http://www.ksat.com/news/10115430/detail.html?rss=ant&psp=news
As long as he’s paying for it out of his own pocket, fine.
I’m sick and tired of the anti-steroid polictical grandstanding. And really tired of that kid that killed himself and the father that is just SO certain that steroids were to blame. All the father is now is a tool for every oppotunistic politician that comes along.
Not sure what’s going on now there in terms of football and everything, but I don’t think it’s a bad idea. It keeps the adolescents safe from messing with thier hormonal output where they can really do damage.
It certainly is a good idea, especially with the pressure they put on these high school kids over football.
“Dewhurst was joined by Don Hooton, a Plano father whose son was a promising baseball player who killed himself in 2003 at age 17 after using steroids. His parents and doctors believe he plunged into a deep depression after using the muscle-building drugs.”
WTF…
I need to move to Canada.
I have a real problem with this.
I realize that minors don’t get all the rights of adults. I question whether we are educating them to be good citizens by getting them used to being constantly, invasively monitored all the time.
I suppose they don’t have to play football. What happens when the public schools decide they can test the general school population for other substances?
[quote]nephorm wrote:
I suppose they don’t have to play football. What happens when the public schools decide they can test the general school population for other substances?[/quote]
Shhhh. That’s phase II. Test all kids for anything and everything… so we can expel those little troublemakers and raise the school average, so it gets more funding.
I think its funny how people want to test for steroids. No one wants to deal with the shitty parents, corrupt politicians, crappy use of funding, or the crazies that decide to shoot thier classmates. It is even rediculous to think this is a problem worth solving.
Just last month there were 3 school shootings. None roid related. This IS INSANITYYYYYYYYYYY.
[quote]Curzon wrote:
As long as he’s paying for it out of his own pocket, fine.
I’m sick and tired of the anti-steroid polictical grandstanding. And really tired of that kid that killed himself and the father that is just SO certain that steroids were to blame. All the father is now is a tool for every oppotunistic politician that comes along.[/quote]
How many alcohol related suicides do you think occurred last year?
…or alcohol related accidents?
…or alcohol related crimes?
It has nothing to do with science or logic.
Just follow the money.
How expensive is this?
In this day and age of high health care costs do we really want the government to be paying for this sort of BS?
I don’t care if it is steroids or pot or alcohol, it is the parents responsiblity to watch the kids, not the nanny state.
[quote]nephorm wrote:
I have a real problem with this.
I realize that minors don’t get all the rights of adults. I question whether we are educating them to be good citizens by getting them used to being constantly, invasively monitored all the time.
I suppose they don’t have to play football. What happens when the public schools decide they can test the general school population for other substances?[/quote]
agreed that’s going to far especially since they pressure us into using them in the first place
Of all the issues with kids, he’s going to tackle…uhhh…teen steroid use. Yeah, that’s the ticket…TEEN STEROID USE!!!
What a waste. How about
-metal detectors at the doors
-armed security officers in school
-birth control/condoms for free
-better teachers
-better books
-school uniforms for all kids
-bring back dodgeball
So many better uses of the resources. Pathetic.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
How expensive is this?
In this day and age of high health care costs do we really want the government to be paying for this sort of BS?
I don’t care if it is steroids or pot or alcohol, it is the parents responsiblity to watch the kids, not the nanny state.[/quote]
If you can scare the general public with “hot topic” potential dangers, you can get more votes. Marijuana is old news. That just doesn’t scare people anymore. Alcohol? What parent actually waited until they were 21 years of age before they ever drank an alcoholic drink? I would bet that number is less than 20% even though I just pulled that out my ass.
But steroids? That brings thoughts of really big scary muscular guys who make sedentary fathers feel weak and sedentary mothers think impure thoughts. Surely that can scare up some more votes this year.
I am just amazed that anyone is falling for this. If it works, I fear for where the country is headed. With the amount of info available today right at your fingertips, if people are this gullible, that doesn’t speak well of us as a whole.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
But steroids? That brings thoughts of really big scary muscular guys who make sedentary fathers feel weak and sedentary mothers think impure thoughts. Surely that can scare up some more votes this year.[/quote]
That’s exactly what I think.
These days the PTA crew doesn’t seem to get nearly as riled up about things that are destructive to kid’s lives as they are about things that might help them accomplish something out of the norm.
Not that I think steroids have any place in high school… but the government should leave parenting to parents.