The Olympic rings on a slope at Whistler before the 2010 Winter Games commenced. (Image: Kathryn Reed)

Something about the Olympics tugs at me. It’s not just the competition; it’s these athletes’ stories that are so compelling. They took different routes to arrive at this world stage; all with the singular goal of competing as an Olympian.

Only a few have a realistic chance of being on the podium. And even when there is a chance, it can all end with a clip of a gate.

I’ve played sports most of my life and continue to do so. Sport unites people—even in individual sports. Sport builds character. It takes discipline. It takes sacrifice. Ultimately, though, it’s fun.

Look at the joy so many of this athletes are overcome with—whether it’s walking during the opening ceremonies, after their competition is over, hanging with teammates, or chatting before the television cameras. The love of competition shines through.

One does not have to have participated in any of these disciplines to appreciate the skill and determination it takes to compete at this level.

Unfortunately politics have seeped into these Games. But I shouldn’t be surprised. They seem to be on the surface at every Olympics. Multiple boycotts have occurred, with the most significant in 1980 when the United States and 67 other countries skipped the Moscow Games because of Russia’s invasion into Afghanistan.

One has to wonder if a boycott could occur in two years when the U.S. hosts the Summer Games in Los Angeles. How many more countries will we have invaded by then?

What I don’t understand is why anyone is asking athletes from the United States what their feelings are about competing for the U.S. What does this have to do with why they are there? Keep the questions to sport, competition, their road to getting there, their experience at the Games. Why stir the pot? For ratings? Forced controversy?

U.S. athletes, and presumably those from other countries, are required to meet with the media. They don’t know what the questions are going to be. Do people watching really care what the athletes think about Minnesota? Trump? Immigration? They can’t “win” this poltiical banter no matter what they say.

If any individual wants to come forward, voice an opinion on his or her own, so be it. That is that person’s right. Let the athletes decide how they use this moment, not the interrogators.

Go ahead and have your Tommie Smith and John Carlos moment. I’m all for that. This many years later the image still resonates of those two U.S. track athletes holding up a black-gloved fist at the 1968 Mexico City Games to protest racial injustice.

Rule 50, which was instituted in 1975 by the International Olympic Committee after incidents at the 1968 and 1972 Games, says: “No kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or other areas.” This rule applies to everyone, not just participants.

The International Olympic Committee seems to be duplicitous with how it approaches political speech. It allows athletes to voice opinions at press conferences, but not to be demonstrative with their beliefs.

The IOC disqualified a Ukrainian skeleton competitor because his helmet has images of athletes in his country killed during the on-going invasion by Russia.

How is remembering people who died a bad thing? A U.S. skater held a photo of his dead parents as he waited for his score without repercussions.

This isn’t the first time the IOC policymakers and enforcers have been on the wrong side of self-expression.