• 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

Beaudreaux said:
This is just now being announced, so there isn't much out there yet:
Click to expand...

…yet the Patent Office has sat on its hands for the previous 8 decades. Why is this such a pressing issue now?

Are they going to make Norte Dame change their nickname too?
 
Mithros said:
But you agree that the name is pretty offensive right?
Click to expand...

Not at all.

While the term may have been used in a derogatory manner in some limited circumstances it has never been used that way with any real prevalence. In fact, based on my experience, I have found the term to be used FAR more often to identify the football team than any native American individual or group. Even when I lived the northeast it was far more common to use the term "indian" to refer to native Americans as a whole or the tribe name to refer to a given group.
 
Beaudreaux said:
There's one place I feel it will definitely go... to court, against the Obama Administration in the form of the US Patent Office.
Click to expand...

This must go to court.
 
CRUE CAB said:
5 Time Super Bowl appearances.
3 Time Super Bowl Winner.
Yea, real losers.
Click to expand...

Haven't won diddly lately. Who's brilliant idea was it to name the team after the losers, anyway?
 
Lutherf said:
Not at all.

While the term may have been used in a derogatory manner in some limited circumstances it has never been used that way with any real prevalence. In fact, based on my experience, I have found the term to be used FAR more often to identify the football team than any native American individual or group. Even when I lived the northeast it was far more common to use the term "indian" to refer to native Americans as a whole or the tribe name to refer to a given group.
Click to expand...

I don't know of any team that named themselves after something they held in contempt and felt should be considered a slur.
 
When is Obama going to call on his black friends to quit using the dreaded "N" word in music and movies?
He should pull all the copyrights to all the movies and lyrics that used that word. Right now. Today.
Any thing less proves he is a hypocrite.
 
I haven't heard whether any other groups have protested any other NFL teams.

Are 49'ers offensive, or perhaps Chargers. I even read a suggestion that someone might object to the Green Bay Packers because a sexual connotation.
 
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...

Actually the State of New Mexico just gave the Village of Taos permission to change the name of the small Kit Carson State Park, located within the city limits, to something else. Why? Because some folks said the name "Kit Carson"--his images and characterizations and memorabilia are found all over the place up there--is offensive because, among many other accomplishments, he was an army officer once ordered to escort Navajos from Arizona to Fort Sumner in New Mexico and many died on the long walk. The State said they would revert the name back to its original if the towns people failed to maintain the park.

But is this the beginning of a push to rename the Kit Carson National Forest or Kit Carson National Park? How about Washington D.C. named after the U.S.A.'s first president. Washington once owned slaves. Will some political correctness police group decide that disqualifies him from the honor of being commemorated in the national capitol? And others of you commented on the New Orleans Saints and all the many many villages, towns, and cities across the nation named for historical or religious figures.

How much are we supposed to allow political correctness to control every facet of our lives?

Things like this can become so nit picked and absurd that I think any thinking person has to say enough already.
 
Jango said:
…yet the Patent Office has sat on its hands for the previous 8 decades. Why is this such a pressing issue now?
Click to expand...
Why? One word... Obama.

Jango said:
Are they going to make Norte Dame change their nickname too?
Click to expand...
Of course not. That only depicts a slanderous stereotypical group that happens to be white. No problem there. No one to get upset, because the Irish are also too drunk to notice.

meanwhile-in-ireland_o_321790.jpg


3caee235cadb8ea71ba7bc38a28e1be4b1ecfabc30c0530fe62abec3be2750ef.jpg


military-humor-funny-joke-army-irish-special-forces-drinking-enemy.jpg
 
Jango said:
…yet the Patent Office has sat on its hands for the previous 8 decades. Why is this such a pressing issue now?

Are they going to make Norte Dame change their nickname too?
Click to expand...

Its mascot's problematic too. Leprechauns are little people, you know.
 
Papa bull said:
Question with a question. Do you figure the winners had to move to a reservation?
Click to expand...

Treatment of a race of people that were not as technologically advance as its invaders does not make them losers. I guess Americans are losers since we lost wars in Korea, Vietnam and now Iraq and soon Afghanistan.
 
