Topic: News: Norik Vardanian busted for marijuana

[Chris Ⓐ LeRoux]

Mike,

I was taking the case of Norik and applying it in principle to future situations. In other words, the nature of the substance tested positive for is not really the issue to you, is it? It is to me because as I said I consider it an immoral effort, and even worse done under false pretenses, under the cover of keeping a level playing field when it is in fact political in nature. The IOC, USOC, WADA, USADA, etc have the right to be immoral however in their private affairs just as I have the right, as you agree, to condemn and remove myself from their authority. Freedom is great. The point is eventually by your plan, lifters will face greater sanction in America than elsewhere. This is the opposite intention of drug testing, which is not surprising. All efforts to control human beings committing no aggression against other human beings inevitably achieves the opposite of the desired effect.  Further, I predict the USAW WILL pay a fine for a lifter, within 6 years at the outside. I just enjoy making predictions. Its a test of my worldview. :)

As for being in the minority, I have found the majority is very often wrong and even worse immoral, (ie., collectivist-statist.) I believe nearly all of my mistakes in life occurred before I realized this and found a superior path. I no longer concern myself with the herd, those I do respect your opinion very much, appreciate your viewpoint which you have articulated very clearly, and am thankful for your willingness to discuss it.

Another idea I'll just throw out though, is maybe pay half the fine if he agrees to pay the other half on a certain timeframe- mutual interest. :)

Peace

[Andy Dick]

I would have to agree with you Chris in the fact that pot does not make you a better lifter, its not going to have anabolic effects so in that regard it is kind of a dumb rule.  There is nothing about it to do with a level playing field.  But I do agree with Mike in the fact that for now it is the rules and we have to follow them.  Yes other countries are skriting the system by paying the fines for the lifters but I don't think it is good to take the stance "well if you can't beat them, join them."  But that is just my opinion, I was always the moral high ground guy, at the end of the day if USAW pays the fine I am not going to lose any sleep over it.

Chris, also I do think paying half is a reasonable solution, it doesn't bury Norik and also still imposes a penalty on him.  I could live with that. 

Just to play the devils advocate, I have heard the argument that money could be better spent on allowing other lifters to lift internationally.  However, helping Norik lift again may have the benefit of allowing more slots for the future Olympics as well so there could be a benefit just not a monetary one.

[Chris Ⓐ LeRoux]

There is nothing about it to do with a level playing field.  But I do agree with Mike in the fact that for now it is the rules and we have to follow them.  Yes other countries are skriting the system by paying the fines for the lifters but I don't think it is good to take the stance "well if you can't beat them, join them."  But that is just my opinion, I was always the moral high ground guy, at the end of the day if USAW pays the fine I am not going to lose any sleep over it.

Andy, but I have been making a moral argument against imposing the fine on Norik. First, because it is an immoral rule that should not be enforced or supported; second, because it is a lie and nothing based on a lie, a denial of reality, can be moral; third, because it is not objective, being based on arbitrarily determined fines. Thus it is not applied equally and acts retroactively (not knowing the fine in advance). Post de facto regulation = unjust. Etc. All of my arguments are moral arguments, even the call for it being a wise investment to pay it off entirely and seeking mutual interest (each pay half) since seeking mutual interest and consent is the height of morality. I did make some predictions on the policy, which should not be interpreted as pragmatic arguments against it. :)

[Mike Wittmer]

Chris, I don't know what else to say on this issue.  You can say it is immoral to enforce the rule but whether we (USAW) agree with that or not does not change the fact that we have to abide by the IWF ruling or we do not lift in international competitions.  Again, I think it is a stupid rule too.  But, we're paying the fine and we are not taking funding from other budget items to cover it.  The USAW and it's members have a moral right to what little money we have.  I really believe this is the right course of action and putting myself in the same situation would mean that I would have to pay the fine as I certainly would not expect others to pay it on my behalf.  I don't like the IWF (IOC) ruling but we did not get to make this decision. 

As for my comment regarding you being in the minority, that was meant to be an observation of the feedback I have received on this, not the basis for my decision.  The BOD decision was unanimous and there was no other option given even slight consideration.  If a majority of voters do not approve of BOD actions, they can vote BOD members out of office, something that is much easier to do under the new bylaws. 

In the mean time, while I will listen to the opinions and rationale of other members, I will vote for what I think is the right thing to do.   

Mike

[Mike Wittmer]

Just to play the devils advocate, I have heard the argument that money could be better spent on allowing other lifters to lift internationally.  However, helping Norik lift again may have the benefit of allowing more slots for the future Olympics as well so there could be a benefit just not a monetary one.

Andy, this is what I said:

"I think paying the $5000 fine for a lifter puts other lifters at a disadvantage.  For example, a couple of kids would be at the disadvantage of having to come up with the travel expense to go on an international trip because USAW is spending it's money bailing out drug offenders."

[Andy Dick]

First, because it is an immoral rule that should not be enforced or supported; second, because it is a lie and nothing based on a lie, a denial of reality, can be moral;

What lie are you referring to?  I can see by your other points what you feel make it immoral but I am unsure what you mean here.  Even please explain to me, so I am fully aware, why you think the rule itself is immoral if you meant something more that what you stated in your post.  I think the fact that Norik was willing to say he will compete according to the rules put in place by the governing bodies on using something that was deemed to be an illegal substance and didn't was what put him in the wrong to have to face a penalty.  He began by causing the offense to allow him to be wronged against by the imposition of the fine.  If he would have followed the rules of competition it would not have been the case.

third, because it is not objective, being based on arbitrarily determined fines. Thus it is not applied equally and acts retroactively (not knowing the fine in advance). Post de facto regulation = unjust. Etc.

