Church over stepping its bounds, Hart defends Sunday racing

[evanovitch]

Church over stepping its bounds, Hart defends Sunday racing
Friday, 18 September 2009

The Chairman of Caymanas Track Limited (CTL) has chided the church over its stance against Sunday horse racing in Jamaica.

Tony Hart believes the church has overstepped its bounds.

The CTL head says while he respects the views of the church, it should not dictate to well thinking Jamaicans how they should spend their time.

"I personally believe in the church (but) the church should tell its members don't gamble, don't go to the tracks, don't go to dancehalls that go on until 6 o'clock Sunday morning, don't watch pornographic television at nights in your beds and don't do what you want to do.

"I believe that it's the right of any human being to do what they want to do without hurting anybody else," said Mr. Hart Thursday on RJR's daily current affairs programme Beyond the Headlines.

Have other churches lost membership asks Williams

Meanwhile, Senator Arthur Wiliams, State Minister in the Ministry of Finance and Public Service, who is responsible for horse racing, defended the Government's decision to allow Sunday racing.

According to Senator Williams who was also a guest on Beyond the Headlines, it should not affect worshippers.

"Other religious groups have had to live with gambling on their days of worship for a long time and I don't know if Seventh Day Adventists' will tell you that they lost membership or anything really serious has happened in that regard. It's not a question of racing all day on Sunday ... it would be for a few hours on Sunday afternoons," Senator Williams said.

Under a pilot project, Sunday horse racing will take place at Caymanas Park on November 29 and December 13.

However, the Jamaica Council of Churches has expressed surprise and disappointment that the authorities have given the green light to the events.

[evanovitch]

Pastor concerned about consequences of increased gambling ac

Pastor concerned about consequences of increased gambling activities
Friday, 18 September 2009


As debate continues to swirl over the government's approval of Sunday horse racing, Chairman of the Manchester Ministers Fraternal, Reverend Dr. Roy Notice has raised concern about the economical implications of increased gambling activities.

"The persons who are involved in gambling are those with the least resources and their families are being affected more. So whether gambling is Saturday, Good Friday or Sunday morning, that is not my concern,"

"My concern is that at a time when we should be focusing on productivity, building family life and increasing family value we are leaning towards a quick fix. It is the same money in society that is being circulated but it is being removed from the hands of the many and placed in the hands of the few," he said.

Under a pilot project, horse racing will take place at Caymanas Park on Sunday November 29 and Sunday December 13.

However, the Jamaica Council of Churches has expressed surprise and disappointment that the authorities have given the green light to the events.

[Dyoll_73]

Re: Pastor concerned about consequences of increased gambling ac

My understanding is that SDAs have become (or is it becoming?) the single largest religious denomination in JA. What if they should become so powerful as to demand that Caymanas Park racing close down on Saturdays, or all stores and supermarkets close on that day, or that the eating of pork be abolished? How would the 'Sunday people' react?

[Dr.Dudd]

Re: Pastor concerned about consequences of increased gambling ac

Well they do all those things in the middle east and it does not seem they are any worse off for it..<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Humano</div><div class="ubbcode-body">My understanding is that SDAs have become (or is it becoming?) the single largest religious denomination in JA. What if they should become so powerful as to demand that Caymanas Park racing close down on Saturdays, or all stores and supermarkets close on that day, or that the eating of pork be abolished? How would the 'Sunday people' react?

</div></div>

[Amberal37]

Re: Pastor concerned about consequences of increased gambling ac

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Humano</div><div class="ubbcode-body">My understanding is that SDAs have become (or is it becoming?) the single largest religious denomination in JA. What if they should become so powerful as to demand that Caymanas Park racing close down on Saturdays, or all stores and supermarkets close on that day, or that the eating of pork be abolished? How would the 'Sunday people' react?

</div></div>
Nothing wrong with having an official day of rest so let for Sundays to remain so. I'm with the church on this - I don't think that they should stay out of this issue.
Also - don't think all denominations castigates the eating of pork.

[Dyoll_73]

Re: Pastor concerned about consequences of increased gambling ac

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: amberal37</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Humano</div><div class="ubbcode-body">My understanding is that SDAs have become (or is it becoming?) the single largest religious denomination in JA. What if they should become so powerful as to demand that Caymanas Park racing close down on Saturdays, or all stores and supermarkets close on that day, or that the eating of pork be abolished? How would the 'Sunday people' react?

