Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
if you got 70,000 native American that has no problem with it but 4 native American that did, then you have to get rid of it, the majority doesn't matter anymore. it is like the CSA monuments if one person is offended then down they come
I know you're joking but this is an actual argument supposedly serious people were making in response to this poll.
the who curfluffle was typical activists kicking up a storm, pretending to represent all community, hoping that the public will take shots at the community instead of the activist. the activist blends back in and then points to all the hate and illwill that is directed to the community by 'racists' created by lowering the threshold for racists to sub zero levels. No, the problem is the individual activist, not the community. Scam seems to work well in this day and age.
Great job if you can get it.
Now back to my safe space.... when you think about obama saying 'they cling to their bible and guns, wasn't he mocking people who went to their safe place?
Now chalk marks on the sidewalk 'trump 2016' cause PTSD in the offended obama supporters and they get media sympathy as well as an institutional embrace from universities.
I'm a Redskins fan and have been conflicted about this topic for years. I never wanted the name changed, I love the logo and team colors. And the numbers appear to vary. In the early 2000's they were 90-10 for not offended. Then as the debate grew the numbers changed as more appeared to be offended. When they did I was in favor of a name change. It didn't matter what others felt, if many NA's feel the name is offensive it's offensive. I'll get over a name change if it meant we would stop offending others. I felt those who were offended had a much stronger "yes" vote to the name change, they were much more passionate than many voting "no" because to them it was no big deal either way. I was ticked at our owner, again, when he trotted out an Indian Chief to attend a game in a very clumsy attempt to garner support from the NA population.
But these new numbers, which back the numbers from a decade ago, has me going the other way. If 90% of the people who really matter don't feel offended then stop already.
Let's do this democratically:
Set a date for a national vote. Anyone with native American blood gets to vote. If more than 50.1% of the votes come in favor of a change, then it gets changed. If not, it stays.
Problem solved.
Most of us football fans here in the DC area just call them the "Skins" anyway. But if the PC crowd would like to call them the "Rainbowskins" or something ridiculous be my guest. Anyway, I'm looking forward to watching the NBA playoffs tonight with the Golden State Warriors. Is "Warriors" okay or should they change their name to the "Golden State Peaceniks"?
Personally I think it's a stupid name for a sports team and should have been changed a long time ago.
Are you native American? Do you have NA blood? If not, you don't have a say in the matter because a lot of NA are proud of the name and the team. There's a small vocal minority raising a stink about it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
