[color=green][/color]Casinos:  The push is on to legalize gambling in NYS.  I take the position that whatever economic advantage is perceived the moral damage is greater.  Lottery numbers & horse racing should satisfy anyone's lust for gambling, it does not.  Like porn, it is a slippery slope.

For decades I have opposed  casinos:  A number of years ago I had a discussion with Jack McEnemy (D NYS Assemblyperson), Mr Doubledip,  on the issue, he told me "for every dollar in revenue taken in, eight go out in social service cost".  I felt vindicated, I was being told what I wanted to hear.  Politicians are intuitive that way.

Ten years ago I ran for office, I was going to ride my no casino hobbyhorse.  I called Jack up & asked him where the source data was certifying $1:$8 trade off.  Before I opened my mouth I wanted to back up what I was saying.  Jack told me, "I made that up, just say anything, people will believe you."

Needless to say I lost any respect I had for Jack.  Jack is one of many who will say what is necessary to get the job done.  Assume nothing, believe no politician & use your God given common sense.

I do not know the revenue:cost ratio in dollars, I am sure in human (moral) cost, no amount of revenue is worth throwing NYS into another moral abyss.

Legalize gambling --- let ANYONE who wants to pay for a gaming license be able to run games.

Third world casinos ( outside of Vegas ) and depending on each state  and gross revenue are taxed on a sliding scale of between 65 and 75 per cent- most 3rd world casinos pay about 50million per year in taxes- this is why Ohio, Pennsylvania and Kansas have  recently allowed gaming .  

I love how Paul vandenburg promotes gambling. He boasts on how you can wager a bet even 'while you are at work on the computer'!! My a$$ would be out on the street if my boss ever caught me wagering bets on company time. Vandenburg used this ploy to promote and encourage it.

I'm sure there weren't too many business owner who liked that one. Well unless the business owners are avid gamblers themselves...huh?

You can't force your morals onto a society and expect good results, all you end up with is a underground economy which usually ends up even more destructive to society. Look back to the prohibition of alcohol, it didn't stop the demand for the product it just made those who were willing to take a risk rich. Those who became rich off prohibition were the ones we didn't want to succeed, that was the mafia. Just like the war on drugs, its a total failure which never stopped the demand it just produced a violent underground economy which killed more people than the drugs themselves.

In a free society comes personal responsibility, what choices you make holds risks and rewards.

Great post Henry I couldn't have put it better myself.

Quoted from Henry

You can't force your morals onto a society and expect good results, all you end up with is a underground economy which usually ends up even more destructive to society. Look back to the prohibition of alcohol, it didn't stop the demand for the product it just made those who were willing to take a risk rich. Those who became rich off prohibition were the ones we didn't want to succeed, that was the mafia. Just like the war on drugs, its a total failure which never stopped the demand it just produced a violent underground economy which killed more people than the drugs themselves.

In a free society comes personal responsibility, what choices you make holds risks and rewards.

I agree entirely.

Quoted from Henry

You can't force your morals onto a society and expect good results, all you end up with is a underground economy which usually ends up even more destructive to society. Look back to the prohibition of alcohol, it didn't stop the demand for the product it just made those who were willing to take a risk rich. Those who became rich off prohibition were the ones we didn't want to succeed, that was the mafia. Just like the war on drugs, its a total failure which never stopped the demand it just produced a violent underground economy which killed more people than the drugs themselves.
In a free society comes personal responsibility, what choices you make holds risks and rewards.

"You can't force your morals onto a society and expect good results,"

It applies to gambling,
it applies to alcohol,
it applies to drugs,
but when it applies to abortion,

YOU CAN FORCE YOUR MORALS ON A SOCIETY AND EXPECT GOOD RESULTS. (Ron Paul, the Libertarian)

Quoted from Box A Rox

YOU CAN FORCE YOUR MORALS ON A SOCIETY AND EXPECT GOOD RESULTS. (Ron Paul, the Libertarian)

He believes life begins at conception and I agree with him. Going by that we consider it our duty to protect the rights of that life.

Quoted from Henry

He believes life begins at conception and I agree with him. Going by that we consider it our duty to protect the rights of that life.

So the quote:
"You can't force your morals onto a society and expect good results,"
only applies when you want it to.  
If your personal opinion is that life begins at conception, then you have the right to force that opinion on the rest of society, even though the majority of society rejects that concept.
Paul would FORCE his morals onto a society.

Explain it again to me... or do I have it right?

Wrong, most morals forced onto society usually involve losing rights. The rights of that life are infringed when the mother feels it is morally right to take that life to justify her opinion. If a drunk driver kills that life he will be charged with taking that life, it should be no different because a mother thinks its morally right to do so.

Quoted from Henry

Wrong, most morals forced onto society usually involve losing rights. The rights of that life are infringed when the mother feels it is morally right to take that life to justify her opinion. If a drunk driver kills that life he will be charged with taking that life, it should be no different because a mother thinks its morally right to do so.

OK!  Ron Paul would force a woman who was raped to carry and birth that pregnancy.  Regardless of the mental anguish.  A Father who rapes his 12 year old daughter, an AIDS pregnancy where a woman acquired AIDS along with the pregnancy, An incoherent  mental patient who is pregnant by an unknown partner, A woman dying of cancer who becomes pregnant and needs chemotherapy, or a woman who due to Republican attacks on Planned Parenthood offices, is afraid to get her prescribed birth control, and becomes pregnant...
Ron Paul will FORCE all these women to carry to term and give birth to an unwanted, unpaid for, unwelcome child.  And he calls himself a libertarian???
The more I hear about Ron Paul, the more he sounds like just another Conservative Republican candidate.  Nothing new here.

2 wrongs don't make a right and listing all those excuses doesn't change the fact a life is being ended and its rights infringed. All moral laws are based on the stupidity and bad actions of a few and are sold on the concept that a law can bring about good, however it never works.

Quoted from Henry

2 wrongs don't make a right and listing all those excuses doesn't change the fact a life is being ended and its rights infringed. All moral laws are based on the stupidity and bad actions of a few and are sold on the concept that a law can bring about good, however it never works.

~ A life is being ended every time you eat a cheeseburger... so it isn't life that you cherish... supposedly it's human life.

~ Human life is ended at every operation where human blood cells are sacrificed in a cosmetic or necessary operation... so it isn't human life that your cherish, it is an entire human being that you want to protect.

~ At the time that most abortions are preformed, the HUMAN LIFE you want to preserve isn't a human being, but a clump of cells, but, like those blood cells, made of human material but not a human being.

When you discuss abortion, you post about what WILL BECOME a human being.
When I discuss abortion, I discuss what IS... a human zygote, made of human cells, but not a human being.

That difference is where the phrase "You can't force your morals onto a society and expect good results," enters the scene...
Ron Paul's opinion about human life is being forced on the majority of America that doesn't have his view... and as you pointed out... "you can't expect to force your morals onto a society and expect a good result."

Henry, this is where Box goes haywire and everything with a human cell is now human.  Box will argue that flushing a turd down the toilet would then be considered an abortion.  It really starts getting twisted.

Hey box, would you argue in support of experimentation on the human embryo, if scientists were able to find pregnant mothers willing to inject their embryo's with dangerous virus' to find out what would happen during gestation? After all, that would be like injecting it into a cancerous tumor.  It's only a clump of random human cells.  People volunteer for medical experimentation all the time.  What do you say?