Casino 'will imprison your soul' says Archbishop

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, has led Church of England bishops in attacking the plans for a supercasino in Manchester, pictured here. Dr Williams, speaking at Lambeth Palace at a press conference with Patriarch Bartholomew who heads the Orthodox Church, said:   “It’s quite clear from all the research figures that gambling is a more and more popular form of addiction in this country, and we must not underrate the seriousness of that."

  He continued: “All addictions are imprisonments for the soul and therefore any form of addiction is something that ought to be of concern to the population at large and, as to the religious population in particular. It seems to me that any large, high profile development is going to attract attention and draw people in here.  I know that the area of Manchester where this development is planned to take place, in Beswick, is one which has a long history of deprivation which is going through regeneration at the moment. I happen to have quite direct contact with one of the primary schools there, so it’s not quite an academic interest.” (Picture from Trinity University

He was worried that youngsters in particular will be sucked in. "I'm very concerned that we can’t think of better ways of regenerating deprived areas than by developing within them institutions which may well contribute to the material and spiritual deprivation of the area in the long term.”

This all has a horrible feel to it. I reckon that the problem is tax revenue. So many people are stopping smoking, the Government needs to foster other addictions in Britain to keep the cash coming in. All these casinos should carry health warnings like cigarette packets do: "Gambling can kill." I've known men - for some reason it seems nearly always to be men - reduced to shambling wrecks by gambling addictions. I've seen marriages destroyed, homes lost, children neglected and even suicide through drink or otherwise as the problems spiralled out of control. No Government should be allowed to gamble with our own and our children's lives in this way. The only possible ray of hope comes from the reality that with credit card debt as high as it already is, and interest rates going up, no-one will actually have any cash to spend in these monstrous shockers. That way, the casinos will go bankrupt, not the victims they are courting. (Thanks to Dave Walker for the cartoon.)

  The Bishop of Manchester, Nigel McCulloch, who chairs the Greater Manchester Faith Community Leaders Group, is equally worried: “We recognise that the Manchester supercasino will have a major impact on the local and regional economy, but we are seriously concerned about its social and moral effects." Speaking to The Times, he continued: "Gambling has few winners but many losers. There will be an increase in problem gambling."  He will be working with faith leaders with the City council to set up counselling and other support services to help the casualties. “It will be the vulnerable and poor who are disproportionately affected. There will be an increase in addiction and knock-on effects in terms of violence, family break-down. The social and moral implications are very serious indeed."

The Bishop of Winchester, Michael Scott-Joynt, is in turn about the news that Southampton City Council will be able to issue a licence for a large casino in the city. He said:  "I am sure that the churches will want to continue to press the city council to consider whether a large casino would not do a great deal of harm than good to the city, by encouraging individuals, young people and poorer people to damage themselves and their families as the casino attracts them into gambling."

The trouble is that in cities such as Southampton, there is not much else for young men to do once they turn 18 than go out to the pub. When I visit there at weekends to see my parents, I even see youngsters who cannot be much older than 12 or 13 hanging around on the streets with nothing to do. I cannot imagine how they will resist the lure of this casino.

This is one area the churches, in particular the Methodists and the Salvation Army who've worked in this area for decades, really do know what they are talking about. They said that they believe many more people will develop serious, long-term gambling problems. "Our concern throughout this process has been to protect people from developing gambling problems, and our fear remains that an increase in the number of gamblers will lead to a rise in the number of problem gamblers," a spokesman said. "There are already about 370,000 problem gamblers in the UK and that number indicates a great number of tragic stories for the problem gamblers, their families and friends. We want the Government to remain committed to a proper period of evaluation, of at least three years from when the casinos open, to determine what the real economic benefits and social costs of these new casinos will be."

The issue has arisen out of the new Gambling Act, which gave the green light to one regional casino, eight large casinos and eight small casinos. The one regional casino, the so-called "super casino", will contain hard forms of gambling that have never been seen before in the UK, including unlimited jackpot machines. As the Methodists and Salvationists rightly point out, machine gambling has highly addictive properties, and the lure of mega-prizes can only further compound this danger.

