Of course Article 26-(4)(e) is legal! But is it right? Things change. Laws change. Constitutions change - sometimes for the better, sometimes not. Humanity seeks a "level playing field" for all and it is an ongoing process.

Hi AmericanPhemfatale:

I'll briefly answer your questions:

Rev. Moss, what was your expectation on this subject matter when you started it?
I did not start this thread. Lincoln did. I joined in the discussion because the issue of gambling is one that I have given time and attention to and I really just wanted to help Lincoln with the law by pointing out to him that Article 26-(4)(e) of our Constitution authorizes the same gambling laws that he calls illegal.

did you think all people who posted would not have a complaint about gambling and discrimination?
I expected the complaint about discrimination because that complaint is as old as the discriminatory law itself. Lincoln is not the first to complain about this discrimination. However, I did not expect Lincoln and the others to continue saying "The Lottery and Gamming Act is Illegal!" even in the face of the plain language of Article 26-(4)-(e).

What I find interesting is that even though Lincoln considers himself as "some one well learnt and experienced in law", he is yet to acknowledge that our gambling laws are legal but CG (well known on Bahamas Issues as an objective thinker and someone who is fair), who actually shows humility regarding the law, was able to read Article 26-(4)(e) and easily agree that our gambling laws are legal.

so, after all you have witnessed on this thread, what is your take now with the gambling act?
My take is as I indicated in my first post: Our gambling laws are legal, but they discriminate against citizens of The Bahamas.

This issue about the discrimination imbedded in our gambling laws is a case in point example of poor and shortsighted governance. In my opinion, the decision to bring casino gambling to The Bahamas was a mistake and we could have developed our tourism product without it as other tourist destinations have done and continue to do.

Also, in my opinion, it would not be right to cancel the existing casino licenses but we should cease issuing others (including all forms of gambling like lotteries). I do not believe that the discrimination in our gambling laws is bad discrimination and thus not harmful to Bahamians so I do not support "levelling the gambling playing field" to allow Bahamians to gamble in order to "correct" the "injustice". This is my opinion and I do not debate opinions because we are all entitled to opinions, even if they are wrong.

Of course Article 26-(4)(e) is legal! But is it right? Things change. Laws change. Constitutions change - sometimes for the better, sometimes not. Humanity seeks a "level playing field" for all and it is an ongoing process.

CG:

I've come to learn that how questions are phrased determines the answer given. What do you mean by right? Using my understanding of right, it is my opinion that not allowing Bahamians to legally gamble is the right national decision.

Again CG, you have earned my respect for being a straight shooter.

Take care

CG: I've come to learn that how questions are phrased determines the answer given.

You are "right" there.

What do you mean by right?

By "right" I mean if something is legal for me, but illegal for you then that is not right. If something is legal for a foreigner but illegal for a local, that is not right, or perhaps a better word would be, consistent. To be consistant it should be "gambling for all or gambling for none."

Using my understanding of right, it is my opinion that not allowing Bahamians to legally gamble is the right national decision.

No doubt your opinion is based on your faith and your experiences with those damaged by gambling. I understand that and respect it. However, we live in a Democracy, not a Theocracy, or for that matter a Buddha-ocracy - be that for better, or for worse. In a Democracy there must be equal rights, equal opportunity, even an equal chance to make a fool of oneself, even if those rights offend religion(s). Yet, because it is a Democracy a voice like yours, or Lincoln's has the right to try to try and sway public opinion.

Again CG, you have earned my respect for being a straight shooter. Take care

Thanks! I try!

if the argument is just a question of right or wrong, as how 'good' it is for a person, then they would have to also outlaw drinking alchohol, cigarette and cigar smoking, and much more, sitting to close to the TV..etc.

Rory

No doubt your opinion is based on your faith and your experiences with those damaged by gambling. I understand that and respect it. However, we live in a Democracy, not a Theocracy, or for that matter a Buddha-ocracy - be that for better, or for worse. In a Democracy there must be equal rights, equal opportunity, even an equal chance to make a fool of oneself, even if those rights offend religion(s). Yet, because it is a Democracy a voice like yours, or Lincoln's has the right to try to try and sway public opinion.
No, CG. My public opposition to gambling is from a socio-economic viewpoint because it is that viewpoint that the government will listen to above that of my Christain faith. The socio-economic arguments are borne out in the historical experience of gambling like the Hobby Horse Race track which you know about first hand (I've heard the horror stories).

You are right...we are not a theocracy, but a democracy. Democracy does not mean unbridled freedom of choice/expression for everyone. For example, I would like to drive at 50 miles per hour on JFK drive but the law says 45 is legal so I will be penalized if caught driving at 50 mph. Democracy means "people rule" or rule by the people. Further, it means that the view of the majority determines governance for ALL, including the minority. Any arrangement where everyone has an equal chance to make a fool of himself is anarchy, not democracy. And trust me CG, while the "freedom and equality" of anarchy sounds noble living under such an arrangement would be utter madness.