</div></div>
Nothing wrong with having an official day of rest so let for Sundays to remain so. I'm with the church on this - I don't think that they should stay out of this issue.
Also - don't think all denominations castigates the eating of pork. </div></div>

Well, what if the non pork-eaters call for a law banning the eating of pork in Jamaica solely on narrow religious grounds? I think the pork eaters would be up in arms about it, and for good reason. My larger point is that one group of religious people are seeking to impose their views on a larger society on this issue, as I have seen with some other issues to which a certain segment of the church has objected.

On the issue of an &quot;official day of rest&quot;: This would be unconstitutional in societies where freedom of religion/worship/conscience is expressly guaranteed because of the various prohibitions which would come with such a status, and the stifling of liberties that would occur to those who do not embrace this day of rest. It's why even in societies where there is some official day of worship of some sort, it is not strictly enforced or even taken seriously.

[Amberal37]

Re: Pastor concerned about consequences of increased gambling ac

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Humano</div><div class="ubbcode-body">On the issue of an &quot;official day of rest&quot;: This would be unconstitutional in societies where freedom of religion/worship/conscience is expressly guaranteed because of the various prohibitions which would come with such a status, and the stifling of liberties that would occur to those who do not embrace this day of rest. It's why even in societies where there is some official day of worship of some sort, it is not strictly enforced or even taken seriously. </div></div>

That's strange...I live in a country where it is stringently imposed (no supermarkets allowed to open, and no noise disturbance over certain decibels...etc), and it is ENTIRELY within the constitution. In fact it is also in the constitution that persons freedom of religion, etc. are guaranteed..Point being - the two are NOT mutually exclusive.

I see this issue as one institution that are voicing their concerns, and if those concerns are valid for the wider population - why ignore them <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="text-decoration: underline">just because </span></span>it is a religious institution?

[Dyoll_73]

Re: Pastor concerned about consequences of increased gambling ac

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: amberal37</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I live in a country where it is stringently imposed (no supermarkets allowed to open, and no noise disturbance over certain decibels...etc), and it is ENTIRELY within the constitution. In fact it is also in the constitution that persons freedom of religion, etc. are guaranteed..Point being - the two are NOT mutually exclusive.</div></div>

Based on your profile, I see you live in the UK. Aren't stores allowed to open on Sundays there (according to the <span style="font-style: italic">Sunday Trading Act</span>), and various activities, including football matches, allowed on Sundays? It's not as if London, for example, is a ghost town on Sundays! Sure, there are certain regulations, but activities aren't shut down because it is designated a &quot;day of rest.&quot;

In any case, the exalted status of the Anglican Church, though in all honesty, it is rather benign compared to a few centuries ago, is part of the reason there is such a 'day' in the UK. The Queen is head of the church, strangely. Like the monarch, the Anglican church is deeply rooted in British history and culture. It seems this day of rest is more symbolic than substantial because if strict prohibitions attended it, it would easily be seen as a violation of statutes which provide for freedom of religion, which also means freedom <span style="font-style: italic">from</span> religion. Those prohibitions would encroach on the liberties of others who don't observe that day of rest.

Religious days of rest should be abolished, IMO. But in certain societies citizens choose to tolerate them if they do little or no harm, and are of symbolic value only, instead of challenging their constitutionality.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I see this issue as one institution that are voicing their concerns, and if those concerns are valid for the wider population - why ignore them <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="text-decoration: underline">just because </span></span>it is a religious institution?</div></div>

Sure, religious persons and institutions are free to voice their concerns, but religious viewpoint should not form the basis for public policy. If the position of a church group finds commonality with a secular group on a particular policy, then fine, but obviously religious belief was not the basis.

[Amberal37]

Re: Pastor concerned about consequences of increased gambling ac

I moved out of the UK two years ago, but still travel there regularly. But the laws in the UK is as you say. I remember there was also a big hoohaw about changing the sunday trading rules at the time.

But generally, although no-trading on Sundays came about through the church, I don't think that it is a bad thing for a society. A day in the week when people do not feel pressed to work, and can have relief from pressing day to day matters especially so n today's modern society. I think that it is right that ANY constitution protects that.

Yes I suppose where I am it is more symbolic than anything else, because as far as I see, much as most would say that they are christian and religious - honestly there aren't many that I do see attending church (apart from the weddings, funerals, etc.).

There are also other things - such as working hours and summer holidays which are more rigid than UK - but that is another story.