Terminalcoffee discussion
Rants / Debates (Serious)
>
Should A Casino Get Built By Gettysburg? and the general question of proximity to sacred/historical spaces...
date
newest »

I think that this should be a local decision, or a decision by the Federal Government. I do not feel that I should have any say in this matter.
In the case of the Federal Government I think that it would need a law about casinos, and all historic sites, I don't think that you can have a law broad enough to cover them all.
So in essence I believe that it should be a local decision.
In the case of the Federal Government I think that it would need a law about casinos, and all historic sites, I don't think that you can have a law broad enough to cover them all.
So in essence I believe that it should be a local decision.


When do others get a say? That's trickier. An Oklahoma fireman called in to Talk of the Nation when this was the topic the other day, and tried to weigh in on the "Ground Zero Mosque." The host pointed out that it wasn't at ground zero, nor was it a mosque, but I think two blocks means something different to an Oklahoman than to someone who lives in Manhattan. In two blocks you can go from the heart of Chinatown to the heart of Little Italy. I think New Yorkers would have handled this whole issue in a different way if the rest of the country hadn't gotten involved.

I agree with you about Auschwitz definitely. Pearl Harbor maybe. Gettysburg probably. But Ground Zero was a commercial entity before it was destroyed, and the plans are for it to become one again, along with a memorial and a public transportation hub. The mosque/cultural center, if it ever gets developed, will not be on Ground Zero proper. (And it used to be a Burlington Coat Factory.) One World Trade Center will be 1776 feet tall (including antenna) so there will be lots of floors of commercial things going on there. It's simply not feasible for the land to be developed without commercial profits being the goal.
I think casinos and slot machines are gross and sad and they harm more than they help and I generally don't think they should be built anywhere. But I don't have a huge visceral opposition to this being built in the vicinity of Gettysburg. As long as it's not butting up against it.

There's a handsome artist's rendering of it here. It looks very nice. The actual bases of the twin towers will become reflecting pools, surrounded by trees.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Tr...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Tr...
"Cost — Preliminary estimates place the cost of the memorial alone to be US$500 million, which was the exact same cost to build the original Twin Towers. According to The Wall Street Journal, it would also place it among the most expensive memorials in history." - Wiki.
Wow, that's a lot of money! It doesn't look like it should be that expensive...
Wow, that's a lot of money! It doesn't look like it should be that expensive...

The town does abutt the battleground, by the way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Tr..."
thanks LG.

I reject the whole idea of hallowed ground. Life is for the living. Roping off an area and making it sacred doesn't not make the dead any less dead.
I expect this is coming off as cold and insensitive, but I consider holding on to past wrongs to be very destructive.
Pat, I agree with you on this: "I reject the whole idea of hallowed ground." I don't think we should forget past wrongs; I think we should reserve these spaces where truly horrific things happened, and memorialize those things. However, I don't believe in the concept that ground is hallowed. The ground does not become holy or sacred as a result of some tragedy.
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/front_...
Now, I know "casino" and "mosque" are not synonymous, first of all. Some interesting issues emerge here.
1) Should faraway people of the same country have a same on this, or is the decision exclusively local? I can say, for example, "No casino near that important historical site!" but then I don't live with the economic issues apparent near Gettysburg.
2) Is this a slippery slope in either direction? If the decision "no casino near Gettysburg" is made, does that mean casinos shouldn't up near other historical sites? What about the other direction? If I say "Yes" does that I mean I support casinos everywhere?
3) Anything else? What do you think?