Yes or No?

The Death Penalty may, for some people, seem very humane and advantageous for the states, but for me, there are two main problems: The first being that that it portrays the belief that in some cases, killing is acceptable, but secondly – and more relevant to my point – the person gets no chance of redemption. It is important to believe that humans, if given the chance, can improve and rescue themselves. It is this I use to make the somewhat tedious link the recent drug issues in Athletics, especially British. A few months ago now, some of you may have remembered the story of Christine Ohuruogu. This British 400 metre runner was given a one year ban for missing three drugs tests – not found taking drugs – who then can back to win a Gold medal at the World Championships, only weeks after the end of the ban. Sounds like a fairy tale right? Unforunatly not, as it turned out that her one year suspension also included a ban from competing in any future Olympic games. This was, to every British men anguish, imposed by the British Olympic Association, rather than the International Olympic Committee. This started a heated debate within the country, which was never really solved, though recently she won the right to compete in the Olympics. Things have now moved on now to another level. Dwain Chambers, the British 100 and 60 metre runner, has recently returned from his ban too. His is slightly different though, as he was banned from testing positive for THG, an performance-enhancing drug. He has come back a new man, with a point to prove, and succeeded, wiping the floor in the recent London trials. This has meant he has been reinstated into the British Olympic team and will represent Britain at the Indoor World Championships in Valencia. The has reopened the debate and so, it erupts again. Many people have been highly critical of his inclusion, including Dame Kelly Homes and Lord Sebastian Coe, believing that it is people such as him that are tarnishing and ruining the “true spirit” of the sport. Even the selectors claimed the picked him under duress, though if you really thought that they wanted to make an example out of him, he would not of been picked. Furthermore, let’s not forget this is a sport lead by the ever-so corrupt, IOC. Also, many disagree, and I am one of them. Interestingly enough, the people who agree with Dwain are in fact current Athletes, aware of how the sport is operating at this time, and perhaps where is it headed, such as Kim Collins and Asafa Powell. The reason I disagree is I feel he should be given a second chance – shouldn’t we all? He served the ban with no trouble, acknoledged he made a mistake and the error of his ways, and now that it is expired, why shouldn’t he run? It’s perfectly allowed, and unless they plan to change to rules, than it is perfectly fair. Moreover, the rules are there to be seen in black and white, plain and simple, but people are still complaing even though they are following. All I am saying is that we are all human and all make mistakes – its part of being who we are, and thus we should give him the chance to redeem himself. One thing that is essentially important is that he is not made a example of, as it is undemocractic to keep punishing him personally. And so, the Hullabaloo is all about nothing. Dwain and Christine should both be allowed to run (if they qualify of course) this summer, at this year’s Beijing Olympics, for they served their bans- end of story. Plus, they are pretty much one of the best hopes for any medals returning Britain’s way. What does Britain want – renewed athletes making us proud, bringing back medals, or an embarrassingly bad medal-free Olympics? It’s your choice. Just remember: To err is human; forgive, divine.