[Mempho]

[ QUOTE ]
All gambling includes a financial risk, but all financial risks are not considered "gambling" (in the sense that we are talking about in this thread).

Poker is zero-sum gambling game. You only win at someone else's expense. That's why many Christian denominations consider it to be wrong. Investing in stocks, opening a business, etc, are all financial risks, but it's not zero-sum. Wealth is being created, not merely transferred.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can understand the basic gist of your post. However, many times "wealth creation" is really a transfer of wealth. In capitalism, people often do things at the expense of others. In fact, many businesses make most of their money at the expense of others. What if your job is to sell things to people that can't afford what you are selling? Is this bad? Does it have a moral cost? Poker provides nothing tangible, but neither does a concert. Entertainment is intangible and that is what poker is to most people. For some people, it's an addiction. I think you have to think about what is truly right when you get into the grey areas of life (i.e., selling someone something that will put them into financial slavery/ruin or playing poker with people who can't afford to lose the money and have no control). I believe poker is an "interesting" game that is not just comprised of the "gambling" component. In other words, I think it is interesting because it is a game of strategies, skill, and luck. Contrast this to lottery, slot machines, or craps. For most people, a poker game is an enjoyable experience apart from the money. I enjoyed the game when I originally played it for no money at all. Yes, it's a gambling game, but I think the entertainment factor provided by poker is high. I enjoy winning because I am competitive. The money is nice only because it allows me to play at a higher competitive level.