Kimmel Center worthy of community support | Readers Respond

As proud Philadelphia natives, we have enjoyed the art presented by the Kimmel Center for more than a decade. We've experienced Broadway in our backyard, relished each season of the Philadelphia Youth Orchestra, and appreciated events in the beautiful roof garden. We want to ensure that the Kimmel Center will continue to educate, inspire, and delight audiences for generations to come.

For this purpose, we are pleased to announce the Kimmel Center's Honickman Family Society, a group of planned giving donors. We are proud of Philadelphia's museums, Jewish programs, medical centers, and educational facilities. We have advocated for important issues such as gun reform, breaking the cycle of poverty, and fighting hunger. We view the Kimmel Center as another important Philadelphia structure worthy of preservation. The Honickman Family Society will work to preserve the Kimmel Center's iconic buildings and maintain facilities for performing-art organizations. It will expand audience reach and diversity, enrich arts education, and focus the world's attention on the Philadelphia International Festival of the Arts (PIFA).

As we prepare this everlasting gift, we invite others to join us in this effort. This is intended to be a community effort, bringing in diverse members to protect all forms of art. As art defines a community or era, the community must work to protect and preserve art. For more information on the Kimmel Center's Honickman Family Society for planned giving email: president@kimmelcenter.org

Lynne & Harold Honickman, Philadelphia

I found "Our love-hate relationship with guns" by Nathan Gorenstein (Currents, July 2) disturbing for several reasons — mainly associated with the headline. Obviously, Gorenstein is having a wonderful time with his semiautomatic pistol — firing it, modifying it, competing with other firearms enthusiasts, and so forth.

So much for the "love" part. But where was the "hate"? Was it his warning that "Guns can be scary. And they are dangerous" — two short sentences telling readers something they already know, many through personal tragedy?

His allusion that "shooting a gun is a lot like playing golf or basketball — just more dangerous" is simply inane and insulting to the many thousands whose lives were permanently shattered by guns. I would hope you follow up this article with one that takes the "hate" part of the headline more seriously.

Randy Lyons, West Chester

As a resident close by McMichael Park in East Falls, I also am strongly against having this wonderful green space altered to serve the aspirations of a minority of villagers intent on subverting this oasis for their own purposes ("East Falls has enough playgrounds," letter, July 3).

From a city planning perspective, the park represents one of the last true original public green areas created in the 19th century by Philadelphians who cherished leafy open spaces.

East Falls has several other perfectly purposeful play areas; they only have to be readjusted to serve the needs of a younger family dynamic. Let's start by redeveloping these spaces, and leave our oasis alone.

Scott Cameron, Philadelphia, scottcameronart@comcast.net

I take exception to the July 2 letter "Williams a plague on all blacks." I can remember when a crime was committed and Jewish people would quietly pray, "I hope he isn't Jewish."

I suspect that same feeling existed in many religious and ethnic groups. It is another form of prejudice and should not exist. Each person is an individual, whether white, black, Christian, Jew, Muslim, etc., and is responsible for his or her own actions, which do not reflect on anyone else.

Former District Attorney Seth Williams is not a poster boy for all blacks; just as the Oklahoma City bomber, Timothy McVeigh, did not represent all whites.

If we are to eliminate prejudice, we must stop blaming any group for the actions of one person. We should be better than that.

Ralph D. Bloch, Rydal, ralphdbloch@yahoo.com

In reference to the commentary by Michael Sargent calling for dismantlement of the Federal Aviation Administration ("Modernization long overdue," July 5), I immediately become suspicious when an author invokes the greater efficiency of the private sector.

I think this is more mantra than a demonstrable fact. I know of no substantial evidence to support the claim. Can Sargent come up with evidence? I would like to see it.

Louis C. Harris Jr., Cherry Hill