The Pros And Cons Of Banning Boxing

643 Words2 Pages

Thus, whether or not the case for legal prohibition is determinative, many reasons have been given for moral concern about boxing. It is perfectly appropriate for those who share such moral concerns to refuse to support boxing, to urge others to refrain from supporting it, and to advocate strong reforms in the practice of boxing. (Simon, 2001, p.355) John Mills, a moral philosopher, “feared state intervention into private affairs because he thought that “some projects are more worthy than others, and liberty is needed precisely to find out what is valuable in life, to question, re-examine, and revise our beliefs about value”” (Leclerc & Herrera, 1999, p. 427). When given the choice to participate in boxing, athletes have the right …show more content…

The liberty of an individual in sport is the number one value that should be respected to make boxing morally adequate. Autonomy should be respected in sport because ones body should always have freedom from external control and influences. All arguments for paternalism can be explained in a justified way to prove that boxing is unethical and unsafe, but this does not mean that paternalism is the best way to bring about safety in boxing. If boxing were to be banned, violence would become more prevalent outside of sport, and proper boxing technique and skill would slowly disappear. Keeping boxing as a sport will create a safer environment for this type of activity to occur, and also create a fair ground for each sport that involves violence to stay available to athletes. Because boxing does involve violence, this does not imply that it is immoral to participate and that the freedom to participate should be taken away from athletes. Boxing provides a safe environment, a place to create a career, and is an institution for sporting entertainment. By allowing boxing as a sport to continue, this will create a safe and fair atmosphere with the freedom to allow all individuals to participate with proper

Open Document