There's been a lot of talk on various news agencies and baseball blogs about "why doesn't the MLB have random drug testing", and people tend to make disparaging remarks about the MLBPA (MLB Players Association, the players' union) about how they're ruining baseball, etc., etc., by not following the lead of the NFL, which does require random drug testing.
Sorry, this will be one of those times when I actually side with the union. Random drug-testing is wrong. It's saying "prove your innocence, even though we have absolutely no suspicion that you've done anything wrong", or even worse, "You're all under suspicion, all the time, of doing something wrong."
Having to prove one's innocence on a random basis is, put simply, evil. If you've got a suspicion that Barry Bonds (or whomever) is dipping into the pharmaceutical products, then you stand up, make your case and present your evidence, and then he can be tested. Otherwise, back the hell off.
I've been reading your site for almost 3 years now and this is my first post. I'd have to disagree with this. Sports players are put on a higher pedestal and are seen as "heroes" in the eyes of many of today's youth. They are supposed to be competing on an equal basis. If one person is using illegal drugs to gain an edge, he should be exposed and tossed. So how do you hold everyone to the same standard, knowing there are illegal ways to gain an edge. You test EVERYBODY! This means that if Bonds is clean he can piss in a cup, just like the guy next to him and be held to the same standard as the guy next to him. If he can't "naturally" compete at this level, then he shouldn't be there. It's why the Olympics are so strict and it's a good thing. Look at the Russian teams in the 70's and 80's that were known to be abusing the system and getting away with it. They tainted the Olympics just to win more medals.