comment: >
  
  Waste of money
context: Damn it’s been 4 years already? >
  
  It has. Crazy. But I’m glad to hear it’ll reopen in the near future. I visited Notre Dame about ten years ago. I’m in no way religious but it was stunning for so many good reasons. Westminster Abbey in London is also very awe-inspiring. >
  
  I'm not super religious either, besides old Pagan beliefs. But some of the most impressive buildings on Earth are old Churches, Mosques, and other huge Temples.
  Hagia Sophia, The Rome Pantheon, The Athens Acropolis, Borobudur Temple, Masjid al-Haram Mosque, Notre Dame Cathedral, Seville Cathedral, Saint Peters Basilica and the whole of Vatican City.
  Notable mention are the dozens of really awesome looking medieval Gothic architecture Cathedrals, Churches, Ministers in Germany and France built during the Holy Roman Empire. >
  
  Genuinely curious about which old pagan beliefs you hold. >
  
  A little bit mixed between mostly Norse, Greek, Roman, and Egyptian mythology. My fascination on the stories behind the myths grew to where I started to observe Pagan holidays and other traditions. 
  Its not like how people currently worship in the Christian/Muslim religions. It's more so just observing the holidays and traditions, keeping the myths alive. Like the next big holiday is Lupercalia. Basically a more 'crazy' Valentines day. Then Dísablót at the end of the month into March to get ready for farming season >
  
  Thanks for sharing. >
  
  Will it remain historically accurate or are they incorporating new design elements? >
  
  I’ve heard that it will be reconstructed to match the as built design before the fire. Original timber framed components that burned will be rebuilt using that construction technique. Other parts of the cathedral had been renovated before the fire that utilized modern construction techniques, and those will be rebuilt in a like manner. >
  
  Well that was a full on roller coaster. I wonder how his wife is doing now. >
  
  This is great to hear! Did any of those billionaires that pledged to help fund reconstruction during the initial outpouring of shock and grief ever end up doing so? >
  
  wow, that's great! I was honestly hoping that would be the case but I suppose I let a touch too much cynicism seep in to my initial comment >
  
  I mean those billionaires aren’t sacraficing much and are doing it entirely for the reputation laundering.
  They could just get together and like feed and house billions of hungry people or something >
  
  Donors will likely get their names on some sort of plaque inside the church. It’s a pretty big flex to say your name is literally on the Notre Dame. >
  
  Lol semi related but I was sitting in the DC botanical garden and noticed the plaque of doners
  And my my it was like a literal axis of evil. You had oil companies, lockheed martin, insurance companies i think, fuckin purdue pharma. Like literally a list of the worst humanity has to offer lmao. >
  
  The Sackler family literally has a Smithsonian gallery named after them. >
  
  I hope they make a documentary on the destruction/restoration. Would love to get a closer look at the lives of those involved with the process. >
  
  There’s already been a few. 
  National Geographic made one, and I believe it’s available on Disney+. >
  
  Awesome. Thanks >
  
  I hope they are including fire-alarm and fire-suppression systems this time, and not just rebuilding it exactly as it was (without those systems). >
  
  Well they were clearly grandfathered in previously, new builds have to be to new code. >
  
  Cool how it has been restored. ♥️ >
  
  This showed up right next to the article . . . 
  "Sexual abuse in the Portuguese Catholic Church reached 'epic proportions'
  Until the church can figure out how to stop the sexual abuse, people should not celebrate this reopening. >
  
  Idk why ur being so furiously downvoted, haha 'epic proportions' made me laugh.  totally fucked up tho fr fr >
  
  I’d be curious to know the reasons why they’re replacing the lead with (250 tonnes) more lead?
  Edit as of -9 votes: perhaps not a lot of people are aware of the negative health effects of lead exposure. I would like to know, since the article doesn’t delve deeper, why choose to replace lead with lead when there are plenty of other safer architectural design solutions which would achieve the same aesthetic and structural result, goodness forbid there be another fire. I have the opinion that there should be a balance between full restoration of a total loss and learning from the lack of health and safety foresight from our predecessors. How many renovations would you accept no ADA accessibility being incorporated into? Or fire sprinklers? How about number of exits and which way the doors swing? Lead is a known toxin, so it seems to me a terrible choice as part of any construction where it could pose hazardous at any point. >
  
  Because they're trying to rebuild it as it was before the fire. >
  
  So if it had asbestos before, that would be a good reason for it to have asbestos after the rebuild? >
  
  Lead isnt airborne microscopic lung cancer-guarunteeing fiber...??  Dont... lick it? >
  
  Do you know why it took them 2 years after the fire to even start the restoration work? Because the fire melted so much lead into the building that they weren't allowed to work without hazmat suits and every single surface on the interior of the church had to be wiped clean. Lead is only stable and "safe" until it isn't. 
  The obsessive insistency to use the same dangerous material simply for 'historic accuracy' is stupid and short-sighted. >
  
  AD MAIOREM DEI GLORIAM !!! >
  
  The layer upon layer of God revealing himself to the world and the individual workers through that which satan sought for evil, God sought for good. He's giving the church a fresh new voice through the complete refurb of the organ?  WOW!!! I want to be there for the reopening of this church.