The question of whether the double-amputee runner Oscar Pistorius should be eligible to run in the Olympic Games has been needlessly turned into a technical and ethical conundrum.
The 25-year-old South African sprinter, born without fibula bones, had both legs amputated at mid-shin as a baby because he would never have been able to walk on them. Now he runs - on J-shaped carbon-fibre prosthetics. He holds the world records for his disabled-athlete class in the 100m, 200m and 400m.
His prowess earned him the name Blade Runner and a place in his country's 4x400m relay team for the London Olympics. And this week his national Olympic committee reversed an earlier decision and gave him the go-ahead for the individual event over the same distance as well, even though he had failed to meet the Olympic qualifying mark of 45.3 sec at an international meet, as the rules require.
The committee's U-turn constitutes a complete argument against his inclusion, of course. Pistorius made the team for the solo race only because they bent the rules; if he were sincere in his claim that he just wants to be treated equally, he would have declined a place offered to him by an exemption. But even the place on the relay team is a nonsense.
Those who argue for his inclusion suggest that it might help erase the lines between people with physical disabilities and those without. But such reasoning is specious and, worse, supports him by patronising him. There is no erasing the line between Pistorius and the other runners against whom he will line up in London: he does not have the legs that birth gave him. It may make able-bodied people feel warm and fuzzy to say he's just like the rest of us. He is not. His legs were made in Iceland.