News
Gambling: Politically unwise (Part 2)
Gambling is also bad political policy. Solely in terms of its effects on society and government, a law that permits gambling is hard to justify, and a law that sponsors or promotes gambling is a sure loser.
It should not be surprising that many of the public policy arguments against gambling are mirror images of the moral and religious considerations reviewed last week. The moral codes of religion are rooted in our Creator’s teachings of how his children should live to be happy, prosperous, and at peace. A religious and moral person is generally a good neighbour and a good citizen. The encouragement of moral behaviour by citizens is generally good public policy.
Columnist George F. Will explained it this way:“Gambling is debased speculation, a lust for sudden wealth that is not connected with the process of making society more productive of goods and services. Government support of gambling gives a legitimsing imprimatur to the pursuit of wealth without work.”In the words of Former Governor of Florida Bob Graham, “What the lottery says about success is the wrong message. What it says is that you don’t have to work hard, you don’t have to try to improve yourself. All you have to do is just take your roll of the dice.”
A Catholic priest, Monsignor Joseph Dunne, deplores what the lottery teaches children: “Why should they get an education when with a little bit of luck they can win a bundle of money for life? That’s what lotteries are doing to our youth.”The philosophy of something for nothing or something for far less than it is worth is at the root of a multitude of crimes: theft, robbery, looting, embezzlement, fraud, and many other kinds of plunder. By nourishing and legitimating that philosophy, gambling is a threat to the prosperity and peace of any nation.
Gambling is especially wicked when it is administered by government or when government relies on it as a substantial source of public revenue. In times when a government’s appetite for taxes seems insatiable, government officials who depend on gambling to finance a share of the public budget have a strong temptation to promote gambling and to protect it from opposition.
You can’t run a successful lottery by telling the whole truth. You need hard-sell promotion, often vague and misleading about the odds and the prizes. That enterprise of parting the gullible from his hard earn money is questionable enough in the free marketplace; it’s no business for a nation or government whose purpose is to serve and protect the people.
As a Newsweek business section writer noted: “The strongest case against lotteries may simply be that they are inefficient.”Most methods of taxation cost only one to two cents to bring in each dollar of revenue. In contrast, between 60 and 75 cents of every dollar spent on a lottery ticket goes to operating expenses and prizes.
Lottery is the worst form of taxation ever invented when operated by the government. This is because the poor pay a higher proportion of their income than the rich. Economists describe this kind of tax as highly regressive. Writing in the National Tax Journal,one economist stated that most forms of gambling, including lotteries and numbers games, turn out to be “two to three times more regressive than sales taxes.”
An official with a firm that markets lottery products told a trade audience that the typical player of a numbers game is a labourer or service worker who is male with less than a high school education. Scholarly studies confirm that lotteries draw their revenues from the poor and disadvantaged.
A national lottery encourages many non-gamblers to take up gambling. Its goal, as explained by an official of the Public Gaming Research Institute, “is to get lots of people to play a little bit.” That is what happens. Like a virus, official sponsorship spreads gambling like an epidemic.
Advocates of legalised gambling argue that their games will eliminate illegal gambling, but there is no evidence that this has occurred. Instead, legalised gambling wins new participants, which expands the market and the potential revenues of illegal gambling. Just by example see the number of young people flocking betting dens all day of the week take a chance on sport betting.
The only beneficiaries of a national lottery are the businesses that sell the specialised products and services used in lotteries. Those businesses are behind the campaigns to adopt them. National sponsored lotteries are a good news/bad news proposition. The good news is for a handful of businesses that are sure to profit by it, and for professional gamblers and the crime syndicate that will benefit from having their most profitable enterprise promoted and legitimised by the state. It is also good news for a tiny number of winners who cannot be predicted in advance but who are sure to be fewer than one in a thousand of those who participate.
The bad news is for the hundreds of thousands of losers and for the citizens at large. As a method of raising revenue to support any worthy object, a national lottery is the most unfair and expensive form of taxation, and its victims require increased state expenditures for social welfare and law enforcement. In short, the national lottery is costly, ineffective, and unfair.
I conclude this discussion of public policy arguments against gambling with several moral objections. Law is concerned about morality, and there are serious legal-moral objections to lotteries and gambling. I quote five of these objections from a publication of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Christian Life Commission:
“It is a moral issue when the state decides to derive income from an activity which is a highly regressive form of taxation that affects poor people more extensively than affluent people. It is a moral issue when a state decides not only to tolerate gambling but to get in the business of planning games, engaging in promotional activities … and targeting its citizens through extensive marketing analyses in the hopes of creating new gamblers.
“It is a moral issue when a state adopts a form of gambling which in all probability will increase the extent and the amount of illegal gambling. It is a moral issue when a state adopts a form of gambling that will draw off large amounts of money, especially from the poor people for whom the state supposedly has a responsibility to provide assistance.
“It is a moral issue when a state engages in naive projections and adopts financial planning that amounts to putting a shoddy patch on a state’s long-term financial problems.”
To summarise: that governments would tolerate gambling is regrettable; that governments would promote gambling is reprehensible.So what should we do about gambling a people? We should not participate in any way, and should encourage others, especially our family members, not to participate.
If as Christians, Moslems and high minded people in the society members do not oppose immoral and pernicious practices, who will? If not now, when? We can make a difference! May God help us to do so.