Some time ago, when 24-hour drinking was introduced in Britain, I wrote a post warning of the dangers it posed. The fears of people such as myself were widely dismissed as the laws came in and the streets were not immediately filled with vomiting and dying drunks. But as anyone with any experience in this field understands, these things do not happen overnight. And sure enough, now we see the Government rowing back on this issue, no doubt comforted by the fact that if they can't get us all out there 24-hour drinking, at least they can get us to pour money into the exchequer by 24-hour gambling. By the time these casinos are built, it will be too late to row back. The casualties will be you, me, our neighbours, our children, our friends. We will all be affected by this, and there seems tragically little that any of us can do about it.

Comments

[Frank Schnittger]

The story of Fiona Jones may illustrated some of the points I was trying to make, J Pearce. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/alice_miles/article1343405.ece

I don't disagree with much of what you say, just that those who often makes those criticisms don't always offer a better alternative!

[J Pearce]

"I live in admiration of the abuse so many politicians have to put up with every day of the week. Many of them are not particularly good at their jobs. But who put them there?"

I did. Only once, mind you :-) I can see some of your points, Frank - I don't think all politicians venal, power-hungry careerists. There are plenty of back benchers who do good, honest jobs and truly try and serve the people who elected them. But you have to look at some of the things that go on and wonder if democracy is truly being served.

Take the Blair government style - the civil service in Whitehall has been eviscerated. Government by mates on a sofa. No accountability or traceability (which is something that any decent business has to provide for these days). We have an non-elected "friend of Tony" doing the job of Lord Chancellor and he gets the final say on what is "legal" or not, including this cash for honours row. There is a clear conflict of interest, but what happens? Politicians shrug and let him get on with it! What chance that he's going to find any misdeeds at the highest levels?

Government is now also about centralised diktats. The mechanisms for local accountability (town/borough councils) are in hock to central government and centralised targets. Local democracy - where people have the power to affect things that directly impact their own lives - is being killed stone dead, from the centre outwards, as a result of New Labour policy (although I acknowledge that the rot started before then). Just look at Prescotts plans for regional assemblies - another non-elected body that can ride roughshod over the increasingly impotent local councils.

I could go on, but this is not exactly the right blog! I take the point that its easy to criticise from the sidelines, but it does feel to me, at least, that the accountability and virtuousness of those who effect political power over our lives, has drained away over the past 15 years (and I include the fag end of the Tory years in that). But maybe I'm just getting old and cynical…

Maybe the ABC could run for PM?

[Frank Schnittger]

J Pearce - at the risk of breaking one of the great taboos of the chattering classes - I would suggest to you that the list of corruptions you provide is pretty small beer compared to most countries in the world.

There is of course no such thing as an acceptable level of corruption, and tolerating even a little opens the floodgates to a whole lot more. So by all means go on the rampage about what corruption you can find. You would probably find more in any medium sized business.

However there is a structural problem in modern democracies: Pro-business parties have an almost infinite source of potential income whereas more left wing parties have to rely on slim pickings from trade union dues or much smaller contributions from generally much less well off individuals.

The temptation to try and level the playing field by "cultivating" some rich sympathisers must be enormous. But how many politicians have seriously enriched themselves because of such corruption?

What I find absolutely remarkable is how honourable, idealistic, and dedicated most political leaders actually are when you meet them up close and personal. The media images projected onto them of corruption, cronyism, venal self interest and vainglorious self-absorption is actually a far more accurate representation of the media themselves, and perhaps of the wider population which buys into that characterisation because they can recognise it in themselves and find it comforting that "the high and mighty" are also subject to such temptations.

We have for so long treated politicians with such contempt that we are in danger of getting only the contemptible to represent us. In a democracy you end up getting the politicians you deserve, and sometimes you don’t even deserve what you do get.

