Should we get rid of football and other contact sports?

[Philosophy Explorer]

If you follow sports, the participants and others have been getting harmed.

What do you think?

PhilX

[thedoc]

If you are suggesting that we ban all contact sports, then you are talking like a liberal left wing politician who wants to protect everyone from cradle to grave but that also includes telling everyone what to do and when to do it. The participants and the spectators have chosen that course of action and they must accept the consequences of those choices. I strenuously oppose any attempt to tell others what to do and when to do it everyone should be allowed to make the choice of what they do to themselves, but I agree that there should be limits on what they can do to others or how much control they should have over others.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

A liberal person would say nothing of the sort.

[Philosophy Explorer]

If you are suggesting that we ban all contact sports, then you are talking like a liberal left wing politician who wants to protect everyone from cradle to grave but that also includes telling everyone what to do and when to do it. The participants and the spectators have chosen that course of action and they must accept the consequences of those choices. I strenuously oppose any attempt to tell others what to do and when to do it everyone should be allowed to make the choice of what they do to themselves, but I agree that there should be limits on what they can do to others or how much control they should have over others.

In weighing the benefits and the detriments, what do the participants have to gain versus being harmed (not only to themselves, but to other family members due to mental health issues from a news broadcast I've just heard)? Is it worth risking harm just to have some freedom in contact sports?

I do lean to the left, but even if I were an arch conservative, I still find it disturbing that participants are putting their lives and others at risk. So if you wish to confuse me with liberalism, please by all means do so if it makes you happy. As far as limits go, how would that apply in football e.g.? How would you specifically protect the players and others? I submit there's only one way you can guarantee you can keep harm from occurring.

PhilX

[vegetariantaxidermy]

If you are suggesting that we ban all contact sports, then you are talking like a liberal left wing politician who wants to protect everyone from cradle to grave but that also includes telling everyone what to do and when to do it. The participants and the spectators have chosen that course of action and they must accept the consequences of those choices. I strenuously oppose any attempt to tell others what to do and when to do it everyone should be allowed to make the choice of what they do to themselves, but I agree that there should be limits on what they can do to others or how much control they should have over others.

In weighing the benefits and the detriments, what do the participants have to gain versus being harmed (not only to themselves, but to other family members due to mental health issues from a news broadcast I've just heard)? Is it worth risking harm just to have some freedom in contact sports?

I do lean to the left, but even if I were an arch conservative, I still find it disturbing that participants are putting their lives and others at risk. So if you wish to confuse me with liberalism, please by all means do so if it makes you happy. As far as limits go, how would that apply in football e.g.? How would you specifically protect the players and others? I submit there's only one way you can guarantee you can keep harm from occurring.

PhilX

Oh well. Just stop children from climbing trees while you are about it. Or having fun on challenging and cooperative playground equipment (oh dear, risk of 'litigation' here, hence the pathetic PC excuses we now see that pass as playground equipment ). Or getting dirty (germs). Or walking to school. Or doing ANYTHING without their parents hovering around like annoying, over-protective gnats. Hang on. You yanks already do all that.

[Philosophy Explorer]

If you are suggesting that we ban all contact sports, then you are talking like a liberal left wing politician who wants to protect everyone from cradle to grave but that also includes telling everyone what to do and when to do it. The participants and the spectators have chosen that course of action and they must accept the consequences of those choices. I strenuously oppose any attempt to tell others what to do and when to do it everyone should be allowed to make the choice of what they do to themselves, but I agree that there should be limits on what they can do to others or how much control they should have over others.

In weighing the benefits and the detriments, what do the participants have to gain versus being harmed (not only to themselves, but to other family members due to mental health issues from a news broadcast I've just heard)? Is it worth risking harm just to have some freedom in contact sports?

I do lean to the left, but even if I were an arch conservative, I still find it disturbing that participants are putting their lives and others at risk. So if you wish to confuse me with liberalism, please by all means do so if it makes you happy. As far as limits go, how would that apply in football e.g.? How would you specifically protect the players and others? I submit there's only one way you can guarantee you can keep harm from occurring.

