I want to know what everyone thinks of this.....

http://www.clal.org/csa48.html

By Sunny on Friday, May 31, 2002 - 10:33 am:

My gut reaction to the idea is no, a building or symbol involving religion doesn't belong. I'll try and put it into words why I don't agree and post later.

By Claire on Friday, May 31, 2002 - 02:59 pm:

this article sums up my feelings on the matter
http://www.msnbc.com/news/757298.asp?0dm=N19RO

By Kim on Friday, May 31, 2002 - 06:18 pm:

Claire, I wanted to say I totally disagree with the article I linked....yours was very touching and hits it on the head very well.

By Ginnyk on Friday, May 31, 2002 - 07:29 pm:

I think it is too soon to think of anything. I hope - I even pray - that the people who want to build a memorial will be held off until there has been time - time for us to all think, time for it to sink in, and time to get past the quick, easy, and cliche-ridden types of memorials that have been proposed so far.

The article Claire posted talks about the power of the Vietnam Memorial, a power I have experienced. It is so simple and so incredibly involving in its simplicity. Every time I go there I feel as if I am walking into a black sea of names. The other memorials to our war dead also touch me in many ways, and I am impressed by the Korean War memorial, but nothing, no memorial I have ever seen reaches into the depths of my heart like the simplicity of the Vietnam Memorial.

I think there is no way that piece of ground is going to be left vacant. The square foot value/price of real estate in downtown Manhattan simply won't permit it. I only hope that whatever memorial is built (1) is very simple and without cliches, (2) incorporates some portion of what is left of the towers, and (3) provides a view and place of quiet so that those who come there can meditate, pray, think, remember, or whatever they choose without being mentally herded into a particular frame of mind because of a memorial so explicit that it does not let the viewers draw on what is in their hearts and souls while they are there. I really want a memorial that does not demand that I admire the artistry of the person(s) creating it, but rather helps me feel the sense of power and grief I feel at the Vietnam Memorial.

BTW, the headline Kim quoted (quoted, not wrote), which is the headline on the article she links to, is, I think, unnecessarily provocative and was probably chosen by whoever wrote the headline specifically to be provocative. I think it is going to produce a lot of angry and hateful responses, which is clearly not the intent of the author of the article.

By Claire on Friday, May 31, 2002 - 10:02 pm:

I realize Kim quoted the headline Ginny and I was not upset with her in the least. I am in a foul mood at the moment and have a rotten worrisome day so I won't post further on this topic

By Ginnyk on Saturday, June 1, 2002 - 05:39 am:

Oh, Claire, my BTW was not meant for you or anyone who had already posted - I was concerned that someone - I don't know who, but someone - might think it was Kim's words. I didn't for a minute think you did. It was just my usual paranoia.

Nor did I think anything about your post except that you succinctly provided a link to another point of view. It never occured to me that you were upset with anyone, let alone Kim. I have to say, I tend to ignore the faces people post so I not only didn't read any significance into the blue face you posted - I simply glided over it and didn't even take it in.

I'm sorry you had a worrisome day, and I hope today is better.

By Kim on Saturday, June 1, 2002 - 11:33 am:

I have great respect and love for you guys, I really do. Claire I hope you are feeling better too, and Ginny, I hope you have been well!

By Claire on Saturday, June 1, 2002 - 11:56 am:

Oh Ginny.....my face is red this morning. I should have re read and cooled down.

I was really upset about my baby - she was having a reaction to her set of shots and I was worried sick - throw in two older kids in puberty and you have my day - forgive me?

By Claire on Saturday, June 1, 2002 - 11:57 am:

sorry kimmy for messing up your debate

By Ginnyk on Saturday, June 1, 2002 - 01:30 pm:

Claire, I could manage a baby reacting to shots, but puberty - and two of them!! BTDT in spades, and have great sympathy for you. Puberty was a time when I longed for the Mark Twain theory of childraising ... You put the child in a barrel and feed it through the bunghole, and at age 21 (though I think 12 or 13 is more appropriate) put a cork in the bung. Boy was that a tempting thought some times.

By Ginnyk on Saturday, June 1, 2002 - 01:33 pm:

Oh - and, Claire, I can't forgive you because there is nothing to forgive. One of the things this place is for, imo, is to allow people to have a bad day. Gone and forgotten, my dear.

By Kim on Saturday, June 1, 2002 - 05:50 pm:

Claire, you didn't mess up my debate at all! I don't think anyone was interested anyway! So quit feeling bad and feel better. i just nopw read about the situation and I hope she is much better! thinking of you!