Why doesn't Utah have a Lottery?

[Bronco70]

Will I agree with this statement, the problem is that having/not having a lottery should be a state issue, not a religious one. The church's obvious influence on this topic once again shows the complete lack of speration of church and state in Utah.

The church has a lot of influence in Utah because (as Nate pointed out) many legislative positions are held by Mormons. They, just like anyone else, are going to do what they do according to their beliefs, and it is completely unreasonable to expect otherwise.

The implication that the State government is some sort of puppet of the LDS church is laughable. If this was the case, I'd imagine all the "fun" stuff (you know - alcohol, tobacco, R rated movies, bikinis, etc...) would be flat-out against the rules (think about how many "dry" counties there are in the United States - there are hundreds, in case you're wondering).

If your idea of separation of church and state is that anyone in an administrative position must divorce themselves from their beliefs, you need to study up a bit.

 

[TroutBum]

The church has a lot of influence in Utah because (as Nate pointed out) many legislative positions are held by Mormons. They, just like anyone else, are going to do what they do according to their beliefs, and it is completely unreasonable to expect otherwise.

The implication that the State government is some sort of puppet of the LDS church is laughable. If this was the case, I'd imagine all the "fun" stuff (you know - alcohol, tobacco, R rated movies, bikinis, etc...) would be flat-out against the rules (think about how many "dry" counties there are in the United States - there are hundreds, in case you're wondering).

If your idea of separation of church and state is that anyone in an administrative position must divorce themselves from their beliefs, you need to study up a bit.

You're on a roll, homie.

 

[SaltyDawg]

The church has a lot of influence in Utah because (as Nate pointed out) many legislative positions are held by Mormons. They, just like anyone else, are going to do what they do according to their beliefs, and it is completely unreasonable to expect otherwise.

The implication that the State government is some sort of puppet of the LDS church is laughable. If this was the case, I'd imagine all the "fun" stuff (you know - alcohol, tobacco, R rated movies, bikinis, etc...) would be flat-out against the rules (think about how many "dry" counties there are in the United States - there are hundreds, in case you're wondering).

If your idea of separation of church and state is that anyone in an administrative position must divorce themselves from their beliefs, you need to study up a bit.

So then why do you think lotteries, decent beer, medical marijuana, online gambling, Indian casinos, and now happy hour, are all illegal? You don't think the LSD church has anything to do with that?

If they push their agenda in California (the gay marriage bill) why wouldn't they push it in Utah?

 

[7StraightIsGreat]

Bronc Wrote:

They, just like anyone else, are going to do what they do according to their beliefs, and it is completely unreasonable to expect otherwise....... If your idea of separation of church and state is that anyone in an administrative position must divorce themselves from their beliefs, you need to study up a bit.

Actually, I think it is completely within reason to ask a Mormon, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, etc. who holds a legislative position to try and govern in way that represents each and every one of the people in his or her state. Passing a law based off of whether or not it agrees with your religious beliefs and/or because it's what the predominant religion in your state would want is not a very ethical way to govern. Unfortunately, while I may think it's completely reasonable to expect a govermnet to function like that, I realize that it seldomly, if ever does.

The implication that the State government is some sort of puppet of the LDS church is laughable.

You say this, but just how "laughable" is it when you also say this:

The church has a lot of influence in Utah because (as Nate pointed out) many legislative positions are held by Mormons.

So let me see if I've got this right: It's laughable that I think the Utah State government is a "puppet" (your word, not mine) of the LDS church, yet the church has " a lot of influence" in Utah because many of the legislative positions are held by Mormons who are voting on things based off of their religious beliefs.

You're right, I have not idea how I could possibly have made the connection that the LDS church is the driving political force in Utah. My apologies.

 

[Bronco70]

You completely missed the point, jazzman12 (Salty did too.)

There is a difference between influence and control. Of course the church has influence, when its members make up the majority of the state population. But your inference was (by the mention of separation of church and state) that the church controls, not influences, policy in the state. This just isn't correct. Whether or not legislators who are LDS are doing the right or ethical thing was not part of my post. You are pursuing a completely different line of argument there (and one which you may be surprised by how much we agree...)

The fact of the matter is, no matter where you go, local culture influences the governmental presence.

