+ + + 3 BRANDNEW NewsTickers for your Website! + + + easy configurable in less than 1 Minute + + + GET'EM NOW! + + +

   Home | Join | Submit News | MyShortNews | HighScores | FAQ'S | Forums 0 Users Online   
                 01/23/2018 04:38 PM  
  ShortNews Search
search all Channels
RSS feeds
  ShortNews User Poll
Are you excited about the holiday season?
  Latest Events
  1.845 Visits   1 Assessments  Show users who Rated this:
Quality:Very Good
Back to Overview  
11/01/2007 07:52 PM ID: 66109 Permalink   

What Would You Like on Your Memorial? Sorry That's Not Allowed


The public school system in Missoula County Montana has made a decision that they believe will help students going through emotional stress after the loss of someone they know.

The tradition has been that if someone say at a school or on the highway die a memorial is put there in honor of their life. However the school director believes the memorials can cause negative emotional effects on the students and communities.

The MCPS Superintendent Jim Clark stated, "It's the message that goes with the name that's of concern. It's a difficult distinction to make. A name is OK. The name could be put on a bench without the 'In memory of.'"

    WebReporter: Jon_Hall Show Calling Card      
ASSESS this news: BLOCK this news. Reason:
so the local park bench one day is gonna be named "bob sagget"
that makes sense /sarcasm
  by: thunderb3   11/01/2007 08:30 PM     
  Excuse me if I'm wrong...  
...but I thought the point of memorials was to remember those who died of whose names are on the memorial. Honestly, I never did understand the point of putting "In memory of" on a memorial because that's the function of a memorial. I think all that is necessary is the person or people's names, their date of birth to the date they died, and perhaps a message to remember them by like "Our loved one" or "To our loving Father/Mother/Brother/Sister/Whomever" But including "In memory of" is redundant because that's the whole point of the memorial anyway.
  by: Jon_Hall     11/01/2007 08:31 PM     
  Not to offend anyone  
but personally I see it as a pointless practice to put a memorial at the exact spot where someone died. If anything, I see too many of them these days, as they are becoming eye sores. If anything, people should be errecting them in their own houses, backyards or at the actual grave site.

My 2 cents.
  by: Jediman3     11/01/2007 08:41 PM     
Comment well taken. I thought there was a reason we had cemetaries...also not trying to be cruel. However, what good does it do to put a memorial at the exact spot of the death? I mean, do you really want to go back to the spot where your loved one died?
  by: Jon_Hall     11/01/2007 08:54 PM     
  Im from a small country town  
and the place is littered with memorials for kids that died during highschool or so doing the stupid teenager antics.

I agree they shouldnt be really putting them out at all. It encourages the depressed kids that think no one notices them into offing themselves so at least someone remembers them, less the whole town.

  by: Pyronius     11/01/2007 11:18 PM     
Is this all he has to concern himself with? The public pays for it? We already have too many on the payroll with not enough to do.
  by: LeePIII   11/01/2007 11:31 PM     
  @ Jedi  
Count me in with you. I personally find the crosses on corners, ditches, on signs etc to be more of a distraction. Most of these are high accident areas as it is so this does no help to those driving. It would be the same to put a cross in the ER and write the name of everyone that passes on it...the family won't be able to come in the room whenever they wish to mourn.

I feel for the bereaved truly, but the crosses and flowers and teddy bears must go after a period of time.
  by: TaraB     11/02/2007 01:43 AM     
I agree. I mean even the Twin Towers will be replaced after a while. And I had an uncle that worked in the police department that helped with the rescue. He got caught when the 2nd tower collapsed. I will always remember what happened to him, but I have no desire to return to "the exact spot" where he died. My uncle would have rather us mourn him at the cemetary like we did for his funeral. Then rebuild what was knocked down and use it for further generations. A person can only mourn so long before they must move on. Same for the twin towers. Same for these memorials. I could understand have a memorial for a military squadron that died in an attack or something, however I would rather the memorial be on some sort of military grounds or on a military cemetary. Not right outside a school or courthouse or something. It's too depressing for the people that walk by it.
  by: Jon_Hall     11/02/2007 02:49 PM     
Copyright ©2018 ShortNews GmbH & Co. KG, Contact: