Redskins

[IMJerusha]

Oh, now, that's just you forgetting your honorable heritage. You should really get back to it.

You won't find any of this instruction for mandatory Christian behavior in Scripture so I'm not sure what you think I need to get back to.

 

[Town Heretic]

They may be entitled to their feelings, but that does not entitle them to take legal action against a team name that has been used for over twice the number of years that the people that got their feelings hurt have been alive.

You keep forgetting to mention and I'll keep reminding you that the name has been legally challenged long before this win and objected to for most of that span. And they're entitled to oppose and did oppose and, so far, have prevailed.

But that is exactly what you have been doing.

You know better, which is why you don't connect any dots, only make the charge. You're on the side of the insulting name. They're only trying to remove it.

Yes, why did those indignant peoples persist in harming the good name of the team,

The name representing them, being used by the team.

knowing that their intention was to do harm?

To end the harm being done to them and harming no one in return. Parroting form without establishing the validity of those turned tables isn't actually making an argument.

 

[rexlunae]

You won't find any of this instruction for mandatory Christian behavior in Scripture so I'm not sure what you think I need to get back to.

It's a good thing you have the chance to correct the record. And that what I say, and what I think, doesn't significantly control your fate. What if that weren't the case? What if everyone assumed that of you, without even meeting you? What if they made decisions about you based on those ideas, without checking with you?

 

[IMJerusha]

Because it interferes with their ability to define their own identity, both as individuals and as a group, by codifying it at a level above their ability to counter.

That's not the team's fault. That is their fault because they turned away from their heritage. They may have lost their ability to counter as a result of their persecution for a time but the old ones continued to instruct. Too often they were ignored. Among the Wyandot there is a push to restore the old ways. Talkers who still know the language are trying to pass it on so it does not completely pass away.

Because they may not identify with that notion of who they are.

That notion? Spoken like a true white man! That notion is the heart of their spiritual core.

 

[IMJerusha]

It's a good thing you have the chance to correct the record. And that what I say, and what I think, doesn't significantly control your fate. What if that weren't the case? What if everyone assumed that of you, without even meeting you? What if they made decisions about you based on those ideas, without checking with you?

They don't need to check with me because it is all recorded in Scripture.
And as far as the what ifs regarding decisions made about Christians and the assumptions made about them, you'd best be opening your eyes because for quite some time now, Christians have been losing their rights and decisions regarding our faith have been being made for us while we have been assigned the name "haters".

 

[Town Heretic]

I know you did, Town. But demanding a change of this magnitude for the reasons they are demanding it, without the backing of the entire Indian Nation is wrong.

That would be a standard unprecedented in the history of our nation, would have denied most of the movements and laws we celebrate today if applied to, say, the Civil Rights movement.

But right isn't a numbers game and I only used the number to ward off the notion that it was merely white liberals getting upset and making political hay. I listed a number of tribes and associations supporting the patent move.

Their ancestors could have made this same demand when the team name was first chosen and didn't.

The name has been objected to for decades, though you also have to remember what this country was like and what the state/power of the Native American and minorities was and wasn't when this team began to use their image and the Redskins name. That said, it doesn't have anything to do with my question or argument really.

The only reason I am entitled to my feelings on this is because my husband is of the Wyandot tribe and that is the only reason why I am entitled to them.

You're entitled to your feelings period. And so are they. You aren't entitled to tell them how they should feel or to reject their feelings because you don't share them.

People who have no Indian heritage should keep their noses out of it.

That's not really possible though, is it? The team isn't owned by Native Americans. Else and on the principle you advance, so only Southerners should have decided the Civil Rights movement's impact on their states? Not a great idea when you think about it.

And yes, they are wounding my feelings because they are wounding my husband's feelings.

Respectfully, how is their trying to remove a distasteful name hurting another Native American?

It is my husband's contention that the American Indian should have more pride than to act like Wasichu.

Maybe he should wonder why he equates the difference with a lack of pride, from which his injury stems. I think trying to get Redskin or Kike or Spook out of the public lexicon is an honorable act that demonstrates pride in the actual identity and diversity of the people pigeon holed.

