W

e all have heard the legendary tale of Robin Hood of Sherwood Forest. He was a heroic outlaw in English folklore who helped the oppressed deal with the corrupt local government and sheriff, stealing from the wealthy lords and giving to the poor. To many, an almost flawless, modern day Robin Hood was reborn in Lance Armstrong, until his eventual confession to doping charges called into question all of his achievements in sports.

A survivor of metastatic testicular cancer, Armstrong beat all the odds and became the epitome of strength and grace. One critical question, however, remains to haunt us: Do the ends justify the means? The validity of this maxim, in my view, is the classic moral debate of all time, and one that is hardly ever comes to a conclusion.

Once ranked among the greatest athletes of all time by winning seven consecutive Tour de France titles, as well as championships in other cycling events, Armstrong has seen the clouds of doping gather until they formed thunderstorm that destroyed his lifetime achievement in one fell swoop.

The American icon admitted in an interview with Oprah that he was the victim of his own falsehoods as much as his use of performance-enhancing drugs, ending years of vehement denials of doping allegations. He conceded his deceit related to elaborate doping scheme as a member of the US Postal Service team that put him on top of the podium at the Tour de France time after time.

The colossal scandal irrevocably tainted what should have been a glorious career. It quickly sparked heated debate over whether Armstrong’s demise outweighed his continuous fight against cancer. Despite the lies, his life struggle has motivated and inspired many people, especially those with cancer.

The Lance Armstrong Foundation had raised millions of dollars for cancer research from the sale of yellow “LiveStrong” bracelets and other fundraising efforts. It has helped to save lives and change countless others.

In spite of this remarkable contribution to humanity, the question remains irksome for many. Cheating is ethically, morally and legally wrong. For me, his drug abuse cannot be tolerated or justified no matter how noble the end is.

As a member of society, I agree that any form of drug abuse, lying and cheating in professional sports should not go unpunished. We don’t want to build a society based on lies and cheating.

It scares me to think of the kind of society we will become if we encourage people to cheat, lie, steal and do whatever drugs are necessary in order to accomplish good things.

For example, we are always taught in school to be honest in facing exams and that cheating is wrong. It’s unbearable to think any teacher has the intention to encourage dishonest behavior such as lying, cheating and stealing among their students to pass the national exam by way of letting the ends justify the means.

Surely, such misconduct will firmly imprint the conception that it is ethically and morally OK to do wrong for the greater good. It helps to fertilize the seeds of corrupt habits and behavior.

For that reason, acceding to the maxim “the ends justify the means” would be like letting this contagious disease spread. It would infect others, spreading like a raging fire, until it was too late to stop the damage. We do not want to see our society lose its moral scruples and be led into stopping at nothing to achieve its goals. Therefore, I personally think that Armstrong’s ends do not justify his means.

I used to admire Armstrong for his extraordinary achievements in sports. Now, I am disappointed. His life story was based on lies and denial. It was wrong. Yet, I can’t turn a blind eye to his significant contributions through the cancer foundation he built.

Herlina
Jakarta