Professional Gambling Systems from a Banned Pro Gambler! 99.6 roulette gambling system. We sell very specific gambling techniques to the average punter. We offer Gambling Systems & Strategies, training manuals and videos. Not only are we professional gamblers ourselves (many thanks to Robert Ren. 10 Reasons why Video Gaming should be Considered a Sport. Video games have been steadily increasing in popularity since the 1980’s. Atari hit the market with a vengeance, changing the way kids spend their afternoons and weekends.

• Pro Gambling Arguments
• Pro Gambling Arguments 2019
• Pro Gambling Arguments Against
• Pro Gambling Arguments

The main difference between legal and illegal gambling is that legal gambling is monitored by government inspections agencies. But more people gamble because it is legal, and although the government collects taxes on jackpots, Indian casinos and lotteries, the system is highly subject to fraud.

Gambling online is illegal (federally), but this doesn’t stop people from doing it. And even though the Organized Crime Section of the Department of Justice found that “the rate of illegal gambling in those states which have some legalized form of gambling was three times as high as those states where there was not a legalized form of gambling,” we still believe that gambling is a drain to society. Here are our Top 5 reasons why.

Reasons why gambling should be illegal

1. Gambling is subject to fraud.

Legalized gambling, specifically Indian gaming, is the fastest growing industry in the world, and can have a corrupting influence on state government. The governments are addicted to the revenue received from Indian gaming and lotteries. Recently there have been numerous news reports of corruption and fraud in state lotteries.

2. Availability of gambling facilities increases risk of problem gambling.

Legalized gambling makes this activity available to too many people. Governments and casinos portray this as a harmless form of entertainment. Because of the availability of legalized gambling, it is more addictive and destructive than most other addictions.

Furthermore, most citizens would not gamble illegally. Legalized gambling, therefore, entices people to gamble, who normally would not gamble at all. In states with different numbers of games, participation rates increase steadily and sharply as the number of legal types of gambling increases. In fact, legalized gambling in various states has not been a competitor to, but rather has become a stimulator of illegal gambling.

The public is assured they have the potential to win a huge jackpot. All that is required is to drive to the casino or purchase a lottery ticket. Because of the availability of gambling, many gamblers become addicted and compulsive. Interested in how to quit gambling? Read more here.

3. Problem gambling costs society billions annually.

The social costs of gambling addictions will eventually impact careers, physical and mental health issues, bankruptcy, divorce, crimes, and treatment. The gamblers will eventually rely on welfare or unemployment benefits, impacting the government, and the costs could reach several billions of dollars per year.

Pro Gambling Arguments

4. Gambling exploits the poor.

Evidence shows that legalized gambling often hurts and even destroys, especially those who are poor and disadvantaged. If gambling were illegal, the gambling venues would not be able to promote their lotteries, casinos, or other forms of betting and exploit people who are most vulnerable.

5. Gambling sets a double standard for governments.

State lotteries are argueably an effective way to raise taxes. Legalized gambling is a disturbing governmental policy. Governments should promote desirable qualities in the citizens and not seduce them to gamble in state-sponsored vice. When this occurs, the government contributes to the corruption of society.

Legalized gambling is a bad social policy. At a time when independent organizations estimate that there are at least 12 million compulsive gamblers, it does not make a lot of sense to have the state promoting gambling. State sponsorship of gambling makes it harder, for the compulsive gambler to reform.

Compulsive gambling costs

In addition to the above reasons for making gambling illegals, are the economic costs that gamblers themselves incur. The average compulsive gambler has debts exceeding $80,000. Additionally, compulsive gamblers affect the lives of family, friends, and business associates. Some of the consequences of gambling include marital disharmony, divorce, child abuse, substance abuse, and suicide attempts. Other social costs surface because of family neglect, embezzlement, theft, and involvement in organized crime.

Crossing our fingers or wishing on a star will not guarantee a win. The only guarantee is, if a person is a compulsive gambler and continues to gamble, the end result is prison, insanity, or death. Whether gambling is legal or illegal, there will always be gamblers. Wanna bet?

Reference sources: Probe [dot] org

“The Church teaches that the one true God, our Creator and Lord, can be known with certainty from his works, by the natural light of human reason.” (CCC 47)

I make absolutely no claims on originality here: during these parlous times when our nation’s Judeo-Christian roots are being not only challenged and questioned, but attacked and debased and erased, it’s always good to have a ready argument for the existence of God—especially since this weird atheistic vogue shows no sign of slowing down. So without further delay:

1. Paschal’s Wager

In this day and age, when the State not only supports but actively encourages almost every form of gambling, but actively and actually encourages it—and at the same time purveys the myth that the proceeds from state-sponsored gambling “goes to public education” (it’s hard to even type this canard without laughing aloud)—why not bet on the existence of God?

This concept, which dates back to the tortured French philosopher Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), famous for his tome simply entitled Pensées, seems simple enough on the surface: either God exists or He doesn’t. However, since we are already in this crazy mixed up “game” of life, we have everything to gain by living our lives by “betting” that God does exist — and living a life in accord with that belief. And, if at the end of this life we find that God doesn’t exist after all, we will still have “won”, since we would have led a virtuous Christian life.

Paschal took a lot of grief for leaving the door open for the concept of God “not existing” but (a) this was part of the ploy of his wager, in which the player never loses, and (b) Paschal had slipped, at least in part, to the heresy of Jansenism, which ravaged most of France throughout the 17th century—and wouldn’t finally be stamped out until the time of St. Thérèse of Lisieux.

