U.S. Patent and Trademark office cancels protection of Washington team name

[ATL_Predator+ 1,196]

Racism is now a conservative vs liberal thing? Are we reverting back to 1950s America?

 

I'm still here...

[BwareDWare94 723]

Honestly if this has to do with racism then somebody needs to stop the Navajo from using the term and make things equal across the board. Have you seen a single Native American call out the Navajo for using the term Redskin and an IDENTICAL mascot ? No, you have not because they are not worried about its use as a pejorative apparently, but there is profit being made off of "their" likeness and heritage. This is bullshit imo. If it offends people then I am sorry, but I really dont know what to say to that.

 

The only color people ACTUALLY give a shit about in this scenario in my opinion is green.

 

So one tribe uses the term and it negates the offensive nature in reference to every other tribe? That makes no sense.

 

And you mean we, as white people, should tell a tribe that they can't use a term that was invented as a slur toward their ethnicity? That's bass ackwards, man.

Edited June 23, 2014 by BwareDWare94

[Omerta+ 1,206]

 

So one tribe uses the term and it negates the offensive nature in reference to every other tribe? That makes no sense.

 

And you mean we, as white people, should tell a tribe that they can't use a term that was invented as a slur toward their ethnicity? That's bass ackwards, man.

 

 

No what is ass backwards is when they want to cry foul when they get no money from it. That said on an Indian reservation where NATIVE AMERICANS make the rules and it would have to go to tribal council, nobody gives a shit... Now all of the sudden they are offended because why ? You can play this sympathies horseshit if you want and try to make me feel guilty for being white, but the truth is I will never. Really, who is the racist here ? The person who says it is ok for their people to use it, but not a different colored people.

 

And yeah ONE town is what I am basing it off of because native Americans are basing it off of ONE football team as well. If they dont like it then they should change their name and then we could act accordingly. Boiling it down both are football teams, just one. So why is their only an issue with the one that is a billion dollar business.

 

You will never get me to believe they are offended because of their heritage. It is money. And yes that is "bass ackwards"

[DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F 2,241]

NCAI, the group that made the video Than shared is the biggest, and most influential organized Native American representative group. Their entire leadership is comprised of Native American. Also the writers of this. They represents more than 250 tribal governments at the Embassy of Tribal Nations

 

That same group has made another video where leaders of other Native American tribes (7) commented on the issue and expressed wanting to have the name changed. That doesn't take into account the multiple number of leaders and groups that have already spoken on this subject.

 

It's far from just "white liberals" pushing this, if it was, this topic wouldn't be bought up every single year. Native Americans account for less then 2% of the American population. The opinion of a racial or national minority, tends to be with their representation. And in this case, an extremely high portion of organizations that represent them are against it.

Edited June 24, 2014 by DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F

[Milla4Prez63 678]

I think Dallas should change their name too since cowboys slaughtered lots of Indians. Native Americans might be offended by glorifying the name of people who killed their ancestors.

[Thanatos 2,847]

Images of different types of Natives being shown while some guy is reading off a cue doesn't scream to me ''EHMERGERD LOOK AT HOW MANY NATIVES ARE RAGING FOR A NAMECHANGE FOR THE REDSKINS!!!11''

 

Nice fucking try, though.

 

There are some Natives that want the name changed, but let's be fair here, it's driven mostly by white Liberals.

 

That video was put together by the National Congress of American Indians. That is what I was referring to, not just the ad itself. The idea that the majority of Native Americans is okay with this is simply untrue.

I think Dallas should change their name too since cowboys slaughtered lots of Indians. Native Americans might be offended by glorifying the name of people who killed their ancestors.

Yes, because all cowboys did was slaughter Indians. The word is a racial slur against Native Americans. End of story.

[Thanatos 2,847]

Back when you first joined, yeah. Now? I'm not sure that's still correct of you to say that. IIRC, there's been a few issues I've seen you respond to that your opinion definitely identified more with a liberal than a conservative.

Really. We're really going to go there.

 

Why, because I'm a conservative with common sense who believes in global warming and evolution and gay marriage being okay?

[Maverick 791]

Really. We're really going to go there.

 

Why, because I'm a conservative with common sense who believes in global warming and evolution and gay marriage being okay?

Um...yeah, actually. Where you stand on those issues identify more with a liberal than a conservative. Time to obtain a new Voters Registration Form.

 

and lol @ "because I'm a conservative with common sense." So I guess everyone that disagrees with you doesn't have common sense? Pretty ignorant if you ask me.

