Redskins Win In Appeals Court

[Paintrain]

I lived in Atlanta in the 90's at the height of the Braves era of (alleged) dominance and I could see the Tomahawk Chop as somewhat offensive to Native Americans, mocking their war cries for a meaningless rallying cry. I know FSU does it, but they have also gone out of their way to embrace the Seminole tribe and have been very careful to their sensibilities. That being said, outside of the name and logo I've never felt the Redskins did anything to 'exploit' the Native American/Indian connection. An argument could be made about some of the Hail to the Redskins lyrics but it would be a stretch. I've never seen the correlation and being a minority I've not drawn the parallel to if they were called something derogatory to my race or any others.

[cochise]

Washington Rednecks....will that make it any better?

[Hog1]

On the other sided of the coin.........

Fighting Whites - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fighting the use of Native American stereotypes : Fightin Whites

Which I am reposting as well since the last time we did this........

[sportscurmudgeon]

I did not anticipate - nor did I intend - for this thead to go in the direction that it did.

May I suggest to everyone here that they go and look up the legal term "Doctrine of Laches" to understand what the court ruling was and why the court made the ruling on the narrowest of terms possible?

In addition to any adrenaline-driven emotion regarding this matter, there is an interesting legal/social set of issues here which might start an interesting dialog on the matter.

[Skinny Tee]

Originally Posted by sportscurmudgeon

I did not anticipate - nor did I intend - for this thead to go in the direction that it did.

May I suggest to everyone here that they go and look up the legal term "Doctrine of Laches" to understand what the court ruling was and why the court made the ruling on the narrowest of terms possible?

In addition to any adrenaline-driven emotion regarding this matter, there is an interesting legal/social set of issues here which might start an interesting dialog on the matter.

Okay. I did what you said and I still don't get it. I think it's because I need a few more hamsters in my brainwheel.

LACHES, DOCTRINE OF - Based on the maxim that equity aids the vigilant and not those who procrastinate regarding their rights; Neglect to assert a right or claim that, together with lapse of time and other circumstances, prejudices an adverse party. Neglecting to do what should or could, have been done to assert a claim or right for an unreasonable and unjustified time causing disadvantage to another.

Laches is similar to 'statute of limitations' except is equitable rather than statutory and is a common affirmative defense raised in civil actions.

Laches is derived from the French 'lecher' and is nearly synonymous with negligence.

In general, when a party has been guilty of laches in enforcing his right by great delay and lapse of time, this circumstance will at common law prejudice and sometimes operate in bar of a remedy which is discretionary for the court to afford. In courts of equity delay will also generally be prejudicial.

But laches may be excused from ignorance of the party's rights; from the obscurity of the transaction; by the pendency of a suit, and; where the party labors under a legal disability, as insanity, infancy and the like.

[CRedskinsRule]

Basically the court said they took too long to act on the indignation caused, and therefore they don't have the standing to bring the lawsuit before the court. A legal loophole that allows the court to dismiss it without actually deciding on the merits of the case. or something like that

[Skinny Tee]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Basically the court said they took too long to act on the indignation caused, and therefore they don't have the standing to bring the lawsuit before the court. A legal loophole that allows the court to dismiss it without actually deciding on the merits of the case. or something like that

Thanks Mister! Me and Charlie, my brain's only hamster, sure do thank you. : )


Thanks CRR.

[GusFrerotte]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Basically the court said they took too long to act on the indignation caused, and therefore they don't have the standing to bring the lawsuit before the court. A legal loophole that allows the court to dismiss it without actually deciding on the merits of the case. or something like that

Funny how the court looked at the weakest of technocalities to save the Skins. $$$$$$$$$ does talk indeed!!!!!!

[BringBackJoeT]

Has this already been posted? I just saw it on Yahoo. Nothing sharp in the analysis here. It's just a rant.

No excuses: Redskins need a new nickname - NFL - Yahoo! Sports

Originally Posted by BringBackJoeT

Has this already been posted? I just saw it on Yahoo. Nothing sharp in the analysis here. It's just a rant.

No excuses: Redskins need a new nickname - NFL - Yahoo! Sports

I know 99% of this board will disagree with me but that article is spot on imo.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Brian Orakpo

I know 99% of this board will disagree with me but that article is spot on imo.

These arguments are almost always made by "intelligentia" to showcase their enlightened viewpoint and hammer on how historically the U.S. treated the NAs, or media types to get web hits and sell columns, or NA activists with either an ax to grind, publicity to get, or $$$ to make.

Bottom line, the Skins are a private entity, if folks don't like the name, don't buy tickets, buy merchandise, or watch the games. If someone has a problem, make another on-line petition like the one with 48 signatures mentioned earlier in the thread, and get it to DS (good luck with that).