Still, Pascal’s wager makes a lot of sense, no pun intended—and it pre-empts the “I-don’t-want-to-play-this-game” argument by pointing out that it’s too late not too: one HAS to decide to bet either for or against the existence of God, as one is already alive—and hopefully preparing for a grace-filled death.

2. The Ontological Argument (or the Argument from Being)

Unlike Paschal’s wager, which had as its origin a man many considered a heretic, the Ontological Argument for the Existence of God dates back to Saint Anselm (1033-1109), who was both Archbishop of Canterbury and Abbot of Bec, and is known as “Doctor Magificus”.

Like Paschal, however, Anselm’s argument is deceptively simple: we can conceive of perfection (since we live in a world of imperfection where things break down and go wrong every day we often wonder what a perfect world would be like), and since we are imperfect beings we can conceive of a Perfect Being, which we call God. The clincher for this argument: if God weren't perfect, He couldn’t exist, and if He didn’t exist, He wouldn’t be God (or, for that matter, perfect).

Perhaps somewhat surprisingly, this rather loose argument took hold and held on for so long not so much because The Church promulgated it as dogma (in the meantime, St. Thomas Aquinas would come along with his “Prime Mover” argument, see below), but because a group of 17th-century European philosophers—none of whom we’d call “practicing Catholics” (one was a Jew who was banished from his Synagogue)—rediscovered it and gave it their own twist: Leibniz, Spinoza, and Descartes all teethed on and wrote about The Ontological Argument. Still, despite its chicken-and-the-egg feel to it, the Ontological Argument still beats its detractors to the punch: namely, if one is so sure a perfect being does not exist, why are you still able to conceive it?

3. ​The Teleological Argument (The Argument From Design)

Though he doesn’t get direct credit for this one, St. Augustine’s poem “The Beauty of Creation Bears Witness To God” is about as accurate a summation of this theory behind God’s existence as one could hope for. In St. Augustine’s own immortal words:

Question the beauty of the earth,
The beauty of the sea,
The beauty of the wide air around you,
The beauty of the sky;
Question the order of the stars,
The sun whose brightness lights the day,
The moon whose splendor softens the gloom of night.
Question the living creatures that move through the water,
That roam upon the earth,
That fly through the air;
The spirit that is manifest;
The visible things that are ruled,
The invisible that rule them;
Question all these,
They will answer you:
‘Behold and see, we are beautiful.’
Their beauty is their confession of God.
Who made these beautiful changing things,
If not one who is beautiful and changeth not?

This philosophical/theological argument actually pre-dates Christianity and goes all the way back to Plato and Aristotle—and pretty much lasted uncontested until the time of David Hume (the philosopher who proclaimed that there’s no guarantee that the sun will rise tomorrow, even though it has for millions of years). Part of the immediate appeal of this argument is that the earth in particular and the universe in general are indeed pretty amazing places—and ironically advances in science have actually helped this argument by showing how incredibly complex nature—make that “Nature”— truly is. (One need only turn on the National Geographic channel or NOVA for examples of this).

And the more one looks at cells, leaves, waves and their relation to the phase of the Moon; the rotation of the seasons, symbiotic relationships within the natural sciences, along with discoveries as deep as the ocean and as far as Mars, literally—it’s hard NOT to imagine that a “Divine Architect” (namely God) is behind such beauty.

Pro Gambling Arguments 2019

Still, the Argument from Design suffers from the complaint that while the world is phenomenal, it is fraught with inexplicable natural catastrophes, from typhoons to tornadoes, sink-holes to tsunamis, which an atheist will use to point out that the world is not perfect.

It is worth noting here that the teleological argument doesn’t posit that the world is perfect, but that its creator is (here, refer to St. Augustine’s poem, supra). That He allows for such vagaries of nature and natural disaster is part of His inscrutable plan—and the fact that nature has not destroyed itself, but perdured (despite man’s attempt to destroy other man, and the earth in the process), is attributed to God’s perfection vis-à-vis man’s imperfection.

4. The “Prime Mover” or Cosmological Argument

Pro Gambling Arguments Against

Up until the middle of the 20th century (when Thomism enjoyed a new vogue thanks to Jacques Maritan and G.K. Chesterton), the concept of a Prime Mover was the classic Catholic philosopher’s case for the existence of God. St. Thomas Aquinas took Aristotle’s concept of an “unmoved mover” and gave it a Christian bent: the unmoved mover, the first cause, the being that sets all others in motion we call God. This argument took hold since Aristotle and Aquinas held such stature (even during their lifetimes) that it seemed like only simple common sense that one could not have an infinite series of causes—that there HAD to be ONE, and only one, prime cause, Q.E.D. God exists.

Pro Gambling Arguments

Atheists, hiding behind a cloud of computer screens and mathematical theorems, seemed to do damage to the Cosmological Argument by showing that there can be all kinds of “infinite” mathematical series. But this is a lot like saying you are going to build a “perpetual motion” machine: the minute you start building it, you’re acknowledging that such a machine does not exist, much less is in motion (let alone perpetually). While this might not be the most air-tight of all the arguments for the existence of God, I’d certainly throw my lot in with Aquinas and Aristotle instead of some Ph.D. in computer science in Palo Alto.