This is a simple question.  At what point do we take corporate responsibility for protecting another’s ignorance?  What is the threshold?

I was thinking of the proverb “A fool and his money are soon parted” and the above question popped into my head.  Because why should we be so unsympathetic to the plight of the fool and so callously indifferent to those willing to take advantage of him?  Then I was reminded of the Sermon on the Mount, which I am using for a sermon topic soon, which seems to encourage us to not only be so sensitive to the fool, but protect them from the greedy.

So here’s the hypothetical situation.

The Casino

At the MoneyBanks Casino, it is expected that House usually wins.  The House has a rule making it “illegal” to count cards.  This rule, forbidding the counting, takes away the singular advantage any one participant in the game has against the House.  So in the current arrangement, the odds are all rigged in the House’s favor and the one instrument that alters that arrangement is eliminated.

Now imagine that counting cards is legal only to a few people.  There is a blanket ban on card-counting, but a few high-rollers are allowed to do it.  The House gleefully takes the money of a large portion of its clientele, knowing that a few patrons will be given the opportunity to win money.  The rest are SOL.

Imagine this same casino, which gives special advantages to a small fraction of patrons is legally protected to tell the vast majority of people that they have a 75% chance of winning games that have a .075% success rate.

At what point is the line between fair commerce and stealing crossed?  For many of us, it happens in the very first paragraph, since the casino, in its very structure, is a parasite.  For others, it is in the inconsistency of approach, allowing a few to benefit while allowing the rest to suffer.  For some, it is in the third paragraph, in which the casino is given the legal standing to directly lie to patrons.  And for a few, none of these crosses the line since fools are supposed to be taken advantage of and the right to trick them out of their money must be maintained on free speech grounds.

Conclusion

We seem all too eager to allow personal freedom to impinge on another’s liberty.  Or my “right” to make money off of your gullibility.  For Christians, this seems completely antithetical to the gospel, not to mention Torah.  If we are not to charge interest, how can we weasel anything from anyone?  

I am no absolutist.  And I’m not entirely anti-casino.  But, one has to wonder why our culture allows for such clear manipulation and outright lying to each other.  At what point do we say ‘every person for him/herself’ is actually not a sensible rule, let alone a moral and ethical one?  At what point do we take responsibility for a culture far too tilted toward individual responsibility?  What is the threshold of responsibility?