• 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

Top Cat said:
LOL. Yeah, the Hawks don't get much press out east. Their defense did something only one other team ever has done. Led the league in the trifecta of defensive stats.

Fewest points allowed.
Fewest yards allowed.
Most turnovers.

The other team? 85 Bears.

LOB!
Click to expand...

85 Bears were in my top 10 favorite teams ever! I love McMahon with his headband protest!

I admit the Hawks were very very very good. Just like the Patriots were for a few years. That doesn't mean I have to like them.:mrgreen:
 
I am beginning to think that "political correctness" is just something invented by white people to keep non-white people distracted and let everyone think they are winning some battle for rights, while the actual oppression against them continues.
 
HenryChinaski said:
As a White person I find Cracker barrel racist.
Click to expand...

I don't know if you meant to make a funny or not, but this made me laugh out loud. Well done!

And yeah I'm also white and am offended by that name. That & "Easy Blonde" are both now on my **** list. I need to get 4 of my blonde friends to agree, and I'm going to the Patent Office.
 
tres borrachos said:
I don't know if you meant to make a funny or not, but this made me laugh out loud. Well done!

And yeah I'm also white and am offended by that name. That & "Easy Blonde" are both now on my **** list. I need to get 4 of my blonde friends to agree, and I'm going to the Patent Office.
Click to expand...

I'm not blonde, but I am easy. ;)
 
Mithros said:
There's a world of difference between a tribes name and a racial slur. And remember, the Native Americans were kind of genocided and Washington DC was the capital of the country that did the bulk of the killing and land theft. The Redskins most rabid fans call themselves the "Hogs", they could easily change their name to the Pigskins, and everyone calls them the 'skins anyway.

It's hard to imagine a team name being more offensive. You'd have to have something like a Football team in Rowanda calling themselves the Inyenzis to come close.
Click to expand...

These decisions shouldn't be made on whether or not a name is offensive. That's FAR too subjective a standard as people are prone to be offended by damned near anything and it opens the door for claims of offense solely for political or economic reasons.

The standard needs to be one of whether or not the trademark causes substantial harm to the general public or to public order.
 
tres borrachos said:
I don't know if you meant to make a funny or not, but this made me laugh out loud. Well done!

And yeah I'm also white and am offended by that name. That & "Easy Blonde" are both now on my **** list. I need to get 4 of my blonde friends to agree, and I'm going to the Patent Office.
Click to expand...
I lean left on quite a few things however I find this whole thing retarded. They pulled the same crap here with Chief Illiniwek who was the official mascot and symbol of the University of Illinois until 2007. He was deemed offensive. Totally stupid.
 
tres borrachos said:
I don't know if you meant to make a funny or not, but this made me laugh out loud. Well done!

And yeah I'm also white and am offended by that name. That & "Easy Blonde" are both now on my **** list. I need to get 4 of my blonde friends to agree, and I'm going to the Patent Office.
Click to expand...

I'm not offended, but I thought the Cracker Barrel comment was hilarious. :lamo

If I didn't have so many true life examples of my own blonde stereotypes being true, I'd have to agree on the blonde stuff, but I exemplify the stereotype. Thank goodness I can laugh at myself, as I've pulled some real doozies. :lol:
 
radcen said:
No, but that's a different question.

People have the right to be offended, and some people are simply hyper-sensitive. We, however, as a society at-large, should recognize this and not pander to it. For example, I have heard people say that discrimination is "whatever the receiver says it is". That's patently absurd. There needs to be some baseline for society to work with.
Click to expand...

But why? So long as there are no artificial barriers to choices, opportunities, access imposed by our public institutions, why do we need any other baseline at all?
 
HenryChinaski said:
I lean left on quite a few things however I find this whole thing retarded. They pulled the same crap here with Chief Illiniwek who was the official mascot and symbol of the University of Illinois until 2007. He was deemed offensive. Totally stupid.
Click to expand...

Yup, I remember that story with the Chief but forgot about it until you mentioned it. If I recall, the NCAA held them hostage by banning them from post season games until they killed the Chief.

UGH this **** drives me nuts!
 
lizzie said:
I'm not offended, but I thought the Cracker Barrel comment was hilarious. :lamo

If I didn't have so many true life examples of my own blonde stereotypes being true, I'd have to agree on the blonde stuff, but I exemplify the stereotype. Thank goodness I can laugh at myself, as I've pulled some real doozies. :lol:
Click to expand...

