[Qwinn]

"Bennett never condemned gambling because it was his preferred vice. This sophistry in the service of hero worship is really tiresome."

You missed my entire point. You are calling it a vice. I don't think it's a vice in the first place. Right now, at this moment, I have absolutely no problem with anyone who wants to go to A.C. and gamble every last penny they have as long as it's money above what they need to care for their own in the lifestyle they're accustomed to. Bennett never gambled so much that he couldn't take care of his family. It's only a vice when it gets to that level. This is right out of the Catholic Catechism buddy.

Again, you're applying Protestant standards to a Catholic... which is fine if you're actually condemning him for gambling... but you're not. You're condemning him for being a hypocrite when he never did anything that contradicts his own Church's beliefs.

As for hero worship? I never even HEARD of Bennett until the gambling charges came up, and haven't heard him since, but nice try.

Qwinn

[LittleJoe]

I think you replied to the wrong post, Qwinn.

I haven't commented on Bennett.
I think Bennett has the right to spend his money any damn way he pleases.

I'm also not a Catholic. I'm a Deist.

[WackyKat]

No, you completely missed my point.

Bennett made a career of condemning other people's pleasures, such as drugs or sex, while indulging in his preferred pleasure.

I don't think gambling is a "sin"; I do think hypocrisy is, especially when it is so public.

BTW, the Church doesn't condemn gambling because gambling has historically been very profitable for the church-ever heard of bingo games?