GAMBLING: Amy Welborn has lots and lots of stuff up about various facets of the Bennett/gambling story. To me (=not much of a Bennett fan to begin with–sharply disagree about the Drug War, obviously, and haven’t read the Book of Virtues anthologies), there are three aspects or layers to this: Gambling and betting in moderation are good fun. Bet on the Derby. Bet on the Oscars. Whatever. It can foster camaraderie, it is a way to taste risk without (assuming, again, moderation) risking too much, it’s a way to indulge our taste for fate without actually becoming a fatalist. Gambling has fewer positive aspects than liquor, but they’re roughly analogous, I think.

And that raises a key point. I wouldn’t patronize a liquor store that I knew sold to people who were obviously drunk. I wouldn’t shop at a store that sold to habitual drunks, homeless or begging or otherwise destitute drunks, or whose owner made no effort to encourage them to get help. (The latter is actually more important than just not selling to habitual abusers of alcohol, I expect, since if all you do is refuse to sell your customer will just get his liquor elsewhere. Plus, now that I think about it, it may be illegal to refuse to sell, sigh.) I like shopping at liquor stores whose owners acknowledge that it’s harder to run a non-vicious liquor store than it is to run a non-vicious hardware store, or florist, or whatever–liquor-store owners who know the regulars and ask after them, or at least employ extra scrutiny when they suspect someone has a problem.

It’s hard for me to imagine that there are that many casinos–like, more than one or two, if that!–where known gambling addicts would be turned away or steered toward places where they can get help. If I’m wrong about that, that’s awesome; I certainly know nothing about the casino world. But I don’t think people should go to casinos that cater to and foster addictive gambling, and from what I hear that’s basically all of them. That’s the main reason (extra camaraderie is the other) that I’m much happier with a poker night at a friend’s house than with a trip to the casino. Again, if I’m wrong about this, that’s great. EDITED TO ADD: Oh yeah, and then there’s the Mafia, and the hookers. Not exactly equivalent to the local package store, I think.

EDITED AGAIN TO ADD: That’s why dropping millions at Vegas casinos strikes me as morally very unlike, say, yacht racing or owning a baseball team. Although the heart/treasure problem (immediately below) may come up with those expensive pastimes as well. Cf. Thomas Monaghan’s switch from using his cash to line his floor with leather and his ceiling with silk to using his cash to fund pro-life and Catholic initiatives. Leather/silk not harmful, but not admirable, either.

Anyway. The final layer of my thoughts on all this is a truth that’s come up on Amy’s site: Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. As Amy says, that is a call for us to examine our lives, now.

EDITED TO ADD: Bennett has apparently said he has stopped gambling. So now it’s just us who have to take a long hard look at whether our use of time and money is laying up treasure in this world or in heaven. Oh, and for what it’s worth, of course I don’t think that only the sinless can bubbitz about morality. I run a blog, no? Case closed. We all do stuff that is, shall we say, maculate; yet we all get to have our say about what constitutes sin and what we should do about it. But I do think “gambling OK, the particular practices this one famous guy engaged in probably not OK, glad he’s stopped” is fair comment.