Posted By:
davidcyclebackA well known sports writer wrote that Bonds competed while using steroids. Bonds himself admitted that he used the clear steroids, so there is no debate about this. The writer said that, as Bonds played and hit home runs while using steroids, the records are not legitimate. He said that whether or not Bonds knew he was using steroids is not relevant when evaluating the validity of the record itself. It may be relevant to other questions (perjury, ethics, character, etc), but not to evaluating the batting records he has accumulated. That he hit home runs while using steroids is what is relevant.
In the Olympics, an athlete is removed from competition if it is found he is on steroids, even if the athlete can prove he didn't know or accidentally took the drug. The Olympics' working theory is that these drugs are banned from the competition absolutely because they give the athlete who took them an unfair advantage over other competitors who didn't take the drugs. If the athlete can show he took the steroids accidentally, the officials may feel genuinely bad for him but he still cannot compete because he has an unfair advantage. If an ex-KGB spy slipped steroids in your can of coca cola while you bent over to tie your shoe, you still can't compete because the steroids slipped into your coca cola give you an unfair advantage. Even if this rule is considered unfair to the banned individual, to let him compete is considered far more unfair, in particular considering there are 20 other competitors waiting to compete who haven't taken drugs.