From Sports Illustrated's article 'The Indian Wars"
"Indeed, a recent SI poll suggests that although Native American activists are virtually united in opposition to the use of Indian nicknames and mascots, the Native American population sees the issue far differently. Asked if high school and college teams should stop using Indian nicknames, 81% of Native American respondents said no. As for pro sports, 83% of Native American respondents said teams should not stop using Indian nicknames, mascots, characters and symbols. Opinion is far more divided on reservations, yet a majority (67%) there said the usage by pro teams should not cease, while 32% said it should."

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Bottom line, the Skins are a private entity, if folks don't like the name, don't buy tickets, buy merchandise, or watch the games. If someone has a problem, make another on-line petition like the one with 48 signatures mentioned earlier in the thread, and get it to DS (good luck with that).

Yes they are a private entity and no one is forcing anyone to watch Redskin games or buy merchandise. At the sametime on some level the team name is racist. I kinda find it funny in todays society that there is still a sports team with a racial slur as their team name.

I think its kinda sad when people start throwing out terms like "private entity". Thats kinda saying I know its a racial slur but people cant do anything about it so deal with it. That same attitude was the same attitude this Country had against African-Americans until the race stood up for themselves. The problem is their arent enough Native-Americans to really voice their anger over the team name imo compared to other races in this Country.

Like I have said before I have no huge problem with it because I do know that the team honors Indians and they dont mean for the team name to be offensive. As A Redskins fan im happy we still have the team name. At the sametime I do realize that it is also used as a racial slur. I do believe in time the team name will be changed. It may be 50 years from now but it will be changed soon enough.

As for the online petition those really mean nothing either way. Im sure the number of Indians who find the name offensive is alot higher than 48. The problem is when compared to the rest of this country the Indian population is quite small. If it was any other race of people the team name was offending the team name would of been changed a long time ago.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Brian Orakpo

...

At the sametime I do realize that it is also used as a racial slur. I do believe in time the team name will be changed. It may be 50 years from now but it will be changed soon enough.

...

Maybe in 50 years we will have had enough of lawsuits and PC'ness, and people will be amazed that any lawsuits were ever filed anyways.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Brian Orakpo

I think its kinda sad when people start throwing out terms like "private entity". Thats kinda saying I know its a racial slur but people cant do anything about it so deal with it. That same attitude was the same attitude this Country had against African-Americans until the race stood up for themselves. The problem is their arent enough Native-Americans to really voice their anger over the team name imo compared to other races in this Country.

Please be clear, I am NOT saying, "I know it's a racial slur, but people can't do anything, so deal with it." I don't believe it to be a racial slur or I would agree with you. The faux outrage of NA activists on this issue really should make one look deeper at what their real motive is.

There are many names or things that can be perceived by one group or another to be offensive. There are many team names other groups may find offensive; Fighting Irish (focus on the drunken Irishman stereotype), Saints (atheists would find this offensive), the Razorback symbol at Arkansas or the "Hogs" (offensive to some Muslims as a pig is a low form of animal). The term "Redskin" and the N-word are two vastly different things. If you survey African Americans and ask if the N-word is a racial slur and if they would be against the term being used for a sports team, I'm pretty sure you'd get a 99%+ percent that the term is offensive. There is no positive or neutral connotation for that word at all. Yet in a survey of NA people, that the vast majority don't have a problem with NA team names, including Redskins, is very telling.

Do a Google search on "redskin" and the autolinks that come up are all about the Redskin team. Here is also an interesting read about the origins of the term Redskin, certainly not a negative or racist origin.

http://anthropology.si.edu/goddard/redskin.pdf

If you know Redskin team history, the name came about because the owner was honoring the coach who was NA and he also wanted to separate the team from the Braves name they had before. If the coach didn't resign or protest the team name, then I'd say we're on pretty solid ground here. This issue has only come about more recently in the PC world we live in.

The problem is when compared to the rest of this country the Indian population is quite small. If it was any other race of people the team name was offending the team name would of been changed a long time ago.

The size of NA population in the US has nothing to do with it. As I referenced in my last post, the problem is the NA team name issue offends NA activists and those with an agenda, not the NA people in general. Keep in mind it wasn't just African American folks who stood up for civil rights in this country, it was a consolidated effort by members of all races. If it was only African Americans, based on population count, we would not have made the progress towards racial equality that we have.

[skindeep]

I read the article and the guy just trying to piss off skins fans with his ignorance. I have indian blood in me and it not that upset hell it might be the reason I root so passionatety for my team. Hell the guy needs a hugg or a role model something.