Comments on: Gambling Addiction Not a Disability

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 20 Feb 2011 20:26:40 +0000

If you only see the 7deadly sins of Lust, Gluttony, Greed, Sloth , Wrath, Envy and Pride as justified reasoning for the “sin exception,” perhaps you should consider just how gambling centers around greed and envy, not to mention gluttony in some form, as well as pride (too proud to accept a loss or to admit you have a problem)… Just a thought to ponder.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 17:08:25 +0000

From my understanding of the ADA, “sin exception” or not, the employer was within the law to take this action, because the employer has to know about the disability and any requested reasonable accomodations *before* any performance issues happen with the employee with the disability, otherwise any negative consequences to the employee as a result of that poor performance are allowed to stand. Reasonable accomodations can be made to improve performance in the future, but past poor performance can be kept on the record and any disciplinary action as a result of it is allowed to stand, so it is very important to request your accomodations *before* they affect your performance, so that particular man waited too long anyway. . I could be wrong, though.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 01 Feb 2011 14:01:30 +0000

7 sins are from church tradition, not the Bible. The Bible has different lists (And lots of them). ADA protects from the effects of the disability not the reason for the disability. Gambling wasn’t the cause for termination anyway. Gambling excessively is no reason not to pay debts or report debts.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 31 Jan 2011 16:01:48 +0000

“Sin Exception” seems a strange argument as according to biblical terms – gambling isn’t a sin. The seven deadly sins are Lust, Gluttony, Greed, Sloth (originally Acedia), Wrath, Envy and Pride.

There are several instances when these sins are committed on a daily basis.

Let’s just look at the recent ruling that labels obesity was a disability. Many obese people have been placed in their state due to gluttony (overindulging to a point of excess) or Sloth (laziness)/Acedia (the neglect to take care of something that one should do), couldn’t that fall into the “Sin Exception” as well. Please note I am not stating all people who are considered obese are gluttonous or sloths, I am just saying that they could be and therefore wouldn’t those obese people who do fall into the gluttony or sloth category run “afoul” of the Sin Exception.

I can’t find the justification in the court’s ruling especially if they won’t use the same premise in obesity disability claims.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 31 Jan 2011 15:00:48 +0000

How is gambling a sin exception, but overeating, or gluttony, is not?