It is very, very easy to mount your high horse and declaim on the corruption of politics, all the better to project yourself as far more virtuous. I have very rarely seen any critic who I believe would have done a better job in the circumstances.

It is always so much easier to stand on the sidelines and snipe than to actually do the job yourself. What seemed so simple when you knew it all becomes far more complex when you have dozens of vested and expert interests shouting in your ear.

Democracy is unique in that it gives equal weight to the village idiot and to the true genius of public policy. All have the right to be heard. But in a democracy only those who have been elected are truly accountable: Which is a lot more than can be said for all sorts of leaders and “experts” in virtually every other area of public life, some given far more prominence by the media – and yet accountable to no one except their sometimes hidden paymasters..

I live in admiration of the abuse so many politicians have to put up with every day of the week. Many of them are not particularly good at their jobs. But who put them there?

[J Pearce]

"However one must hope that the political process has not been corrupted by the commercial interests involved."

Fat chance! Cash for honours. BAE deliveries to Saudi. Bernie Eccleston. The Millenium Dome. Prescott and the housebuilding lobby...

Unfortunately, Frank, the roll call of "money corrupts" for New Labour is as long as it is inglorious.

I would have a smidgeon more respect for the Church if, instead of picking and choosing its targets to appeal to its own cliquey constituency, it would broaden its condemnation to cover the other examples of institutional corruption that seems endemic within our ruling elites.

[Emanuel Appel]

a letter from America

Dear Mr. Jackson,

Excessive drinking and gambling are minor flaws. Actually, from a secular Jewish perspective, I see them as symbols of a society's failure toward its citizens in that they see quick fixes to their money problems through chance or excess.

Let's be straight. I've never been a compulsive gambler because the Jew's analytical and pessimistic nature. Anyone who's made a simple study of gaming knows that the odds are against you. The excitement and escapism that it provides is only for morons that think they can actually avoid work.

Drinking has more of a valid case behind it. If you're miserable or inarticulate, blitzing your brain can provide temporary relief from your own inadequacies.

The best bet for any country is to provide a "sin zone", like Las Vegas, and force the vulgar and the hopeful to make their way there for a limited vacation.

Casinos should not be around every corner to take the poor man's money. If you value your fellow citizens, pick a remote place like the Scilly Islands or the Hebrides and make them free gambling zones.

[Frank Schnittger]

The debate about the degree to which a state should seek to protect the vulnerable from themselves is a valid political debate.

On the one hand you have the libertarians accusing the state of micromanagement and "nanny statism" and on the other you have the statists arguing that the imbalance of power between big corporates and the individual is such that the state should seek to redress this balance by restricting availability of drugs, medicines, alcohol, cigarettes, and services such as advertising (particularly aimed at the young), night clubs, prostitution etc.

The argument between individual “rights” and the social “good” is particularly acute in, say, the gun control debate in the U.S.A. One argument lays the main emphasis on the personal responsibility of the individual, the other on the social responsibility of the community as represented by the state.

These arguments have occurred both within and outside the Christian tradition. Some might argue that the Archbishop saying that ‘Casinos will imprison your soul' shows scant faith in the saving power of Christ! But there is also a strong Christian tradition of social ethics and collective responsibility for such developments.

Ultimately it is for the community, as represented by the state to make such decisions. However one must hope that the political process has not been corrupted by the commercial interests involved.

[Kate]

"I invite you all to Islam where gambling is discouraged." [Posted by: Abidah Sawsan]

'Thus Spake Zarathustra' ... Eternal Recurrence of the Same Events (Nietzsche); in today's Britain, I am reminded of the siege of Constantinople! Zarathustra is he who turns traditional morality on its head. Nietzsche says "what the name of Zarathustra means ... the mouth of the first immoralist".

Islam turns traditional western morality 'on its head'. Government accommodates and funds that head-spin - madrasses, mosques, Muslim specific agencies (literally hundreds), and chilling anti-western demonstrations. British voters are denied the basic civil right of state protection.