CRUE CAB said:
Treatment of a race of people that were not as technologically advance as its invaders does not make them losers. I guess Americans are losers since we lost wars in Korea, Vietnam and now Iraq and soon Afghanistan.
Click to expand...

If a handful of hypersensitive weenies want to act all butt-hurt over the name "Redskins", then I say change it to "The Cavalry". Might as well sort it out and go with the side that actually won the war. If the native Americans don't feel that having a team named after them is an honor, then name the team after the Cavalry, I say. Problem feckin' solved.

P.S. We won the war in Iraq. You remember this, don't you?

1_204157_1_5.jpg


And the Korean war was a stalemate, not a loss.
 
Last edited:
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...

Why? Why is it a racist slur? It certainly isn't a racist slur when I say Washington Redskins. It certainly isn't a racist slur when I quote a movie line that 'the redskins are coming'. It is a reference to a people sometimes represented historically as savages--which was accurate in many cases--or the 'noble redskin' which was accurate in many cases. "Redskin or red man" is certainly more descriptive of the people than is 'Indian' or 'Native American' just as 'white man' or 'white' or 'black man' or 'black' is more descriptive of a people than is "European" or "African American" which so few of us are that it is statistically insignificant.

Why not promote the positive image within the word instead of demanding that it be seen as racially disparaging or any other connotation. Should people be embarrassed or feel denigrated because their skin is of a particular predominant hue more than any other people?
 
Jango said:
…yet the Patent Office has sat on its hands for the previous 8 decades. Why is this such a pressing issue now?

Are they going to make Norte Dame change their nickname too?
Click to expand...

Because Snyder (the owner) is anti-Obama. I'm sure the Dems dislike him immensely. He's also vocally anti-Obama.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
Didn't the article state that the patent office had no power to prevent the redskins from continuing to use their name.
Click to expand...

But that also means that the trademark can now be used by ANYONE, thus making it virtually impossible to stop others from making "official" products bearing that trademark.
 
AlbqOwl said:
Why? Why is it a racist slur? It certainly isn't a racist slur when I say Washington Redskins. It certainly isn't a racist slur when I quote a movie line that 'the redskins are coming'. It is a reference to a people sometimes represented historically as savages--which was accurate in many cases--or the 'noble redskin' which was accurate in many cases. "Redskin or red man" is certainly more descriptive of the people than is 'Indian' or 'Native American' just as 'white man' or 'white' or 'black man' or 'black' is more descriptive of a people than is "European" or "African American" which so few of us are that it is statistically insignificant.

Why not promote the positive image within the word instead of demanding that it be seen as racially disparaging or any other connotation. Should people be embarrassed or feel denigrated because their skin is of a particular predominant hue more than any other people?
Click to expand...
She identifies the negative connotation the word still has....and wonders why it has a negative connotation.

FFS....it is as if the left hand is unaware of what the right hand is doing.
 
CRUE CAB said:
Because of the way the US treated the Native Americans 100 years or more ago.
Click to expand...

Women were treated badly 100 years or more ago too. Should Baylor be forced to change the name of their female sports teams from "Lady Bears"?
 
Gimmesometruth said:
She identifies the negative connotation the word still has....and wonders why it has a negative connotation.

FFS....it is as if the left hand is unaware of what the right hand is doing.
Click to expand...

So we should never mention the negative components of accurate history? You did fail to highlight that qualifier you know, which makes your characterization rather intellectually dishonest. Do you feel that it is not right to mention the negative components of history of people other than Native Americans too? That should be off limits? Or is it just the red man who should be exempt from having to deal with their less than commendable past while it is okay that the rest of us know about ours?
 
Papa bull said:
If a handful of hypersensitive weenies want to act all butt-hurt over the name "Redskins", then I say change it to "The Cavalry". Might as well sort it out and go with the side that actually won the war. If the native Americans don't feel that having a team named after them is an honor, then name the team after the Cavalry, I say. Problem feckin' solved.

P.S. We won the war in Iraq. You remember this, don't you?

1_204157_1_5.jpg


And the Korean war was a stalemate, not a loss.
Click to expand...
You must not have been paying attention to recent events in Iraq. And Saddam was just an arrogant bully. We left, job not done country is devolving into hell.
I don't call that a win. Stalemate is not a win.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom