View Single Post
  #30  
Old 10-01-2006, 06:26 PM
aislephive aislephive is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: And now the children are asleep
Posts: 6,874
Default Re: why was this law passed?

[ QUOTE ]
Let me start by saying that I'm an avid poker player online and I hate Bill Frist. I believe in a small government that shouldn't be telling me how to spend my money.

THat said, I understand the reasoning behind the ban. Poker does not contribute positively to society. While it may be a game of skill, it is still a dangerous way that could potentially lose a great deal of money immediately. Comparing it to something like horseracing isn't fair, as horse races are not something you could blow your fortune on every day with the click of a mouse... for one thing, horse races aren't held every day.
It's also unfair to compare gambling to investing in the stock market. Investing in the stock market helps our economy by providing capital for companies that provide us goods and services. Any similar connection with poker would be tenuous at best. Even skill-less forms of gambling such as the lottery benefit local school systems.

Again, I don't think it's any of the government's business how we spend out money, but pretending that poker is a positive aspect of society is a stretch. Professional poker players aren't really contributing much of anything to society.

[/ QUOTE ]

Simply put, this line of logic does not work. America is a free country, and nothing you do has to contribute to society.

Besides that, the internet gambling ban is extremely hypocritical as we all know. Blackjack, craps, slots, etc all are games of 100% luck with an edge to the house and are allowed in casinos everywhere. Every day people blow money on the lottery where they have no edge, both online and off. Horse racing, fantasy football, etc. is all allowed as well. The only difference between all of these things and online poker is that the U.S. gets nothing from it. The ban is about money and money only. Clearly it has nothing to do with morals, and if it did then that would be unconstitutional. Seperation of church and state rings a bell there. You can not claim to be a country of freedom and then tell people what they can and can not do in their own homes. If people have gambling problems, they will just go gamble in their local casino or with a bunch of buddies, that's all there is to it.
Reply With Quote