But none of that really matters if you take my question as it stands.

Why would you knowingly continue to support an insult you don't mean to give?

Either you refrain from doing it or you can't say you mean to honor them, or not to offend them. But you can't say both.

 

[rexlunae]

That's not the team's fault.

It's not the team's fault that they place stereotypes about Native Americans above the level that can easily be countered by actual Native Americans? If course it is.

That is their fault because they turned away from their heritage. They may have lost their ability to counter as a result of their persecution for a time but the old ones continued to instruct. Too often they were ignored. Among the Wyandot there is a push to restore the old ways. Talkers who still know the language are trying to pass it on so it does not completely pass away.

Who are you to demand that they keep to "their heritage"?

That notion? Spoken like a true white man! That notion is the heart of their spiritual core.

Says you.

 

[IMJerusha]

That would be a standard unprecedented in the history of our nation, would have denied most of the movements and laws we celebrate today if applied to, say, the Civil Rights movement.

But right isn't a numbers game and I only used the number to ward off the notion that it was merely white liberals getting upset and making political hay. I listed a number of tribes and associations supporting the patent move.


The name has been objected to for decades, though you also have to remember what this country was like and what the state/power of the Native American and minorities was and wasn't when this team began to use their image and the Redskins name. That said, it doesn't have anything to do with my question or argument really.


You're entitled to your feelings period. And so are they. You aren't entitled to tell them how they should feel or to reject their feelings because you don't share them.


That's not really possible though, is it? The team isn't owned by Native Americans. Else and on the principle you advance, so only Southerners should have decided the Civil Rights movement's impact on their states? Not a great idea when you think about it.


Respectfully, how is their trying to remove a distasteful name hurting another Native American?


Maybe he should wonder why he equates the difference with a lack of pride, from which his injury stems. I think trying to get Redskin or Kike or Spook out of the public lexicon is an honorable act that demonstrates pride in the actual identity and diversity of the people pigeon holed.

But none of that really matters if you take my question as it stands.

Why would you knowingly continue to support an insult you don't mean to give?

Either you refrain from doing it or you can't say you mean to honor them, or not to offend them. But you can't say both.

Town, Indians have called themselves red skins! They always identified themselves as red skins. It would be ridiculous on the part of the team to name themselves after something ugly and offensive. It's not a distateful name. It is what it is, an apt description of a people, a self description of a people. And yes, I just glommed all of your response together because I haven't the wherewithal to debate you on your level and I'm not too proud to admit it. Besides, I'm tired. LOL

 

[rexlunae]

They don't need to check with me because it is all recorded in Scripture.

Funny. You sure seem to have an opinion about it.

And as far as the what ifs regarding decisions made about Christians and the assumptions made about them, you'd best be opening your eyes because for quite some time now, Christians have been losing their rights and decisions regarding our faith have been being made for us while we have been assigned the name "haters".

If you don't like it, maybe you should get on your donkey and ride back to Jerusalem.

 

[IMJerusha]

Funny. You sure seem to have an opinion about it.

It's called education in the Faith.

If you don't like it, maybe you should get on your donkey and ride back to Jerusalem.

Somewhere between here and there we'd drown. BTW, can't go back to where I've never been.

 

[rexlunae]

It's called education in the Faith.



Somewhere between here and there we'd drown. BTW, can't go back to where I've never been.

Then you have abandoned your people's heritage and your spiritual center. It is your own fault if you are misunderstood.

 

[Granite]

Gee, thanks.

As a comedian's fond of saying: Here's your sign.

Yes, it did. It just didn't say what you or the author of the article want it to say.

Totally incorrect. You've got a real problem with facts.

Tell ya what, why don't I visit a casino, sit down at a poker table, and greet the dealer with "Hey there, redskin." What would be the problem with this, far as you can tell?

Both of which are detestable in my opinion which is another reason why I don't like that article as well as your assertion.

I don't give a damn if you "like" the article or not. History is history and facts are facts. You've got a major beef with both. At this point you're just being stiff-necked for its own sake.

 

[genuineoriginal]

You missed the point, didn't you?

