The battle over Gettysburg has become quite fierce. Of course we are long past the bloody battle that claimed more American lives than any other battle fought on United States soil, thank goodness. The battle is over a proposed casino hotel near the historic battlefield and national park. David LeVan believes that a casino hotel on the site of an old convention center is exactly what the community needs to get its economic wheels turning again. He sees it as a saving grace for jobs in the town. Of course, others see it as an encroachment to the point of blasphemy on one of America’s most revered and sacred sights. The fight has become intense with ecstatic leaders and excitable followers.
Mr. Levan insists that the casino is far enough away from the national park that it would not be a threat to its reverence. Mr. Levan is a Gettysburg native who feels the new casino license would suit his area better than other Pennsylvania communities that are already saturated with gambling halls. He also feels that the sites proximity to Washington DC and Baltimore are great assets.
The battle over the casino has brought charges of theft, harassments and apologies from some major players. Both sides have lawn signs that express views over the casino. Both sides have had lawn signs mysteriously disappear. Hollywood director, Ronald Maxwell, who directed the film Gettysburg. He spoke harsh words in revival style against the building of a casino. “There are hundreds of casinos; there is only one Gettysburg.” He claimed that the group proposing the casino were trying to,”…rape and exploit the battlefield!” The meeting included a “No Casino!” chant. Mr. Maxwell later apologized for his “rape” comment by writing a letter to the Gettysburg Times.
Even though preservationist feel that a casino will forever change the landscape of the area, supporters of the casino are just as passionate about their history. However, most feel that the land will not be spoiled. Most agree that economically something has to be done, and that building a casino would be that, ‘shot in the arm.’
Both sides make strong arguments. Both sides make strong arguments, strongly. The fight over a proposed casino near such a historic landmark should not be taken lightly. As one can tell by the two different points being expressed, taking the issue lightly isn’t an option.
