If you've seen any of my previous comments about
Martin Luther King, Jr.
street signs, you'll know that I have mixed feelings about it. This Lousiana columnist makes the case that memorializing Martin Luther King Jr. on street signs may have little effect on people and is probably not what the man himself would have wanted.
Interestingly, I just found another
MLK controversy brewing in Ithaca, NY. My main observation has been that it is absolutely amazing how much controversy this man still creates. There are always strong opponents to a street being renamed for MLK Jr. I certainly won't say race is always the motivation behind the objections, but it seems likely to be the case some of the time. I never read about the arguments made above, but it is possible that some are motivated by a desire to save the money and spend it on better pursuits. After all, aren't signs meant as landmarks to help us find our way around? Does it make sense to replace a street full of signs to honor someone? Are there better ways to spend this money?