NO thank you Abidah Sawsan; your euphemism "discouraged" butters no carrots. I am an educated thinking woman, the mother of a gay man and three daughters; I am implacably opposed to the ideology of Islam - subjugation.

Tim: "It is a nonsense that, in an informed and diverse culture, members of the clergy representing the Anglican world view need to issue moral warnings ..."

The pivotal word is "informed". I am unsure of how 'informed' it is possible to be in the 'looking-glass' world of New Labour. Accurate information is power. Confusion and deflection enables only those who already hold power. It is an age-old strategy for keeping the masses quiet.

For the rational, there is no logic here. While the government CUTS funding to voluntary addiction agencies and, at the same time, promotes large scale gambling, all statistics show an increased numbers of addicts.

Rape crisis centres, disability groups, creches and youth centres fail for lack of funding, and at the same time, Muslim agencies, welfare groups and fifth columns like the MCB are funded.

In the name of cultural relativism, the mantra is 'equality for all'. How MANY people in the western world know what that means. How many votes were won in the name of cultural relativism?

Apart from the fact that it is a false concept masquerading under a 'race relations' moniker, it has effectively blackmailed and disenfranchised the majority.

Worse, it has hoisted the government of the day on its own petard. How is it possible to root out the subversives and their hate speech. How is it possible to liberate the swathes of England now dominated by such as the Birmingham imman who last week likened the British government to Nazis.?

This is NOT a comparative exercise. I do not believe we were better informed under the Tories.

Whilst debating the morality of state sponsored gambling, drinking, democratic equality for a law-abiding minority, we are complicit in the (apparent) consensus to IGNORE the 'pink elephant in the middle of the sitting room'?

My vote in 1997 was cast in the hopes of a balanced economy, social consciousness, parliamentary integrity and capitalism with a human face. What we have is perilous security, unregulated immigration, a consequent drain on welfare and NHS, a new, untreatable strain of TB, a resentful, impenetrable, fifth column minority and a government hand-in-hand with rampant capitalism.

I think there is a place for 'guidance' (to the 'faithful') ... where is it? How many churchmen or women have spoken out on the unacceptable demands of Islam - on the dangers to democratic values.

How many have drawn attention to theological and moral DIFFERENCES. Is there one instance of a CofE bishop confronting the anti-semitic, gay hanging, book burning Iqbal Sacranie? No. It appears a majority of Anglican and RC Bishops stand four square with Islam.

Pre-MCB (1989), Iqbal Sacranie was involved with the UK Action Committee on Islamic Affairs. In response to Salman Rushdie’s 'Satanic Verses', which resulted in a call from Iran for Rushdie’s execution, Sacranie chose to eschew justice, tolerance and construction and said of Rushdie:

"Death, perhaps, is a bit too easy for him? His mind must be tormented for the rest of his life."

On BBC Moral Maze, (14 July 2004), Sacranie said that he believed that any defamation of Muhammad’s character should be illegal under the proposed law banning incitement to religious hatred. He said,

"There is no such thing as an Islamic terrorist. This is deeply offensive. Saying Muslims are terrorists would be covered [i.e., banned] by this provision." He has been rewarded with elevation to the House of Lords! If this the best Blair can offer in the way of a good Muslim, we have a big problem.

In 2006, there were "Nearly 600 antisemitic assaults against Jewish individuals and institutions ... up by nearly a third on 2005. More than one third, 37 per cent, of the attackers whose background was known, were Asian or Arab. .... 'The percentage overall is clearly not contiguous with the ethnic breakdown of the general population of the UK.’
(Community Security Trust)

Who cares? Who even pays attention to this 'Eternal Recurrence of the Same Events'? It is singular that British Jewry did NOT line up with Anglicans, RCs, Muslims and the abominable Akinola to deny rights to a law-abiding minority.

The casino issue is merely another strategy in keeping the complacent, but disgruntled uninformed, in ignorance. I am not a conspiracy theorist. I simply believe western governments are intellectually and imaginatively unequipped to deal with the capitalist ideal of 'the global village'.

