Online Casinos and the Constitution
A lot of negative media attention has centered Rand Paul in the past several
weeks because of this right wing Republican’s decidedly “un-Republican” views on
the online casino gambling debate in the United States. The debate over the
legalization of internet gambling has become a real hot point in US politics
these days as the politicians duke out which side’s points better match the US
Constitution. Paul has actually made some of the clearest and well stated
defences for the legalization of online casinos than any politicians on either
side of the debate. That’s the really funny part – the Democrats are arguing the
politics and domestic necessity for the internet gambling, and the Republicans
are countering with religious and moral reasoning for banning the activity, and
then there is Paul, arguing the Constitutional backing for all of the policies.
The religious right of the Republican Party are not claiming Paul as a part of
their ideology and have lambasted him for his views supporting the legalization
of online casino gambling based on the Constitution. Paul’s key point in the
debates is that the Constitution is there to protect the individual liberties of
Americans and limit the influence of the US government – a sentiment strongly
echoed by a large population of the US, even though firmly outside of debate
over offshore online casinos. For this reason it’s just so interesting that
neither party is accepting Paul’s message – the liberal stations have baited
Paul into twisting his concepts and words.
The basic essence of why Paul supports the online casinos is because he draws a
line between what the government supports, and what the government makes
illegal. Although he may not believe that gambling is the best activity for the
US, it is not one of the behaviours that should impede on personal liberties and
be an illegal activity. |