Can someone help me create a conclusion on the topic "Should baseball players found guilty of using steroids be allowed in the Hall of Fame?". My opinion is that they shouldn't be allowed into the Hall of Fame if found guilty. What if have so far- Though many people still think that baseball players found guilty of using steroids to enhance their skills should be allowed in the Hall of Fame, they are creating a disadvantage to others and are hurting their reputation...
To create a conclusion on this topic, you can start by summarizing your main points and reinforcing your opinion. Here's an example of how you could structure your conclusion:
"In conclusion, I strongly believe that baseball players found guilty of using steroids should not be allowed in the Hall of Fame. Throughout this discussion, it becomes evident that their actions not only create an unfair advantage over other players, but they also tarnish the integrity of the sport. Allowing steroid users into the Hall of Fame would set a dangerous precedent and diminish the significance of this prestigious institution. The Hall of Fame should be reserved for those who have achieved greatness through skill, hard work, and ethical play. It is important to send a clear message that cheating will not be rewarded at the highest level of recognition in baseball."
Regarding how to craft this conclusion, start by summarizing the main points you made in your essay or argumentation. Restate the reasons why you believe steroid users should be excluded from the Hall of Fame, emphasizing the disadvantage and the damage they cause to the integrity of the sport. Then, reinforce your opinion and tie your points together to make a compelling final statement.