On the recent proliferation of gambling in Canada

In the late 90s and early 2000s, I began to observe an increase in various forms of gambling in Canada; particularly in western Canada, there were more casinos and video lottery terminals in bars.

In recent years, I have observed the same kind of video lottery terminals in several bars in Atlantic Canada; thus far, Ontario has resisted them.

But casinos have spread greatly in Ontario in recent years, outside of some of the more obvious locations (some big cities, many native reserves), into small communities, as well. In the last couple of years or so, one even opened up in my small hometown, which surprised the heck out of me, as I didn’t see my area as the kind of place that would go in for them.

I am not altogether opposed to gambling, per se; I don’t believe it is outright condemned in and of itself in Scripture (yes, the casting of lots for Christ’s garments is depicted as the wicked thing that it certainly was, but not because of the gaming so much as the humiliation of an innocent man who is also God; after all, casting lots is shown in Scripture in general as a tool for decision-making, much like flipping a coin).

But as with other activities that are not wrong necessarily in moderation, but in excess are problematic (e.g. people enjoying some drinks at the pub or at home after work is one thing; people getting shit-faced, blackout-drunk, and puking on the streets like we see today in the U.K. in contrast to the healthier drinking culture of yesteryear is quite another), so too with gambling. A bit here and there, a few national and regional lotteries, a few casinos, a few horsetracks with betting, etc., no big deal for society; only for a handful of people with self-control issues. But video lottery terminals and casinos increasingly everywhere, that’s worrisome. We can expect to see more and more gambling addictions arising, the numbers increasing exponentially, the more gambling proliferates.

What is bringing this about?

Well, frankly, at the end of the day, I think it’s just greedy governments, greedy for increased tax revenues, and/or finding an easy way to boost tourism (and no doubt some corrupt officials on the take, in the pockets of would-be casino owners) – and business owners, esp. bars which play host to video lottery terminals, all too happy to go along with it, because they sell more drinks the longer people sit in the bar and play. I don’t blame business owners for wanting to maximize their profits nor not wanting to lose out to the competition down the street if they host such terminals, but I do blame governments for allowing / promoting such.

As for why the public enthusiastically embraces them, hey, it’s a thrill, and the lure of easy money for nothing is too much for many to resist. (Not me; I think I lack the gambling gene or whatever; I don’t even play lottery tickets, though I will enter occasionally contests to win a trip, or some charity 50:50 draws occasionally, but I don’t bet or go to casinos or the like, just because I have different interests, same as I’m not especially interested in sports, particularly. This of course doesn’t mean I’m better than others; just that my temptations / vices / weaknesses / preferred recreational activities happen to lie elsewhere.) And no doubt in hard times, it becomes even more of an escape, and something into which people place their hopes, rather than in God.

Anyway, just something I’ve noticed, of late; or rather, I’ve been noticing it over the last generation, but with recent increased rates of proliferation of gambling forms, I couldn’t help but be struck by it, and find myself contemplating it more.

 

Britain now led by a political corpse

Yep.

Perhaps this result had been her intent all along; after all, she had been a Remainder, not a Brexiter…

 

Trump = Dubya II

Recall how Dubya ran against Gore on an America-first, semi-isolationist platform (re-watch or read synopses of the debates from 2000 if you need to refresh your memory), but when 9/11 happened, while understandably going after bin Laden and al-Qaeda, nevertheless also took advantage of the opportunity to do a bait-and-switch and go after Saddam Hussein, trumping up charges of terrorism-sponsoring against the secular, Baathist Iraqi regime leader and claiming Hussein had WMDs (which turned out to be false), and used that pretext to launch a war against Iraq. He also used the opportunity to smear Iran and North Korea’s leaders as being, along with Iraq’s leadership, part of an ‘axis of evil’, and whipped up antagonism against the NORKs and the Iranians, threatening to go after them.

Now in Trump, America has a president who campaigned against the bipartisan American imperialist foreign policy consensus, and made some semi-isolationist noises, but who, while rightly attacking ISIS and Islamic fundamentalist terrorists for their actions, has nevertheless taken advantage of the opportunity presented by the increasing rate of terrorist attacks to do a bait-and-switch and go after Assad, trumping up charges against the secular, Baathist Syrian regime leader – and also whipping up antagonism against the NORKs and Iran, threatening to go after them.

I can’t see the difference; can you see the difference?

None, in the first GOP presidency since Dubya and 9/11, almost two decades later…

Still not tired of being betrayed, diehard endlessly loyal Chumps for Trump?

 

Whoever wins, Britain loses

If Corbyn and Labour win the British general election tomorrow… Britain gets a hard-core left Labour government, and Britain loses.

If May and the Tories win by a narrow margin, Britain’s bargaining power in Brexit negotiations will be weakened, and Britain loses.

If May and the Tories win by a great margin, she will feel emboldened to enact draconian new legislation in terms of regulating the internet, and speech, and Britain loses.

Even if Brexit happens, if Britons end up suffering increased tyranny from London, having shaken the shackles of Brussels, Britain loses.