PhilX

Oh well. Just stop children from climbing trees while you are about it. Or having fun on challenging and cooperative playground equipment (oh dear, risk of 'litigation' here, hence the pathetic PC excuses we now see that pass as playground equipment ). Or getting dirty (germs). Or walking to school. Or doing ANYTHING without their parents hovering around like annoying, over-protective gnats. Hang on. You yanks already do all that.

Your usual tired nonYank argument. Which of the ones you brought up are likely to lead to lives, children's or otherwise, along with their families getting messed up?

None of the examples you brought up are contact sports.

PhilX

[thedoc]

If anything there should be an age limit for the contact sports you are referring to but once a person has reached the age of consent they should be allowed to make their own mistakes, and I'm not really sure how one person participating in a contact sport effects another person, as long as they can take care of their own medical expenses.

[Philosophy Explorer]

If anything there should be an age limit for the contact sports you are referring to but once a person has reached the age of consent they should be allowed to make their own mistakes, and I'm not really sure how one person participating in a contact sport effects another person, as long as they can take care of their own medical expenses.

My understanding from the news report is that the player's mental health is affected so this would lead to domestic abuse, etc. A particular case was pointed out where the person, normally calm, hurt his partner, and it's my understanding this isn't an isolated incident doc. I'm keeping my eyes open for the report.

PhilX

[Philosophy Explorer]

If you are suggesting that we ban all contact sports, then you are talking like a liberal left wing politician who wants to protect everyone from cradle to grave but that also includes telling everyone what to do and when to do it. The participants and the spectators have chosen that course of action and they must accept the consequences of those choices. I strenuously oppose any attempt to tell others what to do and when to do it everyone should be allowed to make the choice of what they do to themselves, but I agree that there should be limits on what they can do to others or how much control they should have over others.

In weighing the benefits and the detriments, what do the participants have to gain versus being harmed (not only to themselves, but to other family members due to mental health issues from a news broadcast I've just heard)? Is it worth risking harm just to have some freedom in contact sports?

I do lean to the left, but even if I were an arch conservative, I still find it disturbing that participants are putting their lives and others at risk. So if you wish to confuse me with liberalism, please by all means do so if it makes you happy. As far as limits go, how would that apply in football e.g.? How would you specifically protect the players and others? I submit there's only one way you can guarantee you can keep harm from occurring.

PhilX

Oh well. Just stop children from climbing trees while you are about it. Or having fun on challenging and cooperative playground equipment (oh dear, risk of 'litigation' here, hence the pathetic PC excuses we now see that pass as playground equipment ). Or getting dirty (germs). Or walking to school. Or doing ANYTHING without their parents hovering around like annoying, over-protective gnats. Hang on. You yanks already do all that.

Want to add that if you had any children, you'd understand better rather than pour out your flippant remarks.

PhilX

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Not flippant at all. All of it is true. You must be living under a rock to not know it.
Why stop at 'contact' sports? Gymnastics is really dangerous. Ballet dancers can get terrible injuries. Swimmers get ear problems. Wrestling. Trampolining. Diving. ............... Heck, you should be happy when your fat children want to do any activity at all that doesn't involve the internet or television. Let's just outlaw ALL activity that carries ANY kind of risk of injury whatsoever.

[Philosophy Explorer]

Not flippant at all. All of it is true. You must be living under a rock to not know it.
Why stop at 'contact' sports? Gymnastics is really dangerous. Ballet dancers can get terrible injuries. Swimmers get ear problems. Wrestling. Trampolining. Diving. ............... Heck, you should be happy when your fat children want to do any activity at all that doesn't involve the internet or television. Let's just outlaw ALL activity that carries ANY kind of risk of injury whatsoever. Like.....

Why stop at contact sports? Because that's the way this thread is set up. If you don't like the program, change the channel.

PhilX

[vegetariantaxidermy]

If you don't want anyone to offer counterarguments to you silly threads then don't post them.

[thedoc]

FYI, most parents allow children to do dangerous acts, but teach them how to be safe doing it, it's only the stupid parents that allow their children to perform dangerous acts without any supervision or training. It's a good thing that VT doesn't have any children or thew would be dead or worse by now.

[Greta]

I see no problem other than governments sinking money into sport at the expense of the arts, but that seems to be the way almost everywhere.

[Philosophy Explorer]

If you don't want anyone to offer counterarguments to you silly threads then don't post them.

Crappy English grammar on your part.

PhilX