This will only be settled in kangaroo court

No, Darrell, he doesn’t. And you no he doesn’t. You were using hyperbole. I get it. But that logic is the essence of the argument against him. “If we let him run on these prostetic devices, what’s to stop somebody else from using a jet pack or wanting to drive a car?” (That’s not me exaggerating his opponents POV. People really do use cars and jet packs as examples.) Here’s the problem with that argument and that line of thinking–it can be applied to anything. Should your favorite football team be barred from all competitions? Yes, because if we allow them to play, that could open the door to .

This is the same “logic” opponents of gay marriage have in America. They argue that if we allow a man to marry a man, what’s to stop somebody from saying a man can marry a horse. (Real arguments made by real elected officials. I’m not making this crap up.)

Most studies show there is no advantage. That’s what the experts overwhelmingly say. But people like quoting the fringe opinions that haven’t been peer reviewed. And then people who don’t really care about the science like commenting on this and so many other articles because they really seem to think that one day we’ll have to allow robots into the Olympics if we don’t draw the line here. At least that’s what they SAY motivates their opposition.

I think it really comes down to the argument that having prosthetic legs is an advantage is so absurd that there’s a tendency to think “Well, there must be SOMETHING to it for somebody to have raised it as an issue.”

Please reread what you wrote and ask yourself why you said it.

too right, no way should he be allowed compete.

He has a backup set of prosthetic legs that are spring loaded, I’ve heard he’ll be trying out for the high jump too