EditorialJoe Towalski

While the State Legislature and local governments continue to debate possible funding options for a new Minnesota Vikings stadium, one source of revenue should be off the table: gambling.

Some legislators in St. Paul, however, continue to place their bets on an expansion of gambling to help cover the costs of a new stadium, which carries a price tag around $1 billion. One of the latest proposals, introduced last Monday, is to use funds from a “racino” — a horse track that includes slot machines — to help pay for a stadium. Other ideas put forward include using revenue generated from electronic bingo and pull-tabs, and even a new Twin Cities casino run in partnership with the White Earth tribe.

At first glance, gambling revenue may seem like a good option to help pay for a stadium, which the Vikings say they absolutely must have to stay competitive and remain playing in Minnesota. It reduces the need to raise taxes and relies on the ostensibly voluntary participation of those choosing to play. And, not surprisingly, a large-scale operation stands to generate a lot of money.

Gambling, however, is a poor example of public stewardship. State, county and municipal budgets are ultimately moral documents that reflect the values and priorities of the people for whom they are created. If the thinking is that all Minnesota benefits from building a stadium and keeping the Vikings, then all Minnesotans should shoulder the costs — not just those hoping, despite long odds, to hit a big jackpot.

Cost to society

Large-scale gambling also doesn’t come without costs to local communities and the state, which must deal with the social consequences of gambling addictions and the harm gambling can do to low-income households.

While the vast majority of people who gamble don’t fall into the category of “problem” or “pathological” gamblers, the small number who do have an impact on the rest of us.

A recent blog post by Minnesota’s Joint Religious Legislative Coalition, of which the Minnesota Catholic Conference is a sponsoring body, cited a study that found the social costs of gambling outweigh its social benefits by about three-to-one. Problem gambling, the JRLC noted in a 2005 paper, is associated with criminal behavior, large debts and domestic violence. It cited a study estimating the cost to society for a pathological gambler is $11,304 per year and $3,222 for a problem gambler.

When problem or pathological gambling — or even one night of excessive gambling — involves low-income individuals, the impact on them and the rest of their household, including spouses and children, can be devastating.

Other approaches

This doesn’t mean we need to outlaw gambling. But it also doesn’t mean the government should be giving approval to practices that undermine the welfare of some of its citizens, including those who pay for the consequences of problem gambling, as it seeks to fund projects and initiatives. It must consider other options.

The new Vikings stadium faces an uphill battle. Politicians and voters must decide how, and even whether, to fund it in a difficult economy when the financial benefits to the general public aren’t clear and when other priorities also demand funding. But for the gambling option as a source of revenue, it’s time for all the players to fold.

EditorialJoe Towalski

The Obama administration’s recent amendments to a federal mandate that health insurance plans include contraception and sterilization free of charge have elicited a wide array of reactions from elected officials and concerned citizens, including the U.S. bishops, who feel the changes don’t go far enough to protect the conscience rights of employers and individuals.

The situation highlights the need once again for better education on the importance of conscience clauses and the need for laws that protect citizens from being forced or coerced into providing services they find morally objectionable.

Broad concerns

While the Department of Health and Human Services’ mandate is the subject currently at issue, the subject of conscience clauses also surfaces in other areas: Should pharmacists who object to abortion be forced to dispense contraception that may act as an abortifacient? Should doctors and nurses be obligated to participate in procedures that violate their deeply held religious beliefs about human life?

When health care providers or others take a stand on such issues, it isn’t done on a whim or with spur-of-the-moment thinking; rather, it comes after careful thought and counsel with others. It can be a difficult decision to make because of the risk that it will open them to criticism and hostility from others who don’t share their views.

Such clashes of views are inevitable in a secular society that purports to value religious freedom as well as the separation of church and state. In a secular society, many actions such as abortion, physician-assisted suicide and sterilization may be legal, but that doesn’t make them moral — a view shared not by people of only one faith, but of many. It may be possible for citizens to access these procedures, but those with serious moral or religious objections shouldn’t be forced to facilitate them. Conscience protections offer a reasonable compromise in such situations.

One such compromise is contained in a bill currently in Congress — the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act (H.R.1179, S.1467) — which would ensure that the new health care reform law will allow the “issuers, sponsors and beneficiaries of private health plans to negotiate health coverage that is consistent with their moral and religious convictions.” The proposal so far has 164 co-sponsors in the House and 31 in the Senate as well as the support of the U.S. bishops.

Beyond church doors

A growing tendency in the United States is to equate “freedom of religion” with “freedom of worship.” The latter allows people to express their faith within places of worship, but discourages them — sometimes blatantly, sometimes more subtly — to live as their faith dictates beyond church doors and particularly in the public policy arena.True religious freedom allows people to act in light of their well-grounded moral beliefs without the threat of government coercion or intrusion. Conscience protections help strike a balance between preserving that freedom and allowing others to act in ways that society — although not our faith — deems legally permissible.

EditorialJoe Towalski

Silence as an essential part of communication seems at first to be a contradiction. Silence may be golden, some would say, but it won’t help you get your point across to others in a world dominated by a steady stream of voices and information flowing nonstop from televisions, radios, computer monitors and smartphones.