It is my view that the widespread greed, materialism and get rich quick without working for it attitude that seems to pervade our nation no doubt translates into the clear majority of people desiring to be able to legally gamble. However, they do not know how to bring their will to bear in a representative democracy, something Americans know very well.

Obviously, I will continue to speak publicly against gambling in all forms but if it is legalized, so be it...that's democracy and I know I'm in the minority, and I will still continue to speak.

CG, I believe the vast majoriity of the same people who salivate about wanting to gamble legally in The Bahamas are also adamant about keeping "an abiding respect for Christian values" in our Constitution's preamble. I can see why we "Christians" confuse you as a Buddhist, and I apologize for our inconsistency. CG, one would have to do Biblical gymnastics (without success) to try to show gambling your money to win other people's money as a Christian value. "Give" without seeking anything in return is a Christian value, not "take" by gambling what you have to try to be enriched by other people's property without working for it. The former is fueled by selflessness while the latter is fueled by selfishness and greed.

Hi AmericanPhemfatale:

I'll briefly answer your questions:


I did not start this thread. Lincoln did. I joined in the discussion because the issue of gambling is one that I have given time and attention to and I really just wanted to help Lincoln with the law by pointing out to him that Article 26-(4)(e) of our Constitution authorizes the same gambling laws that he calls illegal.


I expected the complaint about discrimination because that complaint is as old as the discriminatory law itself. Lincoln is not the first to complain about this discrimination. However, I did not expect Lincoln and the others to continue saying "The Lottery and Gamming Act is Illegal!" even in the face of the plain language of Article 26-(4)-(e).

What I find interesting is that even though Lincoln considers himself an expert in the law, he is yet to acknowledge that our gambling laws are legal but CG (well known on Bahamas Issues as an objective thinker and someone who is fair), who actually shows humility regarding the law, was able to read Article 26-(4)(e) and easily agree that our gambling laws are legal.


My take is as I indicated in my first post: Our gambling laws are legal, but they discriminate against citizens of The Bahamas.

This issue about the discrimination imbedded in our gambling laws is a case in point example of poor and shortsighted governance. In my opinion, the decision to bring casino gambling to The Bahamas was a mistake and we could have developed our tourism product without it as other tourist destinations have done and continue to do.

Also, in my opinion, it would not be right to cancel the existing casino licenses but we should cease issuing others (including all forms of gambling like lotteries). I do not believe that the discrimination in our gambling laws is bad discrimination and thus not harmful to Bahamians so I do not support "levelling the gambling playing field" to allow Bahamians to gamble in order to "correct" the "injustice". This is my opinion and I do not debate opinions because we are all entitled to opinions, even if they are wrong.




what about the churches who have raffles? those are lotteries too. :bored:

what about the churches who have raffles? those are lotteries too. :bored:

You are right...raffles and all games of chance where money is won and lost are gambling activities.

Those churches and christians who play them have no moral voice to oppose gambling.

does the church oppose drinking alchohol? Its much more dangerous than gambling. I dont see anyone from the CC voicing their views on this, as much as against the lottery which will help our economy, not ruin it.

No doubt your opinion is based on your faith and your experiences with those damaged by gambling. I understand that and respect it. However, we live in a Democracy, not a Theocracy, or for that matter a Buddha-ocracy - be that for better, or for worse. In a Democracy there must be equal rights, equal opportunity, even an equal chance to make a fool of oneself, even if those rights offend religion(s). Yet, because it is a Democracy a voice like yours, or Lincoln's has the right to try to try and sway public opinion.

You Hit the nail on the head. CG
What I find interesting is that even though Lincoln considers himself an expert in the law, he is yet to acknowledge that our gambling laws are legal
Funny how you preachers are experts at adding and taking away to suit you purpose; I never said I was an expert. You say I never considered the legality of gambling or the act or what ever, please reconsider the language of my article and try to see what clearly every one else (with out a religious bias) sees.

The last time a law like this was pass was during the time of Mahatma Gandhi.
Try to Focus on WAS PASSED!!! Legal means in writting: Illegal means Bad Writting in it's root meaning. Now lets go through the post again and see if you see it differently.


