[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?

[Qwinn]

"No, you completely missed my point."

Uh, no I didn't. Or if I did, you certainly didn't say one thing to clear it up. This sounds exactly like what you said the first time.

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

A pleasure which his church says is not a sin. You seem to think the Church is against all forms of pleasure, that pleasure itself is a sin. I'm agnostic myself, but I'm not an idiot. How are you doing?

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

Read my lips - he never condemned it. If it was something the Catholic Church opposed, then yes, I would agree that by virtue of claiming that Catholicism was "the way", that would make him a hypocrite. But given that he never condemned gambling, and the Church doesn't condemn the level of gambling he did........ he never condemned it IN ANY WAY, not even by inference.

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

What a ridiculous statement! Isn't it possible that they had no problem with it in the first place, and therefore bingo games began? You're basically stating "The egg came before the chicken!" like it's a self evident fact. I'd buy your statement if they had been against all gambling at some point in their past and then changed their minds... but only certain Protestants to my knowledge ever condemned gambling at any level as a sin. Guess who came first.

Qwinn