical cheating, you are telling children that the only way to 'succeed' in sport is to mount a chemical onslaught against your own body and deceive the audience cheering you on. So you kill sport."
"Is This the End of Sport as We Know and Love It?," theage.com.au, Oct. 27, 2003