KEY POINTS:
Oscar Pistorius: Now there's a story.
The South African double amputee has won the right to compete in the Olympics on the blade runners that replace his lower legs.
As much as we all admire Pistorius - a 400m runner - and anyone else who refuses to lie down when faced with tough odds, there is also something disquieting about this decision.
What if, as some believe, artificial limbs can give amputees an advantage over normal-limbed folk, partly because carbon fibre is lighter than flesh and blood?
What if Pistorius, or someone who follows in his Cheetah Flex-Foot steps, is so proficient that they win the Olympic 100 metres in six seconds? Would we be happy about the Court of Arbitration's decision to overturn the IAAF ruling then?
Yet, that's what courts are there for, to play the role of Solomon. And if Pistorius gets to Beijing he won't be the only sprinter using artificial help. Oscar may be part android, but the rest are often steroid.
What a conundrum, though. The more I think about Pistorius, the more uneasy I get. And the more I think about Pistorius, the more I like the idea of him competing against able-bodied athletes, and even winning.
What I really like about the man is that he continued to take the system on, that he wasn't embarrassed about his view of his rights.
So our concept of fair competition might prove to be wrong. We must cherish those who jolt us out of comfort zones and make us realise the world still goes around if our security blankets are taken away.
The Pistorius story reminded me of brave astronaut John Glenn's return to space 10 years ago. The 77-year-old's trip brought a chorus of accusations that it was an expensive political freebie.
The critics may have had a point, yet Glenn was still an inspiration, showing that life is to be lived to its fullest and that increasing age is not - to use the wonderful line - about morbidly "waiting for God".
