Lance Armstrong should still be considered as more of an international hero than just a lying jerk

We, as humans, love heroes. People who overcome incredible odds to perform extraordinary feats are often considered heroes. And Lance Armstrong"s story of overcoming what was thought of as terminal cancer to go on to win one of the most grueling races on the planet more times than any other person in the history of the race certainly qualifies. However, that story was built on a lie. A lie which said that he did it with nothing more than hard work, faith in himself and his teams, and an unearthly reserve of determination. Now that we know truth, why should we continue to cheer for a cheater? Can we actually forget that he broke the rules and gave himself an unfair advantage? No, we cannot. Your assertion that we can and in fact should forget what he did flies in the face of our society"s norms, that if someone cheats, they should be punished. And if he should be forgiven, should other who cheat be rewarded? You are asking society to completely reverse one of our social norms. Also, you"re saying it"s an emotional response and that we should appeal to rationality, but you are asking us to ignore a rational argument in that he took purposeful and deliberate steps to hide his actions and remember the positive emotional response we used to have? No having it both ways on my watch. Now that I've refuted your primary contentions, time to lay out some of my own Counter Contentions. 1)He broke the rules of his sport, which banned PEDs and blood doping. The evidence as presented by the USADA, the United States Anti-Doping Agency, shows that Armstrong put himself in the center of a massive scheme to cheat, and evade those who would catch him. And because he has broken these rules, why shouldn't he be punished, which includes losing all the fame and admiration he gained because of it? 2)We punish other athletes in other sports for the same thing. Right now in Major League Baseball, players who were even SUSPECTED of using PEDs will likely never see the inside of Cooperstown, and those who are caught using drugs face suspensions, loss of pay, and eventual lifetime ban from the game. Other international sports follow the policies and rules set down by the World Anti-Doping Agency, with regular violations eventually resulting in a lifetime ban. As I asked in Counter Contention 1, why shouldn't Lance Armstrong be punished for doing it if others are? 3)His reputation is based on a lie. A heavily defended lie. If someone told you something and then years later, you find out that not only was it a lie, but all this time they were doing everything in their power to prevent you from finding the lie out, how would you respond? I find that on the whole, the response to this revelation is reasonable. Rick Reilly, commentator for ESPN and a regular defender of Armstrong, one of the strongest among journalists, dedicated an entire article explaining why he felt betrayed by the revelations. Why then should we all not feel duped and betrayed by someone that we trusted? Lance Armstrong may have good qualities, but to ignore the fact that many of those good qualities were the product of a lie and are now shattered is simply being ignorant. It is for these contentions that I urge you to vote for the opposition.