Lance Armstrong son is in trouble

I know this one wrote:

Because most sane people recognise the fact that he won the Tour de France 7 times.

Such a tired debate. Lance admitted to cheating. He was stripped of his Tour titles. His cycling legacy is disgraced. He's still wealthy, but not as wealthy as he'd be had he not be caught cheating. He's a bully and a jerk.

if your talking Biden boy are you off the rails. articulate- did you see his only press conference, make stuff up- how about the new Georgia voting laws , nonprofit- how about China, Ukraine thru Hunter, fixing the country- the southern border crisis

runguy wrote:

if your talking Biden boy are you off the rails. articulate- did you see his only press conference, make stuff up- how about the new Georgia voting laws , nonprofit- how about China, Ukraine thru Hunter, fixing the country- the southern border crisis

is this English?

zxcvzcxv wrote:

The sheer fact that no one was given Lance's titles because so many were doping tells you all you need to know. The frequent runner-up, Jan Ulrich, would have had 4 titles if they did that, but he had been busted for a doping offense. The sport is such a joke. Sky was sponsoring doping the past decade when it dominated. Contador was caught doping but stripped only of one title. The guy to win after Lance was Landis, caught doping. It goes on and on. Anyone who thinks that Indurain, multiple champ before Lance, or Delgado or Riis was clean has his head in the sand.

What about those guys from the 80's and early? Surely they were on something as well. Hinault, Fignon, the American LeMond, Roche, Delgado

zxcvzcxv wrote:

Armstrong won the all-drug Tour de France 7 times, whereas it's quite conceivable that some of the 1988 finalists were not doping anything stronger than caffeine.

Were you going along with the sarcasm or are you really just clueless? Unlike cycling, you think sprinters are clean?

In any event, you do know that every single runner in that 100m final except Calvin Smith has tested positive for some PED or other, right? I mean, Carl Lewis tested positive three times for stimulants in the 1988 Olympic trials alone - but he's got a gold medal for the 1988 100m now. You can argue that Calvin Smith really was the only clean sprinter and that he was the only sprinter actually capable of running those times without drugs... or, much like cycling, you can accept that drug use was (is?) rampant in sprinters. The reality is that catching drug cheats is hard (see Lance Armstrong for example), which unfortunately means that even if someone tests positive we have no way of knowing if they haven't doped, especially back in 1988 where testing was not what it is today. So if you want to say it is ok for a cyclist to cheat because they all cheat, then really you can use that argument for almost any sport as we do know drug use is rampant and that catching cheaters is very difficult.

Alaska is bigger, suck it Texas wrote:

[quote]SDSU Aztec wrote:

Texas statutory rape law is violated when a person has consensual sexual intercourse with an individual under age 17. While there is no close in age exemption, defenses exist when the offender was no more than 3 years older then the victim and of the opposite sex. sexual intercourse between an employee of a school and a student is also prohibited, unless they are married, and no age of consent is specified in this law.

https://www.ageofconsent.net/states/texas

3 years older THEN the victim? WTF are you talking about?

it doesn't appear that Luke is arrested due to statutory rape laws as much as he has been arrested with sexual assault for having sex with someone who wasn't conscious or able to consent. So maybe focus on that a little more than what age they were?

I want to also add that this is so disappointing--Luke was in the documentary that came out this summer on ESPN. He seemed genuine, sincere, and like he had a good value system despite the fact that he had parents with very little value systems.

runinthewind wrote:

w0efuu wrote:

Moral obligation for him to raise son with Christian perspective.

Is that being done?

The mother is a very devout Christian. Also - it's really none of our business what their religious up bringing is.

Well, of course it is ... as Christians we all hope that Lances son gets to heaven....Jesus DID say that we ARE our brothers keepers...

I dunno. The idea that a 16yo cannot consent to sex is stupid. No wonder society thinks girls are dumber than monkeys.

kore wrote:

I dunno. The idea that a 16yo cannot consent to sex is stupid. No wonder society thinks girls are dumber than monkeys.

I REPEAT

it doesn't appear that Luke is arrested due to statutory rape laws as much as he has been arrested with sexual assault for having sex with someone who wasn't conscious or able to consent. So maybe focus on that a little more than what age they were?