But Pope Benedict XVI, in his latest message for World Communications Day, reminds us that silence plays a vital role in our communication with others: It forces us to listen more closely, evaluate ideas more thoroughly, and temper our responses.

Who wouldn’t like to see more of that kind of communication taking place during presidential debates or television talk shows? Or during discussions on important social policy issues facing our state and nation? Or, even in our workplaces and around our family dinner tables, where all of us have trouble at times not interrupting or raising our voices?

If we are going to cultivate the value of silence in our lives, however, it will take more than just silencing our voices. We also have to silence our minds from time to time by unplugging from the 24-hour cycles of news, entertainment and social media so we have the “mental space” to rejuvenate ourselves and reflect more deeply on our lives, our relationships and the world around us.

Many of us try to do something extra for our spiritual lives during the season of Lent — which begins this year on Feb. 22, Ash Wednesday. If you haven’t already committed to a Lenten program — and even if you have — book some additional time right now during those 40 days for silence, prayerful meditation and reflection.

n Check your parish bulletin or The Visitor calendar section for upcoming opportunities for silent retreats around the area. Or make a point to visit one of the many eucharistic adoration chapels around the diocese for an hour or even a few minutes once per week.

n If you enjoy the outdoors, take advantage of area nature trails and state parks for some quiet time alone to pray and contemplate the beauty of God’s creation.

n Spend some time at home as a family with televisions, radios, phones and computers turned off. These media — as valuable as they are — can sometimes interfere with family communication. Shut them down, share a prayer and a meal together, and then play a board game or enjoy another family activity. Silence here is not the focus, but it’s an opportunity worth seizing to nurture better communication in other ways among husbands and wives, parents and children.

Pope Benedict wrote that “if God speaks to us in silence, we, in turn, discover in silence the possibility of speaking with God and about God.”

Silencing our voices and our minds can help us deepen our relationship with God and broaden our awareness of his presence in our life. Silence coupled with attentive listening can also help us deepen our relationships with others we encounter every day of our lives in our families, workplaces and communities.

EditorialJoe Towalski

A lot of ink is being spilled on Denver Broncos quarterback Tim Tebow. Sports pundits are incredulous that this less-than-stellar passer has helped to turn his team into a contender for the NFL playoffs. Unlike most other football players, however, Tebow has also come under scrutiny for the way he publicly witnesses to his Christian faith — something he references in nearly every interview and public appearance.

This open embrace of faith, by all accounts, has been ingrained in Tebow for a long time, although it received a great deal of national attention for the first time when the former star quarterback for the University of Florida and Heisman Trophy winner appeared in TV ads with a pro-life message during the 2010 Super Bowl.

As a member of the Denver Broncos, he occasionally takes a knee in prayer — a phenomenon now known, and sometimes spoofed, as “Tebowing.” He started a recent postgame news conference by thanking “my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.” The son of former missionaries, he works with a foundation that bears his name to help sick and orphaned children around the world. That foundation is now teaming up with another organization to build a children’s hospital in the Philippines.

Being genuine

Like him or hate him, Tebow seems nothing but sincere about his beliefs — a fact his coach, John Fox, acknowledged in a recent online story about the quarterback. “He’s real,” Fox said. “He walks the walk. A guy like that in today’s society, in my mind, ought to be celebrated, not scrutinized to the level that he is.”

But Tebow is scrutinized because, to some, his public displays of faith are irksome, bothersome, too “in your face.” These critics often have no problem with his beliefs, they just wish he would keep them private and not wear them on his sleeve to the extent he does.

Those critics should be more concerned, however, about the antics of others that are as public but certainly not worthy of emulation: athletes guilty of unsportsmanlike conduct on and off the field, coaches and politicians caught in scandals, celebrities whose commitment to marriage lasts a whopping 72 days.

With Tebow you get something genuine — a role model. What you see on the outside is what’s on the inside, particularly when it comes to his spiritual life.

In the same story in which his coach was quoted, Tebow had this to say: “That’s the thing about my faith: It’s not just something that happens when you’re at church or happens when you’re praying or reading the Scripture. It’s a part of who you are, as a person, as a player, in your life and everything. And it should be who you are because you’re not just a Christian or a believer at church. That’s who you are everywhere, and it shouldn’t matter what situation or what setting you are in. Hopefully, you’re the same guy everywhere.”

And, therein, is a lesson for all of us this Advent season: to spend this season of waiting to welcome Christ once again by synching our everyday lives with our beliefs, to translate our words and prayers into action, to live out what we profess on Sunday during the other days of the week — at home, at work, at school and in our communities.

Sharing our faith

Advent isn’t about Black Friday or Cyber Monday or buying ever more stuff that other people don’t need or, frankly, often don’t want. It isn’t about office parties. It’s about making room for Jesus in our lives and bringing the hope and peace of Christ into the lives of others.

We celebrate Advent when we make a deeper commitment to prayer in our lives. To spending more time with loved ones who need our presence more than our presents. To bringing hope to the poor and lonely through service and financial contributions that will improve their lives by helping them meet basic needs.

Advent is about living out what we believe and not being afraid to share and show our faith to the rest of the world, even if someone gives us grief about it.

That’s an Advent lesson for us, courtesy of Tim Tebow.