American Indians look to high court

[Daseal]

Plaschke, Do the right thing and get a toupee.

[KLHJ2]

So why is it that Florida State can have a Seminole?

Why can a chewing tobacco company use this?



Did every other team ask if it was ok to use the likeness of types of people before they made their logos?

Did any of the teams that were named after animals petition PETA to make sure that it was OK to use animal likeness in Logos? The answer is no because it is absurd to do so.

If any Native American wants to name their casino the "Pale Face Palace" It would not bother me one bit. The truth is that they are just logos and nicknames that were created to provide an identity and instill a minute amount of fear into the opposition while providing pride for the teams followers. In no way is it degrading a people.

I have a 100% Native American Aunt who is from Michigan and married into our family decades ago. My grandmother is 50% Cherokee. Both of them are Redskin fans. This fight has no merrit in my mind.

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by Angry

So why is it that Florida State can have a Seminole?

Why can a chewing tobacco company use this?



Did every other team ask if it was ok to use the likeness of types of people before they made their logos?

Did any of the teams that were named after animals petition PETA to make sure that it was OK to use animal likeness in Logos? The answer is no because it is absurd to do so.

If any Native American wants to name their casino the "Pale Face Palace" It would not bother me one bit. The truth is that they are just logos and nicknames that were created to provide an identity and instill a minute amount of fear into the opposition while providing pride for the teams followers. In no way is it degrading a people.

I have a 100% Native American Aunt who is from Michigan and married into our family decades ago. My grandmother is 50% Cherokee. Both of them are Redskin fans. This fight has no merrit in my mind.

In the state of Florida, the head of the Seminole tribe went to bat for the Florida Seminole team. According to her they were not offended but honored by the........reverence, and respect attached by the Seminole faithful.
Makes you wonder just WHO was offended if the NA's were not?
ACLU?

[Daseal]

Because then they get a terrible name like the wizards.

[wilsowilso]

With regards to the Bullets changing their name I was under the impression that the owner decided to change the name after his good friend who just happened to be the Prime Minister of Israel got murdered. He alone decided that he didn't want the team name to have any connection to gun violence.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by wilsowilso

With regards to the Bullets changing their name I was under the impression that the owner decided to change the name after his good friend who just happened to be the Prime Minister of Israel got murdered. He alone decided that he didn't want the team name to have any connection to gun violence.

Well that was sort of the final straw that led to his decision...however, Pollin felt the name Bullets had acquired violent overtones.

[ArtMonkDrillz]

I think the Patriots and the Cowboys should be forced to change their respective names because they glorify the very people who stole land from the Native Americans. Hell, you could probably also include the Vikings in that group.

[Spence]

I'm a huge hoops fan and I've always loved the name Bullets. I wish they would change the name back to it. The Baltimore Bullets made sense, due to the munitions factories put there to ship supplies to our troops in Europe. Washington Bullets doesn't make as much sense, but it's still a cool name and Wizards is just an awful name. I'd have preferred Sea Dogs.

The Redskins name should go. Change it to the Warlords. Washington Warlords has got a ring to it and some historical context, due to the great presidents and generals who have led wars from this city where I'm typing.

The fact that some other offensive Amerindian names and images are still being used is not relevant. The right thing should be done because it is the right thing to do. Let others be wrong.

[Spence]

Originally Posted by ArtMonkDrillz

I think the Patriots and the Cowboys should be forced to change their respective names because they glorify the very people who stole land from the Native Americans. Hell, you could probably also include the Vikings in that group.

I think the federal and state governments had done whatever they wanted to do to the Amerindians before the massive immigration from Scandinavia to the upper Midwest took place.

Cowboys and Patriots aren't names that offend anyone.

[cdskins26]

Fine. If this happens then all ethnic teams should go. Well then goodbye: redskins vikings, cowboys, buccaneers, patriots, chiefs, indians, braves, pirates, canadians, blackhawks, canucks, fighting irish, seminoles, and so on...

[RedskinRat]

Native American equivalent to the N-word?


How is it the equivalent to the 'N' word?

More PC bollocks from the LA Times. Worst paper ever.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by RedskinRat

Native American equivalent to the N-word?


How is it the equivalent to the 'N' word?

More PC bollocks from the LA Times. Worst paper ever.

It isn't. The N word is universally regarded as demeaning. Redskins is not in any way considered as such (except maybe to football sensibilities at times). There could be some people who don't like the term. But you can find some people to not like anything.

Saving a choking baby? You can find some people who don't like it.
Capitalism? Some don't like it.
Smootsmack? Njall doesn't like him.

Just because a few don't like it doesn't make it wrong. Now if they could prove a culturally significant group of unignorable size thought it was offensive then maybe I could understand.

[jgalecpa]

This case probably will never get heard.

First, what they are doing is appealing to the USSCT for a 'writ of certiorari'.

The Supreme Ct gets THOUSANDS of these a year, from nearly everyone who lost at the Appellate level.

The supreme court hears maybe 20 - 50 a year, and are hearing fewer and fewer cases every year.

They generally only take cases where (a) there have been similar cases resulting in different outcomes among different courts of appeals (e.g the 4th circuit says something is ok but the 9th says it's fine), or (b) he matter is of great national import.

This is certainly not the former and seems not to be the latter. At its heart it is a trademark case.

If it does hear the appeal, it is only on the question of did the appeals court make a mistake in handling the appeal?

It will not rehear the case all over ('de novo').

I bet you will hear that 'cert was denied' meaning they won't even hear the case.

That has the effect of letting the appeals ct decision stand, and in effect even strengthening the decision.

J-dawg

[Coff]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

It isn't. The N word is universally regarded as demeaning. Redskins is not in any way considered as such (except maybe to football sensibilities at times). There could be some people who don't like the term. But you can find some people to not like anything.

Saving a choking baby? You can find some people who don't like it.
Capitalism? Some don't like it.
Smootsmack? Njall doesn't like him.

Just because a few don't like it doesn't make it wrong. Now if they could prove a culturally significant group of unignorable size thought it was offensive then maybe I could understand.

So the offensive level of a term is dependent upon the number of people who are offended by it? That's interesting. So therefore a derogatory term would no longer be derogatory following an effective genocide of those people? Worth considering when we refer to the "few" who are offended by the term Redskins.

Let's stop being foolish. Redskins is an unfortunate nickname. As lifetime fans of the team, we don't want to see a name change, but lets not try to justify our selfishness by denying the derogatory nature of the moniker.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by Coff

So the offensive level of a term is dependent upon the number of people who are offended by it? That's interesting. So therefore a derogatory term would no longer be derogatory following an effective genocide of those people? Worth considering when we refer to the "few" who are offended by the term Redskins.

Let's stop being foolish. Redskins is an unfortunate nickname. As lifetime fans of the team, we don't want to see a name change, but lets not try to justify our selfishness by denying the derogatory nature of the moniker.

So if one person finds something "offensive" then it is so? I think that's more interesting. In fact I find your screen name offensive. Please change it.