The Lottery and Gaming Act chapter 387 preventing Bahamians from gambling or owning such businesses is a complete travesty and an insult to our democracy. It is quite a surprise that this act that is inconsistent with, in contravention and a contradiction of the constitution article 15 could last so long in a ‘free’ nation. The problem with this act can be summed up in one word: dis•crim•i•na•tion
The above is my thesis. Note, the focus is discrimination and that I said it is in contravention of Article 15 a good writting versus the other law a bad writting. Creedence is given to Article 15 as a just law.
The act is worded in such a way that it states that gambling in the Bahamas is legal however this act was polluted by the inclusion of section 50 paragraphs B through D.
Read this again, Please.
The constitution of the Bahamas states that no person can be discriminated against
It does (article 15)! This statement is to show the contratiction of the law
Why can’t we own whatever a foreigner can own? Is that fair in a democracy?
You said my argument changed to saying unfair etc instead of illegal. The Words and implications of wrong, unfair, unjust etc were there from my initial post.
The fact is gambling is legal according to the law. It is only illegal for ‘dumb’ Bahamians.

Gambling was made legal a long time ago.
Knowing Cedric he would not have read this whole post before commenting on it. Can someone please explain its contents to him. Then when you are finished explain to him how you find the thesis of a document and the many ways to use a title.

does the church oppose drinking alchohol? Its much more dangerous than gambling. I dont see anyone from the CC voicing their views on this, as much as against the lottery which will help our economy, not ruin it.
There are basically two church views, total abstinence and moderate drinking. No church I know of supports getting drunk. The problem with drinking alcohol is that there is always the risk of getting drunk.

Since consuming alcohol is not a necessity, and considering that many people are recovering alcoholics, some Christians choose to abstain from consuming alcohol all together.

The Christian Council is repeatedly on record voicing concern about alcohol abuse and the proliferation of bars and liquor stores in the over the hill areas but not in other areas like where most MPs live.

Your problem is you are admittingly a novice in issues of law but you choose to argue a definition of the law with some one well learnt and experienced in law.

Sorry Lincoln, I did misquote you. You did not say you were an expert, but from the above comment that was my conclusion. I have gone back and replaced expert with "some one well learnt and experienced in law".

Sorry for overlooking the huge difference between the above and expert.

No, CG. My public opposition to gambling is from a socio-economic viewpoint because it is that viewpoint that the government will listen to above that of my Christain faith. The socio-economic arguments are borne out in the historical experience of gambling like the Hobby Horse Race track which you know about first hand (I've heard the horror stories).
If the government listened to the socio economic view point over the hypochristian view point gaming would be legal for all and used to benifit our economy.
Have you heard the horror stories of airplane flights- all the crashes. While you are at it ban them to

For example, I would like to drive at 50 miles per hour on JFK drive but the law says 45 is legal so I will be penalized if caught driving at 50 mph.
This it irrelivant to our discussion. It does not prove that discrimination is good because this is not discrimination. Your view point would justify making it legal for Foreigners to do 50 but illegal for bahamians to do the same. We know the horror stories of speeding bahamians so stop them but allow the foreigners they are smarter and better and who cares if they kill themselves in our country.
This law is about power and control it is not concerned with our well being. Do you remember Prohibition: when the Italians and other new imigrants to america started to take control of the lucrative alcohol industry. To take control back the 'real' americans became law mongers and prohibited alcohol. they cited many horror stories of drunkards beating there wives, spending all the families money and the disease causing factor of alcohol. However they didn't care about any of this. it was about control. As soon as they regained power by jailing or killing the italians etc controling liquor they made it legal again. But what about the horror stories? They didn't care. this is the same story of the war on drugs. As soon as 'they' gain control of the drug industry from the blacks and latinos by jailing and killing them they will legalize it. This to is the story of bahamian gambling. 'We can't let them thar *iggers have a piece of casino gambling. But how do we stop them, they have a right to it. Simple, take away their rights. Tell a few horror stories- you know *iggers are very scary. once you use fear you can get them to do, don't do or believe anything: that's how the church controls them.

Any arrangement where everyone has an equal chance to make a fool of himself is anarchy, not democracy..
Huh? Oh I get it Those bahamians aint smart enough to make good fools of themselves. Therefore only those smart foreigners are allowed to make fools of themselves. I missed that one cedric thanks for enlightening me.

Sorry Lincoln, I did misquote you. You did not say you were an expert, but from the above comment that was my conclusion. I have gone back and replaced expert with "some one well learnt and experienced in law".

Sorry for overlooking the huge difference between the above and expert.
Thanks Ced I can always tell when I am right on an issue you ignore the meaty facts and try to chew on a bone that you feel you can play with to find a frivilous argument. As I said at the end of that very post, you wouldn't read it through before you commented. you were trained to talk not listen.
Meat for men bone for dogs.

Cedric I know you didn't really read post number 85 so I will repeat an important part of it for you.
Legal means in writting; Illegal means Bad writting. in its root meaning. Sorry for being to deep for you.
luv ya