“If there’s any argument against legalization of drugs, pro wrestling is a microcosm of what can happen when behavior is completely unregulated.”
You (and me) choose not to take such substances, but if a grown man wants to ingest them in his quest to get bigger muscles, what business is it of yours? Sure, it’s dangerous, and he no doubt knew that, along with his family members and associates but he made the choice on his own. We must offer them counsel and encourage them not to make these type decisions but restricting their freedom goes too far.
Freedom means allowing others to make their own decisions and, possibly, fail. As long as they are only hurting themselves then it’s not up to anyone else. That’s the hard part about freedom that our society can’t accept. The Founding Fathers knew it and accepted it but our modern socialistic society can’t handle it. The idea that no one should be allowed to fail is what brought about the welfare state, the Goldman Sachs bailout, the gov’t healthcare debacle, and many, many other negative things in our society.
Freedom is a messy and difficult concept. Most people can’t handle it, because they feel that they must be compassionate, even to the point of controlling others. I’ve had family members with addiction problems and it is heart-wrenching to see them go through terrible things, but they have to be involved in saving themselves from themselves; we can’t do it for them. When they are finally ready for help then we can be there for them.
In my opinion, an individual’s freedom is a higher moral value than your and my compassion for them . Apparently you disagree with that. In the future we will decide anew how ‘compassionate’ our society will choose to be, as we experience a serious economic decline brought on by two generations of liberals trying to make sure no one is allowed to fail.
I think it's a matter of degrees here. I no more want oppressive govt rule than I want anarchy. My argument is that if the NFL didn't have the regulations that it does now, then it would be like pro wrestling.
In this alternate universe, you could argue that it's choice that athletes would enter football even with the dangers involved. Moreover, it's the fans choice to watch it even though everyone knows that human achievement is being eclipsed by pharmaceutical science. Furthermore, it would be a choice for parents to allow their chlidren to go into football when they all know that success would necessarily involve eventual drug abuse. Even so, we, the fans, driven by our baser instincts, will cheer them on, throw money at them, buy their merchandise, demanding harder and more dangerous hits, as the NFL feeds their players to the lions.
The differences I have with libertarian thought is that I do believe that govt has a role promoting virtue. What role that is, and how it's promoted is nebulous and is subject to debate. My view has nothing to do with "compassion," though it's more to do with a more utilitarian ethic of right and wrong. In this case, I think a nation that believes that recreational drug use is wrong and legally questionable will be healthier than one that condones it. Furthermore, a nation that recognizes and frowns upon exploitation of its employees is healthier than one that condones it.
In pro wrestling, it is largely unregulated, and as such, I see it in a far less healthy than the NFL. I am actually big fans of both "sports" and follow them closely. I see that, though imperfect, the NFL is in a pretty healthy state. The games are mostly competitive, and stadiums sold out. In wrestling, more and more is demanded by the wrestlers and they are turning to drugs and are burning out at a remarkable rate.
The big unanswered questions is what to do about it. Libertarians, and probably most conservatives would argue that nothing needs to be done, as the markets will correct themselves. The problem with that is that in a marketplace where there's a virtual monopoly, free market corrections do not happen like they would in a marketplace of competition. We also know that even free markets are often irrational forming large bubbles that may not correct until the bubbles are catastrophically large (re: current economic meltdown).
I do not have a good solution for pro-wrestling. I'm probably inclined to agree with you that it needs to correct itself even though I don't believe that it will. I do not believe in govt intervention, especially with something like pro wrestling, and I don't believe that the athletes will unionize as the WWE will not allow it.
I guess this is a roundabout way of saying that the world unfettered of govt regulation may not be as desirable as some people may think. Certainly we know what happens when govt assumes too much power. In fact, we hardly see an example of a market unfettered of regulations, until we take a hard look at the world of professional wrestling.