I would agree this is a broken system and there needs to be distinct guidelines but fix the guidelines not reward those that didn't compete according to the rules in place.  Yes there is a problem with the punishment in place, but remember if Norik would have acted morally by following the rules put in place it would not be an issue.  One could argue that every case is not the same when morality is involved so there could be no set black and white punishment line.  Is this line abused, yes and it always will be so you do the best you can, I feel it is human nature.

All of my arguments are moral arguments, even the call for it being a wise investment to pay it off entirely and seeking mutual interest (each pay half) since seeking mutual interest and consent is the height of morality.

Interesting.  But it is impossible to come up with a solution that provides mutual benefit.  Someone will get screwed over in the end.  USAW loses money that should go to someone who competed according to the rules in place.  Yes it will benefit Norik and the USAW in some way but the USAW governs a whole body of lifters so money that is taken from them to go to someone who didn't play by the rules is immoral to those individuals.

Morality is a set of guidelines put in place to define human conduct as what is seen as right.  This is to put parameters on how a person should or should not act.  Man is to then conduct their actions according to the set parameters.  That same man was the one who put an authority over himself to make such a rule in the first place and agreed to follow such rules.  It can be an abused and broken system but it is the system put in place by those who put the people in power to set the guidelines.  As I said it will never be a perfect system.  Norik made the offense that crossed the line of the parameter on conduct and left himself open to the immoral actions you are fighting against.  Looking at it that way Norik should pay all the 5,000 and that 5,000 that would go to him should go to fixing the broke system by getting the rule changed or getting the right people in place to change the rule.  That would be of the highest moral outcome that would benefit all would it not?

[Chris Ⓐ LeRoux]

Mike,

You can say it is immoral to enforce the rule but whether we (USAW) agree with that or not does not change the fact that we have to abide by the IWF ruling or we do not lift in international competitions. Again, I think it is a stupid rule too.

Unjust rules require non-compliance and non-cooperation from the just. There are always choices. I've been offering one in particular for many years now. IMO the USAW should stand by its athletes against injustice, not appease it.

The BOD decision was unanimous and there was no other option given even slight consideration.  If a majority of voters do not approve of BOD actions, they can vote BOD members out of office, something that is much easier to do under the new bylaws.

This reinforces my perspective. I have no concern for voting and all that, only the truth, and my view of truth is not subject to vote. Since I have pretty much thought the USAW was clueless for 20 years or so, I am not upset that they view things differently from me. :)  No offense intended, just as you intend no offense by disagreeing with me. :)

In the mean time, while I will listen to the opinions and rationale of other members, I will vote for what I think is the right thing to do.

Absolutely. I am simply attempting to influence the discussion, not so much for this time since its obvious the train wreck can't be stopped, but for the next time. Perhaps when this causes a debacle down the road, people will listen. Or maybe not. Life goes on.

I think paying the $5000 fine for a lifter puts other lifters at a disadvantage.  For example, a couple of kids would be at the disadvantage of having to come up with the travel expense to go on an international trip because USAW is spending it's money bailing out drug offenders.

Is the USAW in the business of producing elite athletes or is it a charity to help all athletes equally? The kids looking for free trips to meets have no right to it anymore than Norik does. Its a simple business decision. Which will help produce the best USA teams? I'd put my money on Norik, a proven elite. Let the kids train harder, get better, and compete domestically for now. I believe a great deal of money has been wasted over the last 20 years sending mediocre lifters to international contests simply to get annihilated. All athletes are not created equal. Some are worth far more than others.

What lie are you referring to?

I am referring to the fact the rule is inherently immoral since it represents an attempt to regulate non-aggressive personal behavior, is based on the LIE that it is part of keeping a level playing field, and is not objective. The last complaint nullifies it entirely. Since the fines are arbitrarily determined after the fact, you can not know your penalty for violation in advance, and thus informed consent is NOT given. I could go on about how it is immoral but it all flows from this, all inevitable outcomes.

Looking at it that way Norik should pay all the 5,000 and that 5,000 that would go to him should go to fixing the broke system by getting the rule changed or getting the right people in place to change the rule.  That would be of the highest moral outcome that would benefit all would it not?"

Impossible. The ends do not justify the means. The means are the ends. You can not accomplish good (reforming drug testing) by doing evil (applying immoral, non-objective, post de facto rules.) Only more problems can result from this policy.

[Mike Wittmer]

Mike,

You can say it is immoral to enforce the rule but whether we (USAW) agree with that or not does not change the fact that we have to abide by the IWF ruling or we do not lift in international competitions. Again, I think it is a stupid rule too.

Unjust rules require non-compliance and non-cooperation from the just. There are always choices. I've been offering one in particular for many years now. IMO the USAW should stand by its athletes against injustice, not appease it.

There are consequences to your actions.  We are saying do not use marijuana if you want to lift for the United States.  That is your choice.  Use it, accept the risk that comes with that, or not.