... BUT, I don't see this as a matter of situational ethics at all:

If this kid turns out to have a gambling addiction, it won't be because her father let her drop some tokens in a slot machine at the age of 12. There is NO way for society to prevent gambling addiction, not even by making gambling illegal for EVERYONE. Seems to me it makes more sense for a parent to teach a child how to gamble responsibly.

Your "extrapolation" is a false argument. Just because I think it's okay for a father to allow a child to drop tokens in a slot machine DOESN'T mean I think it's okay for a father to allow a 12 year old to get drunk or stoned on drugs. I don't (though not because of any potential harm to society). I personally don't think it's okay for ANYONE to get drunk or stoned on drugs, not the father or the child, because of the physical damage it does to that person. So, I would see "harm" (to the child) if a father allows her to get drunk or stoned on drugs. COMPLETELY DIFFERENT situation than the slot machine thing.

In fact, I don't drink at all. Does that mean it's okay for me to impose my standard of abstinence of you (and everyone else)? I don't think so.

On the other hand, I don't disagree with your feeling that you'd rather see the father teaching the child how to fill out a bank deposit. But, I also don't think it's my position (or yours) to impose that standard on someone else.

Ditto the church collection plate. Which is all I care to say on the subject of religion.

----- jim o\-S