Okay, fair. Thanks for playing.

The central argument you're making is for the aesthetic benefits of statuary, which is not the argument at hand - clearly, the subject is the reconciliation of past deeds with current mores.

Here's my argument: Thomas Jefferson's legacy has withstood challenge for a couple hundred years now. There's no new information come to light that might challenge it. What we're experiencing is a new openness about the uneven impact our accepted cultural heroes have on our culture.

It's not like the statue hasn't moved before:

A final spot for the statue is yet to be determined. It was first placed in City Hall around 1834 and was displayed in several locations there before moving to the main chamber in 1915.

And it's not like the statue is going to be destroyed. And granted - everyone in discussion would happily trade the end of this thing for moving Jefferson into the foyer if they were given the choice. But they haven't been.

Art is worth reconsidering. I feel - and feel strongly - that our culture is made up of what we revere, and if we are unwilling to rethink what we revere our culture can never advance.