[Tom Jackson]

"Control, of course is very much a factor in the rigid Christian ethic, but responsible gambling and drinking is far removed from participating in crime as I said above."

The opening part of this observation is incomprehensible to me since it suggests that a faith in Christ leads to the inability to think for yourself, a failure to be responsible for your own actions and an existence in which the world somehow becomes unreal.

Maybe people like Tim appear to have had some experience of Christianity which gives this impression but it is alien to me and to the many Christians I know and come into contact with.

Christianity is about seeking knowledge of Christ and reaching out for a relationship with Him on a personal level. This process is naturally subject to certain limitations and constraints; testing your developing awareness of Christ against the New Testament, for example. But unless you are weak and susceptible - and I guess that may be a major suggestion from those like Tim - there is the opportunity to evaluate the worldly teaching and interpretation of the Church leaders and theologians against your own developing awareness.

Nothing demonstrates this more than the second part of Tim's observation.

Society accepts "responsible gambling and drinking" as a natural part of a communities social life. Fundamentally, the Christian may this is dangerous and unnatural but in the scheme of things, where responsible people are involved and they are exercising a degree of control of their activities and present no threat to society and themselves, there are far greater issues to be concerned about.

But, not everyone is responsible and in control and given the nature and experience of casinos and the like in countries such as the United States, it is reasonable to assume that these people may be seriously harmed through the availability of such establishments as they become more established and widespread. The additional concern of organised crime being involved only adds to the anxiety.

Of course, you could take the view that there should be complete freedom of choice and opportunity where gambling and drink is concerned and if someone can't control themselves, well, hard luck!

Even non-Christians would accept a certain degree of responsibility for their fellow, weaker man and recognise the need to identify and establish limits and constraints of the desire of some people to exploit and benefit from those members of our society vulnerable to their own failings of character (and that, Tim, is not control but just good common sense).

[damien wan]

It is to hoped that in publicising the issue of the super casino that this will not lead to any threat to withdraw the Church's ministry from this particular area.

Rather, it would seem to suggest that more resources for church ministry would be required. Even better if this could be financed in some way from the super profits of the casino.

For my own part my contribution to this debate is to highlight the founding of the Anglican Church of St Paul's in Monte Carlo in 1888.

I understand from the church's local historian that this was in direct opposition and defiance to the wishes of the then Church of England's Bishop of Gibraltar, Bishop Sandford.

The debate was actually aired in the Times in 1883 and covered much of the matters now being raised.

Unfortunately,the local laws of Monaco prevail and provides the focus for a thorny issue in the current relationship between the church and the Diocese In Europe.

[Emanuel Appel]

a letter from America

Dear Mr. Sawsan,

I thank you very much for your invitation. However, since I don't enjoy slicing people's heads off nor trimming female genitals, I don't see what I could contribute to Islam.

Gambling is a minor vice that the mediocre religious people focus on when the real big issues are beyond them.

[michael jensen]

Well, I can't in this instance see why Britain wants to be more like Australia. You could copy our health system - now THAT would be an improvement! But to copy our senseless addiction to this tax on stupidity? It is quite wretched.

[Frank Schnittger]

I don't get your point Tim. You don't like the Archibishop and how he expresses himself. Fair enough. But as you say he is only speaking for Anglicans. Is he not entited to?

[Tim Cooper]

Yes Tom but the house is not falling down is it. The casino proposal is the result of a democratic decision, and the very fact that several major towns and cities were competing for it denotes that there is a level of popular support. The Archbishop is entitled to take whatever view he likes over this and all other issues, but once again the high moral tone and selectivity suggests that the faith group he represents is able to identify problems ignored or unseen by the wider community and through moral rectitude is able to solve them.

Control, of course is very much a factor in the rigid Christian ethic, but responsible gambling and drinking is far removed from participating in crime as I said above. Nobody is suggesting that a moral free-for-all is desirable.

