Alternative name for the Redskins

Originally posted by crake49:

Originally posted by fryet:
Actually, it is your problem. You can try and create an offense-free world, or you can learn to suck it up and accept that people do things that are offensive, and they are free to do so. Don't patronize the Redskins if you find the name offensive, but don't expect everyone to agree with you.

It's not my problem. It's my opinion. We're all free to have our own opinions. Some of us aren't as sensitive to or concerned with things that are hurtful to other people. Some of us are less concerned about a better society. And of course, we don't all agree on what a better society even means.

Yes, we definitely don't agree on what a better society is. In my opinion, a better society is a limited government, not one that tries to shield people from every offense. There is another way to deal with cultural offenses. Convince everyone else of your opinion, and then the business will start losing money and then change the name on its own. When the government tries to force the issue, then you get tyranny.

Originally posted by AmpLee:

Nonsense. I was mocking your point. The idea that it's slippery slope is ridiculous. Every thing ought to be judged on it's own merit. The topic at hand has nothing to do with any conceived fallout that could be fabricated in the minds of those who oppose it. Is the name Redskins racist and if so, should we be okay with it? That is the question at hand. Building a straw-man by claiming that anything is offensive to someone has nothing to do with the question at hand. It's just a poorly constructed argument to dilute the topic at hand. Furthermore, I haven't heard any native Americans that take pride in the name "Redskins" and would surmise that it would be the same percentage of blacks that take pride in Blackskins, Asians with Yellowskins, and Latinos with Brownskins, etc. Sure, to some this is a source of pride, but to most it's a derogatory stereotyping that is absurdly racist.

This is nonsense.

Our entire judicial system is based on precedent, and the slippery slopes that come with it.

The current issue is whether the Redskin name is offensive and if a forced name change should be made.

Eventually this, or a similar case is going to be brought before a federal court (if one hasn't already). Once a decision is made, it is precedent setting. Future hearings must utilize the decision that was made, which may be appealed to eventually the Superior Court, but in either case once a judicial decision is made, it is exactly the slippery slope I was talking about.

On a side note, I have spoken with several Puyallup, Nisqually, and Quinalt Indians (probably 20 total) and none of them said they take offense to it, and about half of them say they do take pride in it. Obviously that's a microscopic sample size, but again who's to say what's offensive and what isn't?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_tribes_in_Virginia

There are several names they can switch too, if they actually gave to cents about honoring Native American's with their proper titles.

Washington REDCOATS

Washington Gamblers....

since the casinos allow their tribes people to cash their per capita checks at the casino in hopes of them gambling the money away there.

Originally posted by Temecula49ersfan:
Washington Gamblers....

since the casinos allow their tribes people to cash their per capita checks at the casino in hopes of them gambling the money away there.

Warhawks sounds like a cool name but it has hawks in it and that makes me angry.

Originally posted by Geeked:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_tribes_in_Virginia

There are several names they can switch too, if they actually gave to cents about honoring Native American's with their proper titles.

Exactly. The Rappannock (sp) is big here, used a lot with buildings and streets. If they wanted to honor them, they could keep the same logo, colors etc. and just change the name.

Its the reason the Florida St seminole tribe stands behind the school, and even donates gear for celebrations, games, etc. Redskins is a slur.

Originally posted by maltz88:

Originally posted by AmpLee:
Nonsense. I was mocking your point. The idea that it's slippery slope is ridiculous. Every thing ought to be judged on it's own merit. The topic at hand has nothing to do with any conceived fallout that could be fabricated in the minds of those who oppose it. Is the name Redskins racist and if so, should we be okay with it? That is the question at hand. Building a straw-man by claiming that anything is offensive to someone has nothing to do with the question at hand. It's just a poorly constructed argument to dilute the topic at hand. Furthermore, I haven't heard any native Americans that take pride in the name "Redskins" and would surmise that it would be the same percentage of blacks that take pride in Blackskins, Asians with Yellowskins, and Latinos with Brownskins, etc. Sure, to some this is a source of pride, but to most it's a derogatory stereotyping that is absurdly racist.

