Have To Disagree Here

Oscar Pistorius is an amazing person. He was born without fibulae in his legs. However, with modern technology, he was not only able to overcome an inability to walk... but has become a faster runner than nearly everybody on the planet. In fact, he recently ran the 400-meters in an attempt to qualify for the Beijing Olympics.

I would have to disgree with allowing a handicapped runner to compete against "normal" (and I use the word "normal" with no disrespect to Mr. Pistorius) runners when he requires special technology in order to run: Sports are primarily about the human body coupled with human skill. Any equipment used in sport is generally available to all participants alike... or otherwise is not directly related to participation in the sport itself.

If a runner wins a race primarily because he was born with huge, long, strong legs, that's simply (amazingly) a variant of the human body that gave him his success. If a runner wins a race because he was born without legs and the prosthetic legs that he uses can propel him faster than he might (I emphasize "might") have been able to run if born with legs, that is not a variant of the human body, but a variant of technology not available to other competitors.

The technology that has granted Oscar Pistorius such a wonderful ability has brought him within seconds of qualifying for the Olympics. That is a wonderful and incredible thing when you ponder it briefly. However, who is to say that improvements in this prosthetic technology in the future won't eventually allow him to win the Olympics? What will happen then... when the best way to win the 400-meters in the Olympics is by having prosthetic legs?

Therein lies the problem: It won't be "the best human body" winning at running, but "the best technology"... and when that technology is not available to all participants — short of voluntary amputation — it is an unfair advantage.