Human pursuits of almost all kinds inevitably involve some degree of self-control and since the world is imperfect there are always casualties. Frank thinks that gambling is an addiction, but of course the vast majority of gamblers, upon which the casinos rely, are not addicts; no more than those who regularly attend race meetings. And addictions come in all shapes and sizes from chocolate to pornography. In his last paragraph he also shows that he misunderstands my posting. I am not saying that I endorse the casino. It is very evident that I clearly question it's relevance, albeit I do not believe necessarily that it will be a direct factor in spiralling levels of suicide, debt and broken lives; although there may be some examples, much in the same way that a new supermarket, welcomed by most, may supply whisky to alcoholics and paracetomol to the clinically depressed. That alone would not be a reason for banning or opposing them.

The point I was making was to highlight the willingness of non-elected clerics, currently sitting in the legislature and representing specific faith groups, constantly to judge the democratic decisions of others, based upon their own beliefs. I do not believe that their cloud-based moralising is appropriate, helpful or required. One doctrinal size does not fit all. Probably no-one has consulted the Anglican church regarding their views on the issue, because implicit in a major social regeneration project is the welfare of local communities. The population of Manchester is not welcoming a demand for heroin and rejoicing because the government has agreed that the widespread cultivation of poppies will now apply. Unfortunately it is supply and demand in a market economy that provides jobs and brings wealth and associated societal benefits. It is a crying shame, in my view, that in this case its nothing more enlightening than yet another casino, which to me signifies futility on a grand scale. There are many smaller ones, online and off and chances for people to gamble everywhere via lotteries and racing.

The Archbishop speaks for the Anglican community, not the world and he is performing the usual leading-cleric trick of popping up appropriately to endorse his status before his specific audience. He should take care not to imply that the legitimate wider society is, in some way morally deficient, or that it should be in thrall to the views of faith groups. It is a nonsense that, in an informed and diverse culture, members of the clergy representing the Anglican worldview need to issue moral warnings, appearing like Roman soothsayers having identified their own redundancy. In this, the erecting of the casino is neither here nor there.

[Abidah Sawsan]

Gambling is an addiction in the same league as drugs, fags, porn, booze, food, commodities etc etc. It is therefore ludicrous to build an addiction in a city or town in this country. I invite you all to Islam where gambling is discouraged.

[Frank Schnittger]

"To warn others implies higher knowledge or status." - Tim

Tim, why would you or anyone else write on this blog if we didn't think we had a better take on things than we have read so far? The Archbishop is as entitled to state his views as anyone else if he feels that certain aspects of the proposal have been insufficiently considered.

Christianity has a long tradition of trying to stick up for the marginalised. Gambling is an addiction, and many families suffer terribly for it. Far better for the Archbishop to warn on the further extension and glamorising of gambling than for him to vent his spleen on the gay community.

Most such planning decisions are based on commercial considerations, and it is important for any society, whether religious or not, to be able to articulate views on the basis of a particular moral framework rather than just on whether a particular proposal will generate more profits and jobs.

The costs of gambling are largely indirect and hidden - and are rarely factored into the decision to go ahead with a particular proposal. Just how many additional broken families, suicides, bankruptcies and broken careers do you think are justified by the extension, endorsment, and glamorisation of gambling this proposal embodies?

[Tom Jackson]

Tim, as I've got older I've come to realise that when something needs to be said, it doesn't matter who says it or why they say it.

Unless you believe addiction to gambling is not to be concerned about or you believe the availability of gambling institutions does not lead to those weaker or less-informed members of our society falling into serious financial trouble, then any voices raised in opposition to casinos run by organised crime syndicates is to be welcomed.

Of course, you may believe that everyone should be in control of themselves to the extent that when presented with opportunities to ruin their lives, they should be able to resist the temptation to gamble, drink or become involved in crime. That's fair enough but not realistic.

You cannot have a free-for-all society and expect a way-of-life that most of us desire and find acceptable. There has to be some form of control or you will find yourself living in a deteriorating community, dominated by those only concerned with their own wellbeing.

