• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Patent office cancels Redskins trademarks

Trademark registry deals with words...of course they are empowered to make decisions on speech. Besides, they did not say Snyder can't us the word. They said he can no longer register it. You really need to study up on the actual meaning of "free speech."

BTW, trademark registration has a long list of rules for which words can and cannot be registered.
http://i.ytimg.com/vi/840z57sGCyU/0.jpg

No, they can't decide what's offensive and what isn't.

I think we should bombard the patent office with applications for logos using, "nigger, spick, gook, beaner, kike, dego, fag, bitch and/or mackeral smacker" and watch their heads explode.
 
You've obviously never been marginalized and alienated.

9 out of 10 people enjoy gang rape. Do you have a poll that says otherwise?

Do you have a poll or not? You're the one who keeps saying it offends them and marginalizes them. Link to a poll?
 
Where are they granted that authority specifically? Citation, please.

They register trademark names. It was just a setup for that First Amendment argument I knew was coming.
 
No. Braves, Indians, Seminoles, Hawks...are all OK sans the offensive caricatures, but Redskins is a racial slur.


Anyone can use it. It can't be registered. Big difference.


Again. Anyone can use any image they want. However, trademarking it, legally registering it, is no longer being allowed.

So it's offensive (to you), but anyone can use it, so all that's been accomplished is prohibiting a trademark on it. Got it.
 
This is stupid... and an overreach of government authority. Truth is though I expect this type of bull from a LibDem Executive branch, they pander to minorities and the uninformed in order to solodify their own power in DC this is nothing more than the Exec Branch flexing their 'Muscles' while trying to push their PC agenda.

Lets remember the context with which the name 'redskin' is used here. To the Redskins the name is something STRONG and POWERFUL it is a symbol of the WARRIOR and something their fans take much pride in. I have native american ancestry myself (1/16th cherokee) and I take no offense to the term at all. Native Americans should take pride in the fact there are so many sportsteams that use their names (or nicknames) for their teams because it shows that modern owners and fans still associate STRENGTH, PRIDE, and FEARLESSNESS with Native Americans.

That said while the trademark is being wrongfully stripped if I were the Redskins I would get an estimate on how much money this action by the Trademark Office is costing the team per day, then I would recoup those losses in Court and sue for the cost of attorneys as well. The redskins should make the fed pay through the nose for this.
 
No, they can't decide what's offensive and what isn't.

I think we should bombard the patent office with applications for logos using, "nigger, spick, gook, beaner, kike, dego, fag, bitch and/or mackeral smacker" and watch their heads explode.

You do love typing racial slurs, don't you?
 
They register trademark names. It was just a setup for that First Amendment argument I knew was coming.

The name was registered already.

So this isn't about making anything right for the Native Americans, it was all just to get the government to arbitrate the trademark. Wow, is that a victory for anyone?
 
Do you have a poll or not? You're the one who keeps saying it offends them and marginalizes them. Link to a poll?

It offends 10%. That's enough for me. Why do you think offense should be put to a vote?
 
I personally don't care if the Redskins are called the Redskins or the Hounds or the Dickheads. As a Giants fan, I will hate them no matter what.;)

What I detest in this story is exactly what you said here (bolded part). I'm amazed that not everyone shares our concern.

At this moment in time we have the IRS obviously being used to damage the free speech rights of citizens, while destroying evidence of their crime as they go. We have encouragement by the White House of invasion by foreign countries, economic ruin with no recourse by the EPA on states conducting legitimate business activities, and the list goes on.

And this isn't a problem?

Bottom line is, we're not alone in our disgust. I have faith this little fad called Progressivism is on the final course of it's foregone collapse, just as it did before. The real work begins afterwards, when so many who have been thoroughly scammed by them will need to be de-programed.
 
It offends 10%. That's enough for me. Why do you think offense should be put to a vote?

If 10% of the people on here were offended by your avatar, you'd change it, right? Without hesitation, and without thinking?
 
The name was registered already.

So this isn't about making anything right for the Native Americans, it was all just to get the government to arbitrate the trademark. Wow, is that a victory for anyone?

It's got a lot of insensitive white folks panties in a twist. So there's that. :lol:
 
62 schools in 22 states, and such schools have been changing their names rapidly. What's that, 62 out of 100000 highschools? And fewer each year. They can all change. No big deal.

You asked. There it is.
 
So it's offensive (to you), but anyone can use it, so all that's been accomplished is prohibiting a trademark on it. Got it.

I have no problem with that remedy. Free speech is preserved while the government refuses to protect the commercial value of it.
 
You love whining about me doing, but you're strangely silent when others do it. Huh?

You do it more than everyone else combined. Huh?
 
If 10% of the people on here were offended by your avatar, you'd change it, right? Without hesitation, and without thinking?

If <1% were offended (the mod team) I would have to change it. Of course, I'm not sure who I am marginalizing and profiting off of. ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom