Legalize 'tigbakay'?

There's a plan of the Association of Barangay Councils in Cebu City to legalize "tigbakay", that poor man's version of big-time cockfights. Their justification: To generate more income for barangays. Another: To stop corruption on the part of the authorities who serve as protectors of this kind of gambling. Still another: To go with the current because tigbakay is already "part of our culture".

How valid are these justifications? Tigbakay is gambling pure and simple. And gambling even if legalized remains immoral. These justifications are therefore open to question. In a civilized society like Cebu City, they are simply unacceptable.

I have written before that gambling, no matter in what form, is based on two defects of human nature: Indolence and greed. Indolence because the gambler dislikes working to get something. He is aware of what he wants but he refuses to soil his hands or rack his brain. He desires that his needs are gratified, but gratified through pure chance. Manna from heaven falling freely for the picking - this is how the gambler looks at the whole thing.

Indolence of course is anti-Christian. Let him not eat who does not work, goes an injunction from an early Christian elder. And Opus Dei's St. Josemaria says: "I don't understand how you can call yourself a Christian and lead such an idle, useless life. Have you forgotten Christ's life of toil?"

The gambler wants to eat, and eat much, by snatching his neighbor's bowl. Every peso won is peso lost by the other guy. One gets his fill, the other starves. This is the inherent evil in gambling. Self-gratification is the driving force. Never mind the other fellow.

Cebuanos know this. That's why jueteng gets no sanction here. Masiao exists but only on limited scale for lack of legislated support. Lotto is allowed, but over and above the objections of many, including the clergy. STL? It's a no no to local governments so far. There are casinos but only the elites go there, people whose problem is how to decongest their pockets. There are cockpits too, but those who go there have money to spare, and what they lose, if they lose, are not their pants.

In tigbakay people bet their pants. They have no jobs, those who gather there. It's a survival game. Losing could mean losing one's meal - and possibly of the family's. Like masiao and jueteng, it's a poor man's game, and this makes it doubly immoral.

Tigbakay advocates talk of augmenting barangay income. They may be right but are there no better ways of doing this? Cocks slaughter each other. Money changes hands. But nothing is produced. What happens to the barangay economy? True, the barangay gets revenues. But money from something evil can generate nothing but evil - like petty thief, mass idleness, interpersonal conflicts, bureaucratic corruption, and other social problems.

Some people talk of curbing corruption because once legalized, what bribe is there to give? But this is like legalizing prostitution or drug pushing. Because authorities are corrupt and therefore the activity cannot be controlled shall we give up and let go? If you can't beat them, join them?

Tigbakay as part of our culture? Perhaps, but this is no reason to give it legal imprimatur. There are admittedly negative behaviors that are culturally identified with the Filipino - like "ningas cogon", "talangka" mentality, parochial complex, "hiya" and others. But exhibiting these is not unlawful like tigbakay. These are not vices unlike cockfighting or number games. Nevertheless, efforts are undertaken through education to minimize their adverse effects upon the youth.

Such efforts also zero in on social vices such as tigbakay. Without the assistance of the community, however, these would produce little effects. For in any educative endeavor exemplars are important, people whose way of life reflects the values being taught. Could the tigbakay patrons serve as exemplars?

The problem here is that our attempts to solve social ills are seldom influenced by our spiritual persuasion. Our Christian faith condemns gambling and other non-ethical practices, but we refuse to factor this in our decisions, personal or official. We consider ourselves proponents of the Christ-centered way of life, but when it comes to counting noses, where are we?