While we're at it, ban it for prescription medications, too.

It's tough, though. Right now we see lots of alcohol advertising in the form of "Buy Heineken...0% ;) ;)" and in the case of tobacco we see shell companies like Mission Winnow set up to covertly advertise Marlboro during sporting events. There's also an increasing trend of guerrilla marketing for these brands, like popular posts on social media taking the form "Formula 1 cars never looked so good as they did in the old Marlboro liveries" which attract tonnes of comments like "this post makes me want to smoke."

Dry January seems to be doing some good too. That is a charity independent from any religion afaict. I know multiple people who didn't start drinking again when February arrived. They weren't alcoholics, at least not in the classical sense, or that wouldn't have worked. But it almost certainly benefitted their health.

There are (rare) situations where gambling is logical. It hinges around the obvservation that not all dollars are equal.

It's basically the opposite of insurance, and most people consider insurance to be rational despite the fact that the "house always wins". A small regular payment that you can afford is preferable to an irregular large one that you can't, even if the small regular payments add up to more than the irregular large ones.

The opposite effect can occur. Imagine if you owe the mafia $X but you only have $X/2. They'll break your legs if you don't give them $X. If you gamble and win you can pay off the mafia. If you don't gamble you'll be in basically the same situation as if you gamble and lose. So it's rational to gamble.

The existence of rational reasons to gamble is problematic. It's very easy to convince yourself that you are in one of those situations even if you aren't.

I didn't interpret the parent comment as saying that religion can be used to/is effective at combating excess, but that the only existing efforts to combat this kind of excess come from religious groups (i.e. there aren't any secular groups lobbying against gambling). I don't know if that is true and I don't necessarily agree with the comment btw.

Sorry, I should've been more clear. That was not my meaning.

I meant that every organization I've seen in that space has a religious aspect to it that has always rubbed me the wrong way. There should be non-affiliated options.