[muleskinner]

I have to agree with Virg. Ridgerunner and Strategerist. The sense of reverance, honor and wonder at the deeds of those who fought there can be better understood if the park is returned to it's battle-day state.
Antietam is better is some sense, as it remains very close to the way it was in 1862. The Miller's still own "The Cornfield". Imagine that.

Cut'em down, let God sort'em out.

[FreedomCalls]

Antietam is better is some sense, as it remains very close to the way it was in 1862. The Miller's still own "The Cornfield". Imagine that.

I too, have been to Antietam and really enjoyed the experience. I was stunned to see "The Cornfield" was still there and still planted in summer corn! It was a tremendous experience all around because of the preservation there.

[Gator101]

I agree too.

I visited Fredricksburg about 10 years ago and was dishearteningly to see houses built over the fields in front of Marye's Heights and the Sunken Road. I am a realist though and I realize a town has to expand in 130-some years, but still, it was sad to think how many Union boys lost their lives on that field and now it's covered with houses.

Gettysburg is one of the few places where we have the room and the will to keep a battlefield looking closely like it did on the day of the battle that made it famous. I would just as soon we did.

It was a boyhood visit to Gettysburg that sparked my interest in history which, in turn, probably set me on the road to being a conservative.