Casinos and ethics

The BDN recently ran an article titled “Casino a moral issue?” (Oct. 7) According to the article, only 15 percent of people polled are morally opposed to commercial gambling, and political groups on both sides of the debate have shied away from ethics, emphasizing either the jobs to be gained or the likely increase in crime. But whether politicians and their allies want to face it to not, the decision to build or forbid a casino is a moral one.

The casino issue is another example of interest groups shelving acute questions of right and wrong, pretending they aren’t important, when in fact we must address them if we are to promote a sane, virtuous lifestyle. Without ethics playing a more prominent role in our democratic process, we are bound to go astray.

For example, whether the factions in the casino debate are hiding it or are simply oblivious, they are feebly imitating a theory called utilitarianism. Utilitarianism follows one simple formula, which can be roughly stated as follows: among available options, choose the course of action that maximizes overall happiness. However, neither side in the casino brouhaha dares to discuss overall happiness. They stick with simple slogans and leave deeper questions untouched and unfulfilled.

A serious way to address the complexity of the issue would be to ask, What will bring the greatest happiness for Mainers? The answer is not as simple as it might at first seem. More jobs won’t necessarily bring happiness, not if the jobs are low paying, demoralizing, lack benefits and send a poor moral message to our children. Similarly, a reduction in crime accompanied by depression and frustration won’t necessarily bring happiness either. Serious questions about our future require that we look beyond profits and crime statistics.

Some just shrug their shoulders and say, “People want to hear about jobs, not lofty ideals.” But the response to such defeatist clich?s is simple: The fact that people don’t have time to consider lofty ideals is the reason we need to change our political modus operandi. Other countries, far less wealthy than ours, have offered their citizens the peace of mind needed to deliberate on weighty matters by providing free health care, day care, reduced work loads and paid vacations.

As long as ethics is pooh-poohed off the stage, we’re going to achieve neither general happiness nor integrity, partially because happiness depends on integrity and partially because we’ll be walking in a fog of cost-benefit equations and obfuscating tangles of statistical data.

I applaud the 15 percent who asserted they were morally opposed to gambling – not necessarily because I agree with them, but because they’re probably basing their decision on a respectable principle. Principles, when well reasoned and properly sanctioned, are perhaps the most noble form that morality can take. Principles are found throughout the Gospel, for example, and in other sacred texts. However, principles need not be religious in nature. The philosophical field of deontology, for example, is devoted to the analysis and justification of rational rules of conduct.

The Declaration of Independence, after an introductory paragraph that emphasizes the need for a profound explanation, introduces a principle of equality and a right to the “pursuit of happiness.” In the casino debate and in other debates that tremendously affect the course of our state, reference to these noble concepts that found the magnificence of our country are entirely lacking. Until this egregious failure is rectified, pundits will continue to throw numbers at each other, while missing the underlying essentials that determine the quality and character of our very existence.

Chris Crittenden, Ph.D., an assistant professor at the University of Maine at Machias, currently is teaching an online introductory course in ethics.