Maybe it should be elected officials that prevent such deterioration; maybe there is something about bishops and priests that is unacceptable to many such as yourself when they offer their proclamations on such issues. Personally, if my house was in danger of falling down, I wouldn't care who came along and helped shore it up.

[Tim Cooper]

I cannot imagine why regeneration in one part of Manchester is only achieved through installing a monstrous casino. But then areas in the East End of London, presumably, would have been left to exist in squalor, disgracefully, but for the Olympic Games.

However, leaders of a particular faith have absolutely no duty to pronounce upon decisions made by democratically elected governments or provincial councils, and to do so is another example of the patronising, exalted position they consider themselves to occupy. Rhetorical nonsense, implying that souls will be imprisoned by gambling, means nothing and achieves nothing. To warn others implies higher knowledge or status. And it is equally true to say that a variety of businesses manipulate and entrap the unaware and uneducated. To view this aspect in isolation applies no more to casinos than anything else. The poor will certainly not be welcome in the mega casino, albeit the 'rich' funded by spiralling credit cards and loans, will continue to be targeted by wholly unscrupulous money lenders. But these people are also wasting borrowed money on a variety of goods and services that someone else has persuaded them they urgently need.

Unfortunately, debt and ruin accompany a wide-range of activities in our modern culture and they manifest themselves across a bizarre spectrum, which extends from feeling uncomfortable and disadvantaged, to committing suicide. To single out one biblically appropriate example and inflate its worst aspects is illiberal and narrow.

Not all gambling is bad or deleterious and some people are rich enough to afford it easily. Drinking alcohol responsibly is also acceptable to most. Selling illegal arms, hard drugs or forcing people into slavery are not, and most would agree they cannot be viewed as humane or responsible in any way.

Clerics continue to believe that their comments are important or relevant; some having acquired a sociological or psychological perspective mystically. A measure of how irritating their frequent and selective comments are viewed, is demonstrated by their vanishing congregations who, for the most part, have dissolved into the wider, informed community.

I think that large casinos are probably the very last dubious attractions we actually need. But the days are gone when rigid institutions, specialising in moral condemnation, frowned upon society, implying that their version of sin applies to all and sundry.

[cj]

your article on September 27, 2005 was the most offending thing i have ever read and i think lower of britain for it.

[Mike Homfray]

I would have thought the Internet gambling was likely to be far more of a problem. It seems a strange place to put it, though - surely a typical resort like Blackpool might have been a better bet?

[Julia Langdon]

The Church via the Archbishop is correct. These mega-casinos provide a particular allure to the poor and marginalized with their glamour and promises of easy money.

A good friend whose son is a manager at a casino in California says that her son is looking for other employment after a short tenure. He has had to deal with the suicides of three of his service staff who gambled their meager wages and incurred huge debts, hoping to hit it big and improve their lot.

Mega-casinos employ carefully orchestrated entrapments designed to keep people off-balance and gambling from the moment one walks through the doors. The uneducated and unaware are systematically manipulated. Free enterprise does not preclude institutions such as the Church from refraining from its duty to speak out and warn the vulnerable. I would argue that it actually requires it to function appropriately.

Julia

[Deb]

I think most people are fed up with the government making decisions without thinking things through. making decisions based on the mighty dollar always blinkers people to the reality of what happens afterwards. The government are now beginning to reap what they sow with the extended drinking hours. I wonder if they have calculated the bill for say....AA groups who are dealing with this or broken homes when drinking becomes an addiction. People have choices to make... I agree but is it wise of kind to hold out easier bigger enticements when more and more and more people are struggling to overcome these things.It is like taking an alcaholic into a huge liquer store and saying....just control yourself and get over it.....not nice.

[fraser macnaughton]

We will all be affected by this, and there seems tragically little that any of us can do about it.

wakey, wakey, this is again part of the pup we have been sold under the great god 'democracy'. Whatever we understand democracy to be we certainly do not live in one, and have been kidding ourselves that if we don't like something then we can vote out the government... to be replaced by one so simialr that they do the same thing anyway.

