• 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!

Redskins chances of retaining nickname improved by Supreme Court ruling

Cigar said:
Wold Series Champions ... after 108 Years :lol:
Click to expand...

Don't you love all the movies set in the future where the Cubs have still never won?
 
americanwoman said:
I know many Natives and none like the name "Redskins" and I don't blame them.
Click to expand...
We travel in different circles. All the Native Americans I know and knew in the past, loved the idea of being named in some form, as an honor. You must be younger, where PC was indoctrinated.

I'm almost 60. How old are you?
 
Yes... Just looked at your profile and you show your birthday. You have very likely been indoctrinated by the PC crowd in school, and likely the Native Americans you know.
 
Lord of Planar said:
LOL...

I got a good chuckle from that!

It's funny because from the things I have seen, there are far more Native Americans that appreciate being named by sports teams, than those who do not. When I lived in The Dalles, we had far more native Americans in our schools than blacks. They loved being the named m,ascot of our High School... "The Indians!"

This is all just another stupid liberal agenda.
Click to expand...

for some

But how would the following names go down

Seattle Slant Eyes

Kansas Coons

NYC Kikes

Philly Krauts

Would people support sports teams with those names?
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
for some

But how would the following names go down

Seattle Slant Eyes

Kansas Coons

NYC Kikes

Philly Krauts

Would people support sports teams with those names?
Click to expand...
You are bringing up names used as racial slurs. Non of the current sports teams were originated as slurs.
 
blackjack50 said:
Don't Forget the Mongols. They killed off 100,000,000 in 100 years with primitive weapons like sword and spear and bow.
Click to expand...

Yes, the Mongols are very under rated. When it comes to mayhem, you can't do much better than a Mongul.
 
When the original court order came out regarding the trademark there were many here and elsewhere making a huge deal out of the impact and meaning of the ruling. At the time, I shrug it off as a largely procedural step within the greater legal battle as it relates to the LEGAL arguments to forcing a name change. This, frankly, was always the direction it was going to correctly go within the courts as it relates to free speech.

There remains, to this day, only two ways I see the name changing in my life time:

1. An open revolt by the NFL owners essentially forcing it upon Daniel Snyder via penalties and other collusion-style tactics (because as Dallas and Washington have seen, the NFL is far from above such dirty tactics)
2. A jaw-dropping offer of land and public financing on the part of Washington D.C. to place a new Redskins Stadium inside the city limits, contingent on a name change

Some people like to put "boycotts" causing a financial burden on the list; it's a foolish argument. The shared revenue from the TV contracts, alone, would likely be enough to keep the Redskins profitable regardless of any individual sponsor pull outs or boycotts of games or team gear. Plus, in terms of the latter, the reality is that said "boycott" of such things would most likely be conducted by individuals who were not likely to actually attend said games, or buy said products, to begin with. Actual fans of the team, overwhelming, do not have an issue with the name; the small minority that do, still pretty actively support the team. The likelihood of the DC sports-fan ceasing to support the Redskins is, frankly, an improbability of massive proportions and any individual that lives within the DC/Maryland/Virginia area would attest the same in a heart beat.

Despite a multitude of losing seasons, epic collapses, ridiculous drama, and a ridiculous owner...in a town with a perennial playoff team with a multi-time MVP, one of the brightest stars in the sport on another team, and an up-and-coming young nucleus on a third...the Redskins are far and away the #1 mover of the needle when it comes to sports in this town. That is not changing for at least the rest of this generation, so any hopes of a boycott putting financial pressure on a man that has steadfastly pledged not to change the name is not going to happen.

Collusion on the part of NFL owners, or the biggest public funding bribe that we've seen....that's pretty much the only two avenues that will feasibly make a name change occur at this point.
 
Lord of Planar said:
You are bringing up names used as racial slurs. Non of the current sports teams were originated as slurs.
Click to expand...

Redskins was not used as a polite way of discussing Indians.

Neither was Coon, Kike, or Kraut

Today no polite person would go to an Indian person who they do not know and call that person a redskin, just as no polite person would go to a jewish person and call them a Kike, or to a german and call them a kraut
 
Cigar said:
I still like the One-On-One approach for Immediate and Direct Feedback. ;)
Click to expand...

Prefer it all you like. Any "feedback" you give will likely be met with "feedback" as well. From the individual and the government. But I don't suppose there is any point in explaining the value of the moral high ground when one is dead set on "feedback" and not rational responses.
 
Carjosse said:
Just because you have the right to say something does not mean you should, and people can still very much disagree.
Click to expand...

That isn't how free speech works.
 
blackjack50 said:
Prefer it all you like. Any "feedback" you give will likely be met with "feedback" as well. From the individual and the government. But I don't suppose there is any point in explaining the value of the moral high ground when one is dead set on "feedback" and not rational responses.
Click to expand...

That would resolve a lot of problems and besides, why should I care if you have a personal problem with someone? I say go handle your business and keep me out of it.

;)
 
Lord of Planar said:
We travel in different circles. All the Native Americans I know and knew in the past, loved the idea of being named in some form, as an honor. You must be younger, where PC was indoctrinated.

I'm almost 60. How old are you?
Click to expand...

Redskin had a history of offensive and racial tones to it. Even the older Natives I know do not see it as an honor. It could be the region or the tribe.
 
americanwoman said:
Omaha, NE. The Natives I know are in the Omaha, Winnebago, Lakota, and Sioux.
Click to expand...

Well, I have Cherokee and Blackfoot in me. The natives in The Dalles are of the Chinook tribe. No offense that I am aware of.
 
Cigar said:
That would resolve a lot of problems and besides, why should I care if you have a personal problem with someone? I say go handle your business and keep me out of it.

;)
Click to expand...

"Feedback" would only cause more problems. It doesn't end them. There are rare occasions, sure, but more than likely you just undermine your own morality when giving "feedback."
 
americanwoman said:
I know many Natives and none like the name "Redskins" and I don't blame them.
Click to expand...

Lord of Planar said:
We travel in different circles. All the Native Americans I know and knew in the past, loved the idea of being named in some form, as an honor. You must be younger, where PC was indoctrinated.
Click to expand...

Eh, in my experiences it's definitely split. With frankly, the largest segment of any I've talked with OR, ignoring anecdotal evidence of ones own experiences and actually looking at more scientific data, being of the mind that they don't honestly have a strong feeling either way with regards to it and, if anything, are more annoyed that so much focus is given to that as opposed to actual tangible significant issues facing Indian Country.

Lord Tammerlain said:
Redskins was not used as a polite way of discussing Indians.
Click to expand...

Not entirely true. It's earliest indications of it's usage is actually one created by Native Americans as a means of differentiating themselves from those that came from Europe. Each tribe generally viewed themselves as unique entities, unique peoples, each different and individual; yet when dealing as a group with the settlers there were language and contextual barriers, and "redskins" was a manner in which to describe the disparate native American people together as a collective.

Over time, it did transition from being simply a categorical mundane term to one that was used as a slur, allowing a situation where you had a word that simultaneously has a mundane and pejorative connotations to it. As time went on and the slur gained prominence, the mundane usage became more archaic, though not non-existent in nature.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom