Judge — February 5, 1927 — page 15: what you’re looking at

Machine-transcribed from the original scan — historical spelling and the odd misread are preserved.

JUDGE Associate Editors, William Morris Houghtor Editor, Norman Anthony William Deal Them Cyards! ECENT remarks of ours on gambling have brought a number of letters. at least two of which raise points that seem worth answering. with an extract from the letter received from J Bolton, of Shamokin, Pa.. who signs himself Cracker.” Ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Bolt I have not checked you up on your ch of gambling is not taken up in Holy Wri “Cruden’s Concordance” (is it really there for an answer to your question, I'm sure you can be answered from the ang! Does it matter who calls it such, or does It is a sin and surely you will agree that it is. Every day the newspapet their dreadful tales of em- bezzlement, robbery, murde all, or a goodly. portion of them, caused by gambling. The misery and povert it is discernible on every side to anyone with a heart and mind. Regardless that gambling si Also, JepGey, from the editos referred to above am I to believe that should the Bible or Cruden’s Concordance call any- thing a sin, you would final? I agree with you d_please loan me your copy of C. C.and I'm sa leader also. However, you are not cons ished your Bible. Con- tinue on and you will just have to change your views on Demon Rum... . We shall begin mes R. A Coal Is it a sin? call it that? aid it was or was not, don't you a May we say with all the emphasis of a passionate nature that we do not consider gambling a sin? mbling under certain circumstances, or to excess, may be a sin, but not gambling in and of itself, any more than dancing or drinking or pli smoking or things under certain cireumst may logically be considered a ing cards or petting or eating ¢ tending the movies. ndy or of thes: aces, or done to excess. . if you prefer that word to “mistake.” but not one of them is such per se or as indulged in by the great majority of temperate people. The notion that such things are sins categorically, because a minority abuses them, lies at the very root of the sump- tuary tyranny that has made our fair land a by-word among civilized nations. To Mr. Bolton’s question regarding the authority of the Bible we reply with equal emphasis that if the Bible called these things in themselves sins, or anyone of them, which it doesn’t, we should still be of exactly the same mind about them and think considerably less of the Bible. Outside of Mississippi and Tennessee, so far as we know, it is still the privilege, and it ought to be the pride, of an American citizen to be guided by his own reasoning faculties in questions of this kind. Cruden’s Concordance, Mr. Bolton, is merely an ex- haustive index of the Bible. Every one HE other letter we refer to is signed by F. C. Robinson and comes from the home town of Aimee Semple McPherson in California. It reads: Commend me to the idiot who wrote the editorial in one of Your recent issues relative to gambling, and found it not a sin because the New Testament does not condemn it. Let- me suggest to him that the same authority has no condemnation for child labor, for food adulteration, for duelling, for slavery, for auto speeding. nor even does it recommend capital punishment for the writers of fool editorials. Yet some of us think it might be well to mn the one and endorse the other. Out at ¢ ina, they catch tuna at this season, which weigh from 150 to 300 pounds. Tam told that fish constitutes a good brain food. | I recommend the writer of the aforesaid editorial to run out this way and cateh and eat a tuna a day for the next three months. By this method he may “catch up.” No doubt if we should run out Mr. Robinson's way we should feel the need of the brain food he suggests. Here. however, we derive a certain mental stimulation from the atmosphere, which prompts us to ask him these questions: 1. Has it occurred to him that mention of the things he catalogs. even the writing of fool editorials. is omitted from the New Testament for the simple reason that they were not indulged in by the Jews of that day we are convinced, wi 2. Has he noti iy fanatical zeal on the part of our churches and Christian societies to rid this country of child labor, food adulteration, auto speeding? Gambling. Even in the matter of slavery and duelling we are under the impression that the churches very timidly brought up the rear of the crusades which accomplished their elimination. We are not citing the omission of gambling from the Bible because it has weight with us, but for the benefit of the professional pietists. It is the professional pietists who are hell-bent on suppressing gambling, as they are drinking and naughty books and naughty plays and petting and prize fights, and in some instances dancing and smoking and even pool and billiard playing. And why? Child labor and food adulteration and auto speeding are not in- herent] are not partic- ularly Only the thing that gives joy arouses their fury. and for a well-known psychological reason they are abnormal people at odds with their environment and determined, therefore, to make it unpleasant for us. But the Gospels which they pretend to follow were neither inspired nor written by abnormal people. Hence there is nothing in them that can honestly be construed as an attack upon gambling or drinking in itself, or dancing or any of these other things so dear to the hatred of the zealots. Jesus loved to see others happy, as he demonstrated at the feast of Cana. Not so his little tin imit W. MM. H. Because these things give pleasure. pleasurable, so in these abuses they interested, comicbooks.com