Poker

What’s wrong with playing a game of poker, with a buy-in?

My friend pointed this out: we have no problem paying $10 for a movie ticket, where all we do with each other is sit adjacent and stare at a screen. Isn’t the benefit of an interactive, round-table game better? We get to read our friends, banter with them, laugh at and with them. There’s the rush of competition and the complexity of subtle glances and body language that teach us how to communicate in a group with finer nuance. It’s a better passtime at the same price.

Chance shouldn’t be taboo. Games are microcosms of the real world, and a game that integrates chance is simply reflective of the uncertainty and risk associated with our lives. There’s a reason why we say “He was dealt a pretty bad hand” when our friend is unfortunate.

Now, granted, there are those who become addicted to gambling, who develop dependence on the rush of taking the risk. I maintain that this is sin. However, as in many (all?) things, it is the improper elevation of something that is to be eschewed, not the thing itself. Avoiding the extreme, for many people, does not mean avoiding the action altogether.