A: Sport as a Unifier
1. I believe sport has brought people together all around the world. It has the potential to unite a country. Sporting events such as the Olympics and the World Cup bring nations together to compete, not in war, but in games and events.
An example of sport as a unifier is when South Africa hosted the Soccer World Cup in 2010, it had a huge positive effect on the national morale. In addition, all the construction that went on to prepare the country’s infrastructure and stadiums also boosted the economy. Better economic conditions also help to lift morale.
I agree with Francois Pienaar, the former African rugby captain who said “Sport is the best thing to unite people; Nelson Mandela taught us how sport can change people’s …show more content…
I am not sure if this created a unifying atmosphere in South Africa as the South African team did not perform as well as expected.
B: Doping in Sport
2.1. If private organizations have their own testing policies that require consent to such policies (including appeals) as a condition for participating in that league, then drug testing at sporting events does not violate the rights of the sportsperson. Hon the other hand, when testing is done without prior consent (eg by the government) it can be regarded as an invasion of the privacy of athletes to test their urine or blood for drugs. In this case, athletes have constitutional safeguards that allow a challenge to such a test on the grounds of its constitutionality.
2.2. Drug testing is justified at school level. The first and foremost reason is that most schools have a code of conduct or a formal form given to them which is compulsory to sign in order to attend the school, which contains the permission of a student to allow tests to be carried out for drugs. Furthermore, schools create and shape future leaders of a country, and by carrying out drug tests early on, it can engender moral, healthy, trustworthy individuals as well as decrease drug abuse in our …show more content…
Sport is contingent upon the hard work, drive, natural talent, and perseverance of the athlete. Thus, doping negatively affects the credibility of the athlete as well as the country they represent because these athletes are willing to take the risk of using a substance not at the regulated medically safe level, but rather at a level sufficient to yield the greatest competitive advantage, therefore compromising the pure intentions of the sports world and honest athletes. Athletes who dope delegitimise their own sport ability and jeopardise their country in their country’s reputation in sport. Doping in sport is a reflection of corrupt sportsmanship. Ultimately, athletes are like us – they are also human. And it is because of our ability to sympathize with their struggles on the field of play that sports have any meaning at all. This meaning evaporates though when the collective frustration with doping turns athletes into a monolithic “other,” who can use performance-enhancing drugs if they so choose, and whose struggles thus become not like our own, but those of someone unlike anyone whom we would want to be. They lose their value as role
1. I believe sport has brought people together all around the world. It has the potential to unite a country. Sporting events such as the Olympics and the World Cup bring nations together to compete, not in war, but in games and events.
An example of sport as a unifier is when South Africa hosted the Soccer World Cup in 2010, it had a huge positive effect on the national morale. In addition, all the construction that went on to prepare the country’s infrastructure and stadiums also boosted the economy. Better economic conditions also help to lift morale.
I agree with Francois Pienaar, the former African rugby captain who said “Sport is the best thing to unite people; Nelson Mandela taught us how sport can change people’s …show more content…
I am not sure if this created a unifying atmosphere in South Africa as the South African team did not perform as well as expected.
B: Doping in Sport
2.1. If private organizations have their own testing policies that require consent to such policies (including appeals) as a condition for participating in that league, then drug testing at sporting events does not violate the rights of the sportsperson. Hon the other hand, when testing is done without prior consent (eg by the government) it can be regarded as an invasion of the privacy of athletes to test their urine or blood for drugs. In this case, athletes have constitutional safeguards that allow a challenge to such a test on the grounds of its constitutionality.
2.2. Drug testing is justified at school level. The first and foremost reason is that most schools have a code of conduct or a formal form given to them which is compulsory to sign in order to attend the school, which contains the permission of a student to allow tests to be carried out for drugs. Furthermore, schools create and shape future leaders of a country, and by carrying out drug tests early on, it can engender moral, healthy, trustworthy individuals as well as decrease drug abuse in our …show more content…
Sport is contingent upon the hard work, drive, natural talent, and perseverance of the athlete. Thus, doping negatively affects the credibility of the athlete as well as the country they represent because these athletes are willing to take the risk of using a substance not at the regulated medically safe level, but rather at a level sufficient to yield the greatest competitive advantage, therefore compromising the pure intentions of the sports world and honest athletes. Athletes who dope delegitimise their own sport ability and jeopardise their country in their country’s reputation in sport. Doping in sport is a reflection of corrupt sportsmanship. Ultimately, athletes are like us – they are also human. And it is because of our ability to sympathize with their struggles on the field of play that sports have any meaning at all. This meaning evaporates though when the collective frustration with doping turns athletes into a monolithic “other,” who can use performance-enhancing drugs if they so choose, and whose struggles thus become not like our own, but those of someone unlike anyone whom we would want to be. They lose their value as role