If only Nigel Farage had not decided to step down after declaring victory in the wake of the Brexit vote, Britain might have been able to win.

 

Catholic farmer ousted from Michigan market over same-sex marriage views

Thought-criminal dissent from the prog zeitgeist will not be tolerated.

A Catholic farmer in Michigan is suing the city of East Lansing after he was barred from a municipal farmers market over his views on same-sex marriage.

Stephen Tennes filed a lawsuit at a federal court on Wednesday (May 31), seeking his reinstatement.

In it, Tennes says he was prohibited from selling his products after his business, Country Mill Farms, refused to host a lesbian couple’s wedding at its orchard in Charlotte, 22 miles outside the city and he stated on Facebook “his Catholic belief that marriage is a sacramental union between one man and one woman.”

Country Mill Farms had sold fruit and produce at the market for six years, but after city officials learned about the Facebook post, they “strongly and immediately pressured us not to return to the farmers market,” Tennes told a news conference at the state Capitol.

According to the lawsuit, Country Mill is the only business to have been prohibited under the market’s anti-discrimination policy.

In a statement, the city of East Lansing said the farmer’s refusal to host a same-sex wedding violated a “long-standing ordinance that protects sexual orientation as well as the Supreme Court’s ruling that grants the right for same-sex couples to be married.”

The Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian-based nonprofit legal organization representing Tennes, said his religious views have no bearing on his involvement at the market and said the city’s actions amounted to a First Amendment violation.

“Steve and his farm have been singled out and excluded from full participation in the life of the community for only one reason,” said ADF counsel Kate Anderson. “Steve expressed a viewpoint the city did not like.”

Flanked by supportive state lawmakers at the news conference, Tennes insisted his views on marriage had not prevented him from serving all farmers market customers equally.

“It’s our faith that informs us how to treat all who come to our farm and the farmers market with dignity and decency … serving customers of many races, religions, cultures and those who identify with the LBGT community,” he said.

His farm is outside of the city, and it’s his own property, but the city government considers his actions there to nevertheless be their business, when of course it’s none of their damned business.

But, that’s progs; no-one is safe, anywhere, from dissent, if they decide on a whim to bring the weight of the state to bear upon you.

Nevertheless, let’s pray that he wins his lawsuit.

 

Heineken promotes a world without borders

(Heineken’s previous foray into prog politics…)

 

Either May miscalculated badly, or she intends to lose; the damned game is rigged everywhere…

Interesting:

Tom Goodenough comments on the latest YouGov survey:

There’s a nasty shock for the Tories in the Times this morning, with the paper publishing a YouGov poll suggesting the party could lose 20 seats at next week’s election. The estimate says that we could be heading for a hung parliament and that the Conservatives might fall 16 seats short of an overall majority.

It seems hard to believe that the Conservatives could fare that badly in the general election, but they have been conducting what is widely regarded to be one of the worst general election campaigns in decades. Compounding their earlier errors, May has announced that she won’t take part in the party leader debate, which has given Corbyn a perfect opening to participate in the debate while ridiculing her for ducking it.

[…]

The Conservatives had almost all the advantages going into this election, but they have run their campaign on the possibly fatal assumption that they couldn’t lose no matter what they did. They will probably still hang on to power, but May will have done real harm to her reputation with multiple reversals in just a few weeks. May has weakened her position at home by calling an election that she and her party weren’t fully prepared to fight, and she might end up sinking her government almost as soon as it began.

Like I had wondered, maybe that has been her intent, all along… To screw Britons over.

Either she’s a bumbling incompetent, or she’s deviously self-sabotaging.

The British political situation is very much analogous to the American one, at present:

In America, the Democrats are in complete disarray, and the Republicans control the House and the Senate and the presidency, yet despite all that, seem mostly politically impotent, unable to get their shit together (whether by accident or design), hell-bent on snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

In Britain, Labour is in complete disarray, with their deeply unpopular hard-left leader Jeremy Corbyn, and shouldn’t be any kind of threat to the Tories, but either through incompetence or malice, as with the GOP, May seems bent on self-destruction.

For that matter, here in Ontario, Canada, we have a deeply unpopular Liberal Premier, but the Ontario Tories have a shitty flip-flopping leader who isn’t in any position to become any kind of threat to the governing Liberals. And federally, while the bloom is off the rose, and Trudeau and the Liberals are no longer seen as unable to do wrong by Canadians, who grow increasingly tired of Prime Minister Selfie and his antics, what do the Tories do? Elect a clone of their last leader, showing they’ve learned nothing from their election loss. (I didn’t particularly like libertarian Mad Max, but at least he would have been something different…)

The game is rigged, throughout the Anglosphere. (And the West in general; witness France and the Netherlands, too…)

Only progs are allowed to enact their agenda; cons are cons, incompetent or self-sabotaging.

The ratchet only turns in one direction.

Bugger it all!

Burn it down.

Hit reset.

Start over.

Put not your trust in princes…