Redskins "Name Change" Volume 10000000

[hooskins]

Reilly makes good points, but he's ignoring some of the points on the other side. And it's a bit of a stretch to compare the moving people to reservations to those that support the name change.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by hooskins

Reilly makes good points, but he's ignoring some of the points on the other side. And it's a bit of a stretch to compare the moving people to reservations to those that support the name change.

I agree. While I really like the positive points that Reilly makes, like Native American schools having Redskins mascots, he seems to imply that there is no Native American opposition to the name. Recent attempts to protest the name by the Oneida Nation, no matter how flawed or small, show that that is not true.

Personally I think that Dan Snyder should use his cash resources to help the Oneida Nation and others like them. Win the opposition over with gifts and there will be few left to complain.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by Lotus

I agree. While I really like the positive points that Reilly makes, like Native American schools having Redskins mascots, he seems to imply that there is no Native American opposition to the name. Recent attempts to protest the name by the Oneida Nation, no matter how flawed or small, show that that is not true.

Personally I think that Dan Snyder should use his cash resources to help the Oneida Nation and others like them. Win the opposition over with gifts and there will be few left to complain.

If 1 in 10 Native Americans are offended yet some other larger percentage actually find it to be an honor who wins?

I'd certainly want to hear more about it if say 25 or 30% were offended but that isn't the case.

The reality is there are always a small percentage of nay group that are upset by something...that doesn't mean they are right.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

If 1 in 10 Native Americans are offended yet some other larger percentage actually find it to be an honor who wins?

I'd certainly want to hear more about it if say 25 or 30% were offended but that isn't the case.

The reality is there are always a small percentage of nay group that are upset by something...that doesn't mean they are right.

I agree about there always being someone who will whine. And the "How many must be offended?" question remains in the eyes of the beholder.

Someone should do an independent, impartial survey of Native American attitudes and publicize it widely. Earlier surveys were either not impartial or not well publicized.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by hooskins

Reilly makes good points, but he's ignoring some of the points on the other side. And it's a bit of a stretch to compare the moving people to reservations to those that support the name change.

What points?

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by hooskins

Reilly makes good points, but he's ignoring some of the points on the other side. And it's a bit of a stretch to compare the moving people to reservations to those that support the name change.

I think he meant to ignore the points on the other side, because those are the only points that the media has been paying attention to. This article is more about exposing the readers to the side that always seems to get ignored in this argument, and it's about time that somebody brings these points to light.