This is nonsense.

Our entire judicial system is based on precedent, and the slippery slopes that come with it.

The current issue is whether the Redskin name is offensive and if a forced name change should be made.

Eventually this, or a similar case is going to be brought before a federal court (if one hasn't already). Once a decision is made, it is precedent setting. Future hearings must utilize the decision that was made, which may be appealed to eventually the Superior Court, but in either case once a judicial decision is made, it is exactly the slippery slope I was talking about.

On a side note, I have spoken with several Puyallup, Nisqually, and Quinalt Indians (probably 20 total) and none of them said they take offense to it, and about half of them say they do take pride in it. Obviously that's a microscopic sample size, but again who's to say what's offensive and what isn't?

lol. It went to court in 1999 and the indian tribe won, only to be reversed in an appeal by the redskins. This issue is not new.

Here is a simple test. Take a word, any word, and if you would not use it during a discussion not involving the team name, there is a good chance it is a slur.

Back in the day it was an acceptable and proud word to use Negro. Can you imagine the Chicago Negroes now? Now. Context and meanings change. Times change. This word is a slur, has been a slur and they have been asked to change it for years.

I hate the when will it stop argument. Judge each one on its own case. It doesnt matter how far it goes or when it stops. What matters is if it was right.

Originally posted by Rubberneck36:

Originally posted by Geeked:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_tribes_in_Virginia

There are several names they can switch too, if they actually gave to cents about honoring Native American's with their proper titles.

Exactly. The Rappannock (sp) is big here, used a lot with buildings and streets. If they wanted to honor them, they could keep the same logo, colors etc. and just change the name.

Its the reason the Florida St seminole tribe stands behind the school, and even donates gear for celebrations, games, etc. Redskins is a slur.

Crazy thing is, Rappannock, is a nice sounding name / title. This whole thing could have been a total coup for the NFL if they just went along and honored a local tribe. But, instead, they thought sweeping it under the rug would have been a better thing to do. Go figure.

The ironic thing is that Washington's basketball team voluntarily changed their name from the Bullets to the Wizards and made a statement against violence in the community by doing so.

There was no crying about tradition...just a recognition that the name wasn't appropriate.

Native Americans are pretty openly opposed to the name....and are aggrieved by it. Why does the franchise and the NFL at large continue to fight this?

Originally posted by AmpLee:
I don't know about you, but if they are forced to change their name, I'm going to try and start a movement to marry my toaster. The precedent will have been set. Where does it stop?

lol

Originally posted by AmpLee:

Originally posted by kray28:
The ironic thing is that Washington's basketball team voluntarily changed their name from the Bullets to the Wizards and made a statement against violence in the community by doing so.

There was no crying about tradition...just a recognition that the name wasn't appropriate.

Native Americans are pretty openly opposed to the name....and are aggrieved by it. Why does the franchise and the NFL at large continue to fight this?

I don't know about that. Some guy on here questioned 20 Native Americans and none were offended by the name. lol.

Sound totally credible. lol.

Except:

Native Americans themselves are leading this fight. They've been legally challenging the trademark in court for decades actually: The familiar arguments are fundamentally the same as in Harjo et al v. Pro-Football Inc., a trademark suit filed in 1992 that wound its way through the courts for 17 years. Suzan Shown Harjo and six petitioners won that case before the trademark board in 1999 but lost on appeal, largely on a technical argument that they had waited too long to assert their rights.

New generation of Indians fight the Redskins trademark

I guess they should just "get over it", right?

Originally posted by zaghawk:
I know what an Osprey is, forgive me if my definition of bad ass animals though are usually reserved for things like Lions, Tigers and Bears...Oh My!

did you really try the why stop here, lets change the badgers, bears, and other animals argument? Yeah thats totally the same thing. haha. Some of you guys are amazing.

The Haynesworths

With their new logo being Fat Albert: