It seems that most of the yes responses revolve around Oscar Pistorius (OP) being a positive role model for the disabled as well as educating the able bodied just how much can be achieved with a disability. It’s a compelling argument which is difficult to argue against with without coming across as a heartless sh!t.
Still here goes. I don’t think he should be allowed to run against able bodied athletes as that competition has always been about finding the best natural athlete in the world. If drugs are banned because of their performance enhancing capabilities and assuming (I don’t know this for sure) that OP’s prosthetic legs give him a performance advantage I think it would be equally unfair for him to compete against able bodied athletes.
The point above about the paralympians gradually getting to a position that their prostheses are sufficiently advanced that they begin to outperform able bodied athletes is an interesting one. If that was clear cut would we even be having the discussion? Is it only because we think that OP’s artificial legs just about balance out his ability rather obviously enhance it that we are left with the question?
Would more people watch the paralympics if the performances outpaced the able bodied performances?