[GA_Eagle 595]

I disagree with your stance that government involvement inhibiting people's beliefs or ability to wed is conservative. Conservatives should be wondering why the government is involved in marriage or inhibiting educators.

Edited June 24, 2014 by GA_Eagle

[Sarge+ 3,436]

See this is what bothers me when we try to talk about issues. It always comes down to what someone is supposed to believed based on how they identify politically. That should never be relevant to individual issues of debate.

[GA_Eagle 595]

See this is what bothers me when we try to talk about issues. It always comes down to what someone is supposed to believed based on how they identify politically. That should never be relevant to individual issues of debate.

Agreed, there. I don't really see how affiliation matters. It was more of a side topic IMO. I personally think public opinion is eventually gonna force the NFL's and subsequently the Redskins' hand with this one. I think this name should be changed because it will piss off Skins fans, and I approve of that.

[Sarge+ 3,436]

I don't think the team will lose money or anything from changing names either. Let's be honest here. The Redskins are one of the wealthiest teams in football even without having much success in recent times. Them changing their name isn't going to ruin that.

[BwareDWare94 723]

Um...yeah, actually. Where you stand on those issues identify more with a liberal than a conservative. Time to obtain a new Voters Registration Form.

 

and lol @ "because I'm a conservative with common sense." So I guess everyone that disagrees with you doesn't have common sense? Pretty ignorant if you ask me.

 

Not acknowledging Global Warming and Evolution's existence is pretty damning in the common sense sector.

 

And not agreeing with gay marriage just makes someone an asshole.

[Maverick 791]

See this is what bothers me when we try to talk about issues. It always comes down to what someone is supposed to believed based on how they identify politically. That should never be relevant to individual issues of debate.

I only brought it up because Thanatos said he was the furthest thing from a liberal. I addressed it because I consider that a lie.

[Maverick 791]

 

Not acknowledging Global Warming and Evolution's existence is pretty damning in the common sense sector.

 

And not agreeing with gay marriage just makes someone an asshole.

Just to clarify, you're saying if someone doesn't believe in Global Warming and/or Evolution, they lack common sense?

 

Please don't let anyone hear you say that in the real world.

[seanbrock 1,684]

First off, I hope the Redskins have to chance their name because...fuck 'em. I don't like them lol.

 

Secondly conservatives who don't want to CONSERVE the environment (Teddy Roosevelt anyone lol) isn't a real conservative and anyone who wants to have the government in your life telling you who you can and cannot marry and can or cannot do in your private life so long as you're not hurting or bothering anyone is not a real conservative. If you don't believe in evolution, then quite simply you are scientifically illiterate.

 

As far as the actual term goes as being racist. I don't know. I haven't cared enough to research it. If it's just a bunch of casino owning Native American's trying to get a piece of the Redskins they should leave it, but if it's a group of people who are legitimately offended and see it as a racist term they should work with them to change up the logo and perhaps adopt the name of a local tribe or something instead. Something that's not so offensive. Native American's have been through a lot in this country and not a lot of people talk about it so I tend to be sympathetic to them.

 

Lastly, I think Maverick should be banned from any further political comments because the shit he's saying in this thread is absurd. I'm not conservative but say all conservatives are biggots and scientifically illiterate is off base imo.

[Thanatos 2,847]

Um...yeah, actually. Where you stand on those issues identify more with a liberal than a conservative. Time to obtain a new Voters Registration Form.

 

and lol @ "because I'm a conservative with common sense." So I guess everyone that disagrees with you doesn't have common sense? Pretty ignorant if you ask me.

 

If at this point you don't believe in at least theistic evolution and the reality of climate change, you do not have common sense, no. If science is wrong on those two things, then you might as well not listen to science at all, because they're likely wrong on everything, including basic shit like the law of gravity.

 

As for gay marriage, it is conservative to be AGAINST government telling people who they can and can not marry. I want government involved as little as possible in telling me what to do. "Conservatives" who are for the Federal or State government defining marriage are hypocrites. You are getting conservative confused with the religious right, which sadly is an all-too-common mistake.

 

Time to obtain a new Voters Registration Form? Why do you assume I ever registered as a Republican? The G.O.P. is not conservative and they havent been for a long time.

[Thanatos 2,847]

I only brought it up because Thanatos said he was the furthest thing from a liberal. I addressed it because I consider that a lie.