Your point was that you don't understand Christians.
I didn't miss it at all.

 

[genuineoriginal]

To end the harm being done to them and harming no one in return.

You are assuming that the indignant peoples are actually being harmed.
They are not.
You are assuming that forcing a team to lose its trademark is harming no one.
Once again you are wrong.

There was no harm in leaving the name alone, there is harm in forcing the change.

 

[Town Heretic]

You are assuming that the indignant peoples are actually being harmed.
They are not.

I'm accepting that ten percent of the Native American's know their own minds better than you do. I assume the same of you.

You are assuming that forcing a team to lose its trademark is harming no one.
Once again you are wrong.

Once again you don't actually support any of your declarations.

The trademark shift actually stands to earn Washington a great deal of money, the way new uniforms do. They only lose if they stand on the offense instead of taking advantage of the financial opportunity. And that would be their choice,not the Native Americans who object.

There was no harm in leaving the name alone,

Sure there was. The people being harmed brought suit. They prevailed.

there is harm in forcing the change.

That's up to Washington ownership, supra.

But the question remains, especially to Christians, if you know you're offending those you say you never intended to offend, why would you continue to do that?

And the silence on that point is as remarkable as the attempts to make this issue about anything and everything but that offense.

 

[IMJerusha]

Then you have abandoned your people's heritage and your spiritual center. It is your own fault if you are misunderstood.

I am an adopted Gentile. My heritage begins and ends with Yeshua.

 

[rocketman]

:deadhorse: Still beating this dead horse are we??? :chuckle:

 

[genuineoriginal]

I'm accepting that ten percent of the Native American's know their own minds better than you do. I assume the same of you.

I am unaware of any harm. Please elaborate.

The trademark shift actually stands to earn Washington a great deal of money, the way new uniforms do. They only lose if they stand on the offense instead of taking advantage of the financial opportunity. And that would be their choice,not the Native Americans who object.

The only way the trademark shift could make the Washington Redskins a great deal of money is if they played up the emotions of the people of America by making sure that the change was accompanied by as much controversy as possible. I am sure they appreciate your help in this regard.

Sure there was. The people being harmed brought suit. They prevailed.

They were unharmed by the name.

But the question remains, especially to Christians, if you know you're offending those you say you never intended to offend, why would you continue to do that?

If someone is taking unjustifiable offense, why coddle them?

 

[Town Heretic]

Town, Indians have called themselves red skins!

IMJ, some blacks drop the "N" bomb. Are you fine with using it?

It would be ridiculous on the part of the team to name themselves after something ugly and offensive.

It would be good business in an era when Westerns are hugely popular and project Native Americans as scalping, terrifying barbarians that brave pioneers had to "tame", to slap that on a team you mean to be seen as fierce.

It's not a distateful name.

It absolutely has been used distastefully. I've linked and provided authority, from the examination during the patent years that convinced the court to Merriam Webster's recognition of its historical usage.

But that doesn't really control the point, which remains one in ten Native American being offended needlessly and some people who claim never to have meant to offend in the first place supporting that continuing. lain:

Do the good you can do, even if you aren't offended.

Think of those who are offended first, because losing the New Jersey Spooks name and symbol isn't going to deprive anyone of anything of real value, won't work an economic harm (should actually work a benefit for the holders and supporting industries cranking out the new materials) and will end the needless offense no one appears to have wanted.

:e4e:

 

[IMJerusha]

As a comedian's fond of saying: Here's your sign.

It isn't the first time I've been laughed at. Won't be the last.

Totally incorrect. You've got a real problem with facts.

Tell ya what, why don't I visit a casino, sit down at a poker table, and greet the dealer with "Hey there, redskin." What would be the problem with this, far as you can tell?

:idunno: He might be black, white, mexican or redbone?

I don't give a damn

Yes, this is clear.

if you "like" the article or not.
History is history and facts are facts. You've got a major beef with both. At this point you're just being stiff-necked for its own sake.

No, it wasn't the article I detested. I was speaking of slavery and Indian persecution. The article is simply deceptive and lending a meaning to something that is untrue.