||I read a few post that says something on the line as "It is a fact that Holy Cross and Carbrini can co-exist".
The question should not be if they can co-exist, but why would Holy Cross want to co-exist with Carbrini? The design is flawed. It is a "money pit due to the result of long-deferred maintenance and inadequate heating and air-conditioning systems and the leaky roof" (Clarion Herald, July 29, 2006, page 3). It will also be a danerous situation towards the Holy Cross family. Leaky roof means wet floor. Does anybody else think that the wet floor from the leaky roof (which was leaking from day one) will cause people to slip and get hurt? Also, why would Holy Cross want to pay for the long-deferred maintenance and inadequate heating and air-conditioning systems?
Someone else stated "You want our Church with no compromise." Well are the Carbrini supporters compromises? How about Holy Cross keeps the church, and they pay for the upkeep of the building? How about they find an architect that can find out how to fix a leaky roof. Of course I do not think you can fix the leaky roof since it leak since day one (how many decades has it leak?).
I also want to point out there are a few people on both sides (of this issue tear down Carbrini people and save Carbrini people) that are being disrespectful. One save Carbrini use the term "SFC hate-mongers". Yes that is respectful. And I know what people will say. One group will say "the save the SFC supporters started being disrespectful first. Than the SFC people will say, "destroy the SFC people were disrespectful first.".