I specifically used the terms liberal and conservative, not democrat and republican. Don't confuse conservative with Republican or liberal with Democrat. They don't fit the label a lot of the time.

 

I am conservative, the GOP is not.

 

Just to clarify, you're saying if someone doesn't believe in Global Warming and/or Evolution, they lack common sense?

 

Please don't let anyone hear you say that in the real world.

 

In the "real world" where exactly? The Deep South is frankly the last bastion of scientific illiteracy in this regard in literally every single first-world nation.

 

If you don't believe in global warming you lack all common sense. If you don't believe that man is a significant contributing factor to global warming, then I would say you are wrong, but I wouldn't say you have abandoned common sense. But to not believe in it at all, at this point in time? Just lol.

Edited June 24, 2014 by Thanatos19

[Thanatos 2,847]

 

Not acknowledging Global Warming and Evolution's existence is pretty damning in the common sense sector.

 

And not agreeing with gay marriage just makes someone an asshole.

I disagree. Not agreeing with gay marriage does not make someone an asshole. Using the government to force your belief about gay marriage on others- that makes you an asshole. People may hold the belief that gay marriage is wrong for religious reasons- and that is perfectly okay. What is not okay is to use your religious belief as impetus to create a law that excludes gay people from marriage.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

It sounds like you are more Libertarian, to me. Not that it matters, really... But most conservatives (granted, not all) are for traditional marriage and just traditional old values in general. Hence, conserve... They want to conserve those same principles that we once did.

Obviously there are a million different branches of conservatism (and any other political ideology) . And I won't argue with you on how YOU identify... But just from reading on the forums and stuff, that is generally the vibe I get. More socially liberal and conservative when it comes to government -- whereas a majority of conservatives are through and through on the right both socially and when it comes to government and foreign affairs (Unless we are talking faux conservative Republicans, but who wants to align with those losers? lol)

Cut taxes. End the welfare state. A strong military that protects us HERE at home instead of in the Middle East or wherever else. Legalize drugs. Let people make their own decisions (Lol Nanny State). Marry whoever you want. Regulations are fairly lenient until you infringe on the rights of others.

Edited June 24, 2014 by Favre4Ever

[Thanatos 2,847]

When I use the term conservative, it is as someone who wants the government to play as little a part as possible. That isnt the standard definition, but it is a definition, and its how I always thought of the two dichotomies.

 

As far as politically, if I had to pick a party to affiliate with, you are correct that it would be more along the lines of libertarian than anything else. I disagree with certain things most stand for there as well, though.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

Oh ya, there are many branches within libertarianism that I stay away from. A nice chunk of them are total and complete anarchists. Absolutely no federal power whatsoever, do almost literally anything you want outside of hurting other people, 0 regulations, etc. No thank you to that... lol

[seanbrock 1,684]

Conservatives would want to preserve the separation of church and state. Just because most republicans believe that gay marriage should be illegal does not make them right. Marriage is a religious institution and should therefore not be legislated. It's really that simple. If you're conservative, regardless of how you fell about the MORALITY of gay marriage, you should support people's right to practice their own religion and beliefs. It's in black and white in the constitution. Any republican who is for gay marriage is a hypocrite, like Thana said.

[oochymp 2,393]

we need to get this thread back on topic:

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

Conservatives would want to preserve the separation of church and state. Just because most republicans believe that gay marriage should be illegal does not make them right. Marriage is a religious institution and should therefore not be legislated. It's really that simple. If you're conservative, regardless of how you fell about the MORALITY of gay marriage, you should support people's right to practice their own religion and beliefs. It's in black and white in the constitution. Any republican who is for gay marriage is a hypocrite, like Thana said.

A lot of Conservatives are devoutly religious, so I am not sure what you are talking about... Liberals want to preserve the "separation of church and state". Those terms are nowhere in the Constitution, Bill of Rights, etc and it is an implied term by the left. Conservatives (generally speaking) see that and want to have God prevalent in federal buildings, schools, etc. Most of the separation of church and state stuff was actually meant to keep government out of religion, not the other way around (although you can and will find examples of such) so they would say.

 

Being that the conservative roots are based on the idea that this country was founded by and through God, it's usually not a popular opinion of conservatives to shed that religious devotion for one issue such as gay marriage.

 

Again, there are a million different branches of conservatism, I am just speaking on the general, "main" popularized version. Just because you disagree with that and accept gay marriage doesn't mean you can't be conservative...

 

But again, if that were the case, I would just point you more towards the social left of libertarianism -- it just fits the platform better.