 

[asian_roger]

Mormons.

 

[asian_roger]

The fact of the matter is, no matter where you go, local culture influences the governmental presence.

.

 

[7StraightIsGreat]

You completely missed the point, jazzman12 (Salty did too.)

There is a difference between influence and control. Of course the church has influence, when its members make up the majority of the state population. But your inference was (by the mention of separation of church and state) that the church controls, not influences, policy in the state. This just isn't correct. Whether or not legislators who are LDS are doing the right or ethical thing was not part of my post. You are pursuing a completely different line of argument there (and one which you may be surprised by how much we agree...)

The fact of the matter is, no matter where you go, local culture influences the governmental presence.

I can see where you're coming from with this post, but for the record, I never said the Mormon church "controls" the state of Utah. Do I think Mormon influence's seep into our government and effect the outcome of many decisions made at the state level? Absolutley, and looking at it that way, I think it's more than fair to say that qualifies as a lack of seperation from church and state.

It's also not just a Utah/LDS issue. This happens everywhere. The dry counties you mentioned in your prior post are usually the result of local bible thumpers who want to keep their county sin free in their eyes.

 

[Bronco70]

I can see where you're coming from with this post, but for the record, I never said the Mormon church "controls" the state of Utah. Do I think Mormon influence's seep into our government and effect the outcome of many decisions made at the state level? Absolutley, and looking at it that way, I think it's more than fair to say that qualifies as a lack of seperation from church and state.

You're right, you never did use the word CONTROL. I put that word in your mouth. I did so because, to my way of thinking, separation of church and state is an issue of direct control of one by the other (and this works both ways). It isn't an issue of whether individuals allow their beliefs to influence their part in the formation of policy. So that's probably where our logic diverges.

Personally, I think the best legislators are those that can act in the true interest of their constituency, regardless of their personal feelings or prejudices. In a perfect world, we could vote in the people that were going to make all the right decisions.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

I can see where you're coming from with this post, but for the record, I never said the Mormon church "controls" the state of Utah. Do I think Mormon influence's seep into our government and effect the outcome of many decisions made at the state level? Absolutley, and looking at it that way, I think it's more than fair to say that qualifies as a lack of seperation from church and state.

It's also not just a Utah/LDS issue. This happens everywhere. The dry counties you mentioned in your prior post are usually the result of local bible thumpers who want to keep their county sin free in their eyes.

I have 2 comments on this. It is possible that most of the people that are represented, have been represented fairly. It's more likely that more is allowed than most people agree with.

You are trying to turn this into a religious issue, when it is a people issue. You cannot take religion out of the equation when it is a part of who people are. That's like telling you to forget all of your feelings for the LDS Church and or BYU, when choosing between similar jobs, one at BYU campus, and the other very similar and just as far away, but not there.

Lawmakers do need to base a large part of what goes on from the people they represent, but they also have to use their own life experience and moral compass to direct them. You cannot cut your religion from you when you make decisions, it is a part of you, not an article of clothing.

If you are saying Utah lawmakers need to listen more to the people they represent, I can agree with that, but you are turning "separation of church and state" into something that it is not. This phrase began early in our country's history and had to do more with religious freedom, and keeping the government out of regulating religion. Even if a church stands for certain principles, it is still up to the people to vote how they feel they should. This does not mean that any church should stop teaching what they stand for just because there is a law being voted on. The church does not get a vote, it is still the people that vote.

I don't think the separation you are looking for is realistic. The only way I see of you getting your private utopia is to move somewhere where most people agree with you.

 

[bigb]

I caught part of an interview with someone about this the last time the lottery hit a huge number (I think it was the AG, but can't say for sure). Basically, he said that since gambling is illegal in Utah, the lottery must be as well (as that is a form of gambling). He said they'd looked at bringing a lottery to Utah, but in the end decided that saying gambling is illegal except the state sponsored lottery would be a contradiction and hypocritical.

 

[colton]

So what if it comes from peoples' pockets? It's a voluntary tax. You don't have to buy a ticket, but those who do buy tickets contribute to the fund. Instead of raising everyone's taxes, why not allow this voluntary tax?

What's the motivation for having it?