By Samuel Enos Eghan
THE Minister of Gender, Children and Social Protection (MOGCSP), Dr Agnes Naa Momo Lartey, has called on traditional authorities, religious leaders and community influencers to stop shielding perpetrators of gender-based violence and allow the law to work.
She said too many cases were being buried at the community level, with abusers protected while victims were pressured into silence. This, she stressed, must end.
Dr Lartey made the call on Tuesday at the national launch of the 2025, 16 Days of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence campaign, held at the Kaneshie Main Station in Accra.
This year’s campaign, observed globally from November 25 to December 10, is on the theme: ‘Unite! End Digital Violence Against Women and Girls.’
It highlights rising incidents of cyberbullying, online stalking, image-based exploitation and other forms of technology-facilitated abuse that disproportionately affect women and girls.
The minister urged the media to use their platforms to condemn abuse and intensify education, noting that no person should “die in silence’’ in a society that values dignity, equality and the principles of Sustainable Development Goal 5.
She also encouraged women, girls, men and boys to report any form of abuse, assuring the public that support services were available to all, regardless of age or social status.
Dr Lartey described gender-based violence as one of the most pervasive human rights violations in Ghana. She referenced a 2016 Domestic Violence Survey showing that 27.7 per cent of Ghanaian women have experienced domestic violence, as well as a 2014 Demographic and Health Survey which revealed that 32 per cent of girls aged 15–24 believe wife beating was justified—an indication of harmful societal norms.
Calling the situation “unfortunate and sad,” she stressed that the nation must dismantle cultural beliefs that excuse or normalise violence.
Outlining government actions, Dr Lartey announced that Cabinet has approved the revised National Domestic Violence Policy, while the updated Domestic Abuse Bill and its Legislative Instrument were being finalised by the Attorney-General’s Department.
She also disclosed plans to operationalise a national shelter in Accra and begin constructing the 16 regional shelters promised to strengthen protection systems for survivors.
Additionally, the ministry has trained 200 market leaders as paralegals and 100 professionals, including psychologists, medical workers and legal experts, to support victims with referrals and counselling.
UNFPA Country Representative, Dr David Wilfred Ochan, reaffirmed the agency’s support for Ghana’s efforts. He unveiled a nationwide initiative titled “16 Stations, 16 Routes, 16 Destinations,” which will use the country’s public transport system to raise awareness on gender-based violence.
In partnership with the Ghana Private Road Transport Union (GPRTU), the initiative will promote stickers, public announcements, training and codes of conduct to ensure that transport stations become safe spaces where commuters, traders, porters and young people can access information and hotline services to report or prevent abuse.
Join our WhatsApp Channel now!
https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VbBElzjInlqHhl1aTU27
CHILD Rights International (CRI) is urging the government to adopt a firm and comprehensive national policy to safeguard the religious rights of students in secondary schools, insisting that no child should be denied education or the freedom to express their faith.
In a statement issued on Thursday in Accra, the organisation said the recent controversy involving Wesley Girls’ Senior High School highlights deep-seated gaps in how children’s rights were upheld within the country’s long-standing educational structures.
According to CRI, the incident underscores the need for Ghana to reassess the relationship between school traditions and the constitutional rights of students.
The group emphasised that the right to education and the right to religious expression were fundamental, and must be reflected consistently in rules and practices across all schools.
Additionally, CRI noted that many well-known mission institutions such as Holy Child School and St. Louis Senior High School operate on religious foundations that have shaped their administrative cultures for decades.
These differ significantly from state-established schools like Ghana Senior High School in Koforidua, Tamale Senior High School and Achimota Senior High School.
This contrast, CRI argued, raises an important national question and what policy framework has guided these mission schools since their incorporation into the public system?
Although the government has declared all such schools secular, they continue to function as government-assisted institutions, maintaining a hybrid structure that leaves them neither fully autonomous nor entirely under the Ghana Education Service (GES).
This unclear arrangement has led to inconsistent rules on discipline, conduct and religious expression from one school to another.
CRI warned that the absence of a unified and enforceable national policy leaves significant gaps in the protection of children’s rights.
While rights may be universal, the group emphasised that their protection depends on strong and clearly defined state regulations.
The organisation further stated that the State has yet to assume full regulatory authority over the schools it supports financially. As a result, key administrative and disciplinary decisions often remain at the discretion of individual school authorities, creating uneven standards nationwide.
For the rights of children, particularly their right to practise their religion to be fully realised, CRI believes the government must move toward full regulatory ownership of all schools it funds or classifies as public.
Without this, tensions between deeply rooted school traditions and constitutional freedoms are likely to persist.
The statement stressed that once a school admits a student, it takes responsibility not only for their academic development but also for respecting their identity, including their religious background. Therefore, no child, CRI insists, should be prevented from practicing their faith within the school environment.
Moreover, the organisation called for the establishment of clear national standards that guide schools on accommodating religious expression without compromising discipline or institutional order.
It also urged the government to strengthen safeguarding systems with firm oversight and routine monitoring to ensure that children’s rights are protected based on national law, not historical customs or administrative discretion.
CRI admonished the government to clarify the official status of government-assisted mission schools to ensure that the rights of all students are upheld consistently across the country.
By Spectator Reporter
Join our WhatsApp Channel now!
https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VbBElzjInlqHhl1aTU27