[Frank Schnittger]

This is an area where the Churches and local faith communities really can make a positive contribution to society. The lack of non-commercial, non-drinking, non-gambling and truly social activities for people of all ages is threatening to undermine any real sense of society for many people.

Kids can play computers games or watch TV all day - but what is there to do that actually involves interacting with other people of similar age and interests?

Instead of getting hung up on people's sexuality or dubious dress sense, it would be great if Parish halls and other facilities could be better utilised to provide social forms of entertainment that actually excite and interest people and promote social engagement.

Sports and hobby clubs are other forms of voluntary activity that should be actively encouraged much more by public facilities and funding. Voluntarism doesn't always have to wear it's religious affiliations on its sleeve, but societies die when people stop making voluntary contributions to the social life of their community.

[simon]

But there are already Casinos all over ther country. London itself probably has more than 20. There are fruit machines in nearly every pub. People bet on horses and football etc. Although I realise gambling is a serious addiction - having had a friend of mine commit suicide after his parents had to bail him out of serious gambling debts - I really don't see that this super casino will make much difference.

Gambling, when it becomes an addiction, is a disease that needs to be treated as a disease. The fact the people of this country that aren't gambling addicts can't be treated to the occasional visit to somewhere like Sun City does seem a little bizarre. People who have sex outside of marriage are likely to get diseases, people who commit adultery are likely to suffer real damage to their relationships, but we don't ban these things - we trust people once they are adults to act in a moderate way. When they are unable to, they need treatment.

To outlaw activities that are only bad in excess is not the sign of a civilised free society. You talk about the long term effects of these things - but why do europeans that have had more liberal licensing laws for the past 50 years not have the same drunken-yob youth culture, based purely around pushing the restricted consumption window as far as possible ? It could be argued that the vast majority of people regulate their behaviour sensible when they are used to the freedom not to.

Of course the fact the militant loony left in New Labour clothes are starting to take over, and need ever more money to throw at services that are ever more incompetently handled by the same militant fringe of central government, is the real reason we are seeing this here and now. Now that Marxism has been shown not to work, these people are really confused in their relationship with money. Its quite symbolic that they are the ones to legalise the ultimate symbol of capitalist excess!

[Tim Cooper]

The casino in Manchester will undoubtedly provide much needed regeneration and opportunity although, for some, the cost will be great. But then, life is about making choices. The Bishop of Winchester might equally have directed his gloomy prognosis to anyone who has a bank account or credit card and who has taken advantage of the thoroughly bad idea of borrowing huge amounts of money with little prospect of repayment. Debts and incremental ruination are accrued without organised gambling, and money lenders are ably supported by relentless advertising which asserts, irresponsibly, that anyone can have anything, no matter what it costs. It normalises borrowing and sets up a culture of envy which implies that some people are benefitting whilst others are not.

The churches however must remember that there is a popular desire for the casino in Manchester. Which is why it has been approved. If it fails to make money then it will not last. It is hardly likely that the idea has been conceived and is reliant upon forcing people into debt in order to facilitate short-term participation, although for some it will be a by-product.

This is just another example of religious moralisers insisting that they know what is best for us all. The same logic could be applied to absolutely anything narrowly perceived as containing a risk of moral danger. Human beings have a choice of how they behave and much misinformation is disseminated. For example, to say that there is nothing whatsoever for teenagers to do in Southampton is ridiculous. They can fill their spare time with a wide spectrum of activity, which includes all forms of sport, joining a plethora of diverse clubs and societies through to staying at home and playing the cello. The truth is that we have a sub-class of mindless idiots in this country that the schools system cannot cope with. These are the people who trot out the mantra of having no facilities and who cannot imagine what on earth to do with themselves. It is a lack of education and imagination that defines the need and expectation for constant entertainment to be provided without them lifting a finger. They will certainly be most unwelcome at the casino.