Salvation Army Problem Gambling

In other words, the Salvation Army does provide lifesaving services, including food and shelter, to LGBTQ people facing homelessness, but it also appears to have no problem with its leadership. The Salvation Army in particular warned that machine gambling has highly addictive properties, and that the lure of mega-prizes would only further compound this danger. There are currently an estimated 370,000 problem gamblers in the UK and the Methodist Church and The Salvation Army.

Salvation Army Problem Gambling Winnings

http://www.pgfnz.org.nz the website of the Problem Gambling Foundation of New Zealand

Today I have been reading:

Stacey Kirk (2014). Problem Gambling Foundation loses
Govt funding. Retrieved from http://www.stuff.co.nz

I’m not going to wade into the debate as to who should get the government funding for this essential work. In some ways this is a segue from my last post since the new providers of the contract with the government funding will be the Salvation Army.

The article raises the concern, from the Labour party, that the funding is being transferred due to the Problem Gambling Foundation’s opposition to the Government’s SkyCity convention centre ‘deal’. I’m not even going to wade into the specifics of this since the Salvation Army also publicly opposed the deal so the claims are looking a little shaky – who really knows?.

This reminded me of the discussion that surrounded the withdrawal of Pub Charity funding from some Anglican organisations due to some groups objecting to gambling.

Salvation Army Problem Gambling

Salvation Army Problem Gambling Games

Anyway this kind of talk prompted me onto thinking about how an organisation can be a positive and productive contributor to society, receiving the resources of the community to support its work, but still be able to outline strongly its opposition to areas of the society that it finds to be in error. There are, I guess, many organisations and individuals who can hold that position in society successfully.

I’ve been thinking about the people in our midst or those we create to fill the role of opposition to the prevailing mode.

  • Since the 1970s the concept of the critical friend has become popular, especially in the education sector. A critical friend is described as a successful marrying of unconditional support and unconditional critique.
  • A loyal dissenter is something different. Someone who is deeply committed to an organisation but dissents from some practices or beliefs of the same organisation. Often used in religious circles.
  • Different again – an activist will actively and prominently act to aim to achieve political or social goals, as by demonstrations, protests, etc.
  • The reformer will try to improve social, political or economic conditions without seeming to be a radical or revolutionary change.
  • The lobbyist – has a long history in American politics.
  • The list goes on…

A while back I watched World War Z. ( Loved that movie… Anyway….) One concept that emerged was that of the tenth man – Whenever nine men agree on something, it’s the tenth man’s responsibility to present a case for an alternative view point — no matter how ridiculous the idea sounds. Funny that it’s called the tenth man – my wife suggests that if a woman was in the room she would be right so there would be no need for any of the ten men!! Brilliant!

Anyway what is this all about?

I’ve been thinking that we in New Zealand are a little bit afraid of not being in the majority. Or maybe it is that when we think we are in the majority are very dismissive of the minority. Often, people or organisations that take a stand against a prevailing view are accused of ‘pushing an agenda’, ‘representing a minority view’, ‘extremist tenancies’, ‘not mainstream’ or anything else the accuser who purports to represent the majority decides will win the discussion. What they effectively do is sidestep the discussion in favour of a polemic.

In reality the lone voice might be the right voice.

How do we discern the right path rather than the right argument?
How can we avoid polemic and diatribe?
Who can unite people and enable us to listen, as a society?
How can we welcome those among us that promote a difficult or different view and truly listen to their wisdom?

Of course the dissenting voice is not always the right voice. The very process of truly listening to the dissenting voice may reaffirm and strengthen the proposed or prevailing position – it is the process of listening and discerning that unifies.

Salvation Army Problem Gambling Rules

I believe that many of major decisions made by company boards, organisations, governments, families, and individuals have been made with a lack of respect to the dissenting voice. More shared wisdom and more respect will result in better decisions.

Salvation Army Problem Gambling Addiction

Salvation

Can we allow ourselves to be open to the wisdom of the little one, the poor, the vulnerable, the children, the different,…..