Being an often ditzy blonde is part of my charm.;)
 
Gaius46 said:
And even if the was offensive or demeaned or belittle what of it? That is no basis for formulating law.
You can argue that if the name is offensive to enough people the owner should change it out of respect to their sensibilities. But as a matter of law, or government regulation? Nope. Goes too far.T
Click to expand...

Yes. I prefer for public opinion to take care of such things. I don't want an angry mob descending upon me if they don't like my business name or the way I choose to do business, and I think organized boycotts or other pressures to damage a person or business because of a politically correct concept is evil and should be illegal. But if I choose to do what offends so many customers that they choose not to do business with me because of that, I am a fool and deserve the consequences.
 
Dan Snyder might want to give the name change some more thought at this point in time. While I think it's pure thought police idiocy that this happened, maybe his team will stop being such losers if he changes the name to something different. Like The Washington Cavalry.

images
 
Lutherf said:
These decisions shouldn't be made on whether or not a name is offensive. That's FAR too subjective a standard as people are prone to be offended by damned near anything and it opens the door for claims of offense solely for political or economic reasons.

The standard needs to be one of whether or not the trademark causes substantial harm to the general public or to public order.
Click to expand...

I agree, this whole thing is asinine. When government starts enforcing Political Correctness, government has gotten way too big and way too powerful. I would assume that government should have other things to do that need tending too, that are much more important, like getting our debt under control, solving the immigration problem, fixing the economy, jobs, etc.
 
Should the Cleveland Indians change thier name? How about the Florida Seminoles?

The State of Oklahoma means "red people" in Choctaw. Might as well have the State change its name as well.

Can anyone give examples of the NFL team name Washington Redskins being used as a racists remark? PC is out of control.
 
Lutherf said:
These decisions shouldn't be made on whether or not a name is offensive. That's FAR too subjective a standard as people are prone to be offended by damned near anything and it opens the door for claims of offense solely for political or economic reasons.

The standard needs to be one of whether or not the trademark causes substantial harm to the general public or to public order.
Click to expand...
But you agree that the name is pretty offensive right?
 
AlbqOwl said:
But why? So long as there are no artificial barriers to choices, opportunities, access imposed by our public institutions, why do we need any other baseline at all?
Click to expand...

I know, I know, it sounds so nice and wonderful. Ok, we don't have baselines at all... and we get crap like this thread topic. Be careful what you wish for.
 
Maybe change the name to something more contemporary Native American. The Washington Slots? The Washington Casino's?
 
radcen said:
I know, I know, it sounds so nice and wonderful. Ok, we don't have baselines at all... and we get crap like this thread topic. Be careful what you wish for.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm referring to baselines imposed by the government. What are you basing baselines on and who do you think should establish them?

Society has always formed its own rules of good/evil, right/wrong, proper/improper etc. within its own culture. Such rules are not 'law' to be punished via fine or jail or whatever, but are the expectations of a people in order to live in harmony. Rules like saying 'please' and 'thank you' and not using certain language in certain settings/company or removing your hat and standing when the National Anthem is played. Stuff like that.

But I simply cannot come up with a rationale for why the word 'redskin' used to typify a beloved sports team is offensive. I understand that some say it is. But I bet they can't say why.
 
AlbqOwl said:
Why? WHY is it offensive?
Click to expand...

Is that a serious question? Um... Go to a reservation and start calling people "redskins". I'm pretty sure that if you then googled offensive the first thing that would pop up is a picture of you calling a Native American a redskin.
It's a racist slur.

I mean, feel free to defend the skins rights to be offensive; but pretending that it's not offensive is just wishful thinking.
 
Papa bull said:
Dan Snyder might want to give the name change some more thought at this point in time. While I think it's pure thought police idiocy that this happened, maybe his team will stop being such losers if he changes the name to something different. Like The Washington Cavalry.

images
Click to expand...

5 Time Super Bowl appearances.
3 Time Super Bowl Winner.
Yea, real losers.
 
Demon of Light said:
I am beginning to think that "political correctness" is just something invented by white people to keep non-white people distracted and let everyone think they are winning some battle for rights, while the actual oppression against them continues.
Click to expand...

Sounds Orwellian.
 
Mithros said:
Is that a serious question? Um... Go to a reservation and start calling people "redskins". I'm pretty sure that if you then googled offensive the first thing that would pop up is a picture of you calling a Native American a redskin.
It's a racist slur.

I mean, feel free to defend the skins rights to be offensive; but pretending that it's not offensive is just wishful thinking.
Click to expand...
Offensive is subjective. To 90+% of Native Americans, Redskins is not offensive. You